Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in January 2011

A House organized

Still plenty to do. But in listening this morning to the organizing of the Oregon House, you can pick up a reasonable sense of optimism.

The Oregon House is evenly divided, 30-30, between the parties, which can be a prescription for chaos. Since the general election when that result became clear, news has come slowly about how the parties plan to share the running of the chamber.

On this first day, at least, the indicators are positive. Cheerful words were said about both incomking co-speakers, Democrat Arnie Roblan and Republican Bruce Hanna. Not a note of discord anywhere. The votes for those two, and other officials elected by the chamber (through to the House clerk), went without a hitch, a negative vote or an objection. The sense was of actual cooperation. At least for now.

A difficult political marriage

Barrett Rainey

A commentary by Barrett Rainey, who blogs at Ridenbaugh Press. He lives at Roseburg.

While legislatures in all states have their hands full this season wrestling with historic deficit problems and barrels of red ink, one of those anguished groups is going to be especially fun to watch: our boys and girls in Oregon’s House of Representatives.

That’s because voters sent 60 of them to Salem: 30 in each political party. Split right down the middle. If you just look at those numbers, you’d be tempted to say it will be a mess with little accomplished. And you might be right. But hearing Co-Speaker-in-Waiting Bruce Hanna (R-Roseburg) talk about preliminary work done so far, maybe not.

On most days, Hanna is upbeat. When he talks about organizational work already done for this historic situation, you get the feeling leadership in the House is going to give it its best shot. But there’s a lot of devil-in-the-details.

The plan is for Hanna and Arnie Roblan (D-Coos Bay) to be co-speakers, each operating out of separate party offices, sharing or duplicating such staff as necessary. All committee membership is to be evenly divided; chairmanships, too. The idea is to have mirror images of everything political. Oregon has no House precedent for this; most states don’t. So Hanna and Roblan have been researching, looking for ideas coast-to-coast.

As Hanna tells it, he and Roblan share a professional respect for each other, feeling their past relationship has shown they can work together on most things. But there’ll be some issues that will be truly partisan. Those will be the ones that test the power sharing and hand-holding.

While talk now is very positive from both men, there will be two major tests of this political bonding. One will be how to deal with a near-record shortfall in the coming budget. Typical Republican approach is to lower taxes and cut back spending. Democrats usually are open to maintaining or even small tax increases and will go further to fund what they believe are primary state responsibilities i.e. health care, education, social services, etc.

Hanna and Roblan have some years of legislative experience to help them deal with budgetary matters. Both seem open to hearing all ideas before trying to come up with a spending plan. Even from the new Governor who, thus far, has been supportive. And helpful. Maybe they can pull it off.

But it’s the second test that’ll pose the most problems: the bomb throwers. That’s my term, not theirs. These are the diehards and ideologues that sponsor futile bills on abortion, states rights, limiting federal interference and, this year, probably immigration. These folks show up every session like tulips in the Spring. Many believe “they are on a mission from God” and dissuading them from pursuing that “mission” is next to impossible.

How Hanna and Roblan keep the whip hand on those loose cannons will be the real test of bipartisanship. If one “cannon” … just one … refuses to cooperate with the joint cooperative efforts of leadership and starts a fracas, the whole House could come to a halt. Neither Speaker wants that, nor do most members who are going to Salem to give it their best shot in a very troubled year.

But ideologues and compromise are oil and water. You might tame a few. But if others are hellbent on making a show for the folks at home … and that seems to be the case from Congress on down this year … if that’s their attitude, Hanna and Roblan will be juggling hand grenades.

I wish them well in their task. And I’m thankful leadership of what will be a very troubled session is in their seemingly capable hands. The new Governor seems to have the same feelings and he has some years of experience to help along the way. So far, he’s on the “team.”

Yep, it’s gonna be interesting to watch. Elephants and donkeys pushing a single peanut up a very steep hill. I hope they pull it off.

The schedule today

Lots of political launches and ceremonies in the Northwest - legislative, inaugural and such - in the next couple of days. Our cheat sheet for the moment:

7 am Oregon House opening receptions

8 am Oregon House convenes

9:30 Oregon Senate convenes

10:45 Oregon Joint session for Governor's Inaugural address

11 am Idaho legislature convenes

12 noon - Idaho Governor C.L. "Butch" Otter state of state

12 noon - Washington Senate opening ceremonies

1:30 Washington House committees begin work

6:30 Washington legislative review on TVW


12 Washington Governor Chris Gregoire state of the state, Republican response (see on TVW)

Who gets appointed, and larger complexion

Probably the largest single power a state governor has is the power of appointment, and most of the time it's not much reviewed. In Oregon, as Governor Ted Kulognoski takes his departure (tomorrow), a review of one set of his appointments from Clatsop County District Attorney Josh Marquis:

Governor Ted Kulongoski, one-time Attorney General and one-time friend of many in Oregon law enforcement, has been making it very clear since early in his second term that he has stopped listening to many of us who helped get him elected. He is instead listening to the criminal defense zealots who think that whenever virtually anyone is locked up our system has failed.

Almost without exception, Governor Kulongoski has appointed criminal defense lawyers to judicial positions and has failed to take the counsel of the 72 elected sheriffs and DAs, many of whom helped him get elected in both 2002 and 2006.

No particular comment here on whether Marquis' argument is right. But it's something that ought to be tracked. Ridenbaugh Press' three Public Affairs Digest weekly publications (the next ones come out early tomorrow) note appointment of judges, and usually a bit about their background, but we haven't been tracking whether there's an overabundance of one type of background - a significant point that Marquis gets at. We'll start doing that.

Post 3,001, and still counting

The last post was, it turned out (hadn't noticed until after it was posted) number 3,000 for this blog. That is, since we went to Wordpress in October 2005; this blog was around for years before that too, back in the days when we hand-crafted the HTML. And it's still running, and will be for the foreseeable future.

Can't say about the rest of the country, but in the Northwest that makes us part of an ever-smaller group. Back around the middle of the last decade the region was loaded with political blogs, a batch in all three Northwest states. Today, not so much. There are a lot more blogs operated by mass media (just about all of the larger regional papers have political-related blogs, and they're generally of high quality). But far fewer independents than there used to be.

The cause for noting this is not just our own landmark but also the note of the passing, at least in likely considerable part, of the Horse's Ass blog at Seattle. Highly partisan (Democratic) it also has been a top source of information on politics in Seattle and Washington, and has forged a nice sparring partnership with the Republican-oriented Sound Politics; each has undoubtedly become better because the other is there.

What's happening, HA founder David Goldstein reports, is that he's joining the alternative weekly The Stranger (where in recent months he's been a regular contributor) as a full-time staffer, and as a result after February 2, "I simply won’t be writing here much anymore, if at all." Goldstein is not the only HA writer, but he's the core. So HA's future is in question.

We see regular eulogies for newspapers (and it'll be coming for broadcasters too, just watch), and there's good reason. But we may before long need some recognition too for some of the blogs that have made a real contribution. As Horse's Ass has.

A key Otter line

Governor C.L. "Butch" Otter takes the oath of office for a second term from U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge in a private ceremony in the State Capitol/photo

Key line from the relatively brief second inaugural speech by Idaho Governor C.L. "Butch" Otter:

You all have seen it happen – tolerance for mission creep spawns an attitude of passive acceptance that government’s needs come before those of the people. The divide is increasingly drawn between those who work for a living, and those who vote for a living.

Ladies and gentlemen, that day is gone.

Frugality in the public sector should not be seen as cruel or careless, but rather as necessary to maintaining our economic and personal liberties.

As a statement of opinion, clear enough - it certainly marks the dividing line. (When life-critical services are curtailed by the state over the next year, as they likely will be, he is cautioning, that should not be seen as "cruel or careless".)

A question about this line, though: "The divide is increasingly drawn between those who work for a living, and those who vote for a living."

Who are these people who vote for a living? How many of them are there? Can names be put to them? Does it pay by the hour or by the vote?

So did he do anything wrong?

Idaho's Tax Commission chair, Royce Chigbrow, resigned this afternoon after a period of intense controversy.

The controversy was mostly pretty personal. It concerned allegations from employees at the tax commission that Chigbrow had, as the Associated Press reported, "intervened in tax cases involving clients of his son's accounting firm as well as for a friend and political supporter." A series of official investigations were launched into the subject.

In resigning, neither Chigbrow nor Governor C.L. "Butch" Otter - who had appointed him and today accepted his resignation - addressed the subject directly. Chigbrow's letter spoke of how he had tried to serve the state, how "I feel vindicated by previous reviews" and of a series of improvements at the commission under his watch.

Then: "Despite all of this I know there needs to be a change. While I would like to continue to serve, it is in the best interest of the Tax Commission and the state for me to step aside. Unfortunately, and perhaps unfairly, I have become the issue, which detracts from the accomplishments of the Tax Commission and the hard work that lies ahead.”

Are we meant to take from this that he did nothing wrong, but he's become a center of controversy and because of the controversy - not because of any wrongdoing - he has to step aside? Although he's basically doing a wonderful job, and did nothing wrong? Is that what we're meant to extract from the message?

If so, or if not, neither Chigbrow nor Otter seem to be saying.

Malloy’s blog

Chuck Malloy

A new blog this week on Ridenbaugh Press, by Chuck Malloy called Malloy from the Inside. It's Malloy's first blog, and he's busy posting.

His viewpoint is a little different from what you'll ordinarily see on this page. For the last several years, he has been chief spokesman for the Idaho House Republicans, and his take on things is substantially informed by that experience. (He's recently departed from that role.) But not that alone. Before that, he also was an editorial writer for the Idaho Statesman in Boise, and earlier was political writer for the Post-Register newspaper in Idaho Falls.

I've known Chuck since we both covered politics for newspapers a long time ago. His background goes way back. His blog stands to become a regular reading stop as this next Idaho legislative session gets underway next week.

The revenues and the consequences

Take a look at this sentence, from the Publicola last week: "For Washington State, gaming and liquor are two revenue sources begging to be expanded."

The writer David Meinert surveys the many and massive state budget cuts that lie ahead, and the many lives that will be damaged by the result of those cuts, and casts around for new sources of revenue. Significant and quick bucks could be had, he argues, if the state loosened the rules and cut new deals on gambling and alcohol.

Some other states are doing it, he points out: "Minnesota is considering legalizing slot machines in bars statewide and the state estimates the expanded gambling would generate $630 million a year in new state revenue. In Pennsylvania, slots provided $616.5 million in revenue last year. With over 1.4 million more people in Washington State than Minnesota, and with a more aggressive licensing plan than Pennsylvania (where only 10 of 14 potential licenses are operating), Washington could see even more revenue."

The bar to such ideas, he writes, is "shallow politics and antiquated morals." But that hardly seems all. There are few free lunches, and prices will be paid eventually for easy bucks achieved today. (Centuries of pulp fiction got that right on the personal level.)

Horses Ass has entered the fray on this, making some of those cautionary points in more detail than we will here. But as the legislature prepares to convene, you can expect that temptations will rise.

A crime of inadvertently stopping by?

The case of Oregon v. Barry Lowell Barger, decided today by the Oregon Supreme Court, is worth some review by anyone who ... well, visiting this space or any other in the World Wide Web. Be aware that the simple process of following a link or mistyping a url could be a serious criminal violation, in the view of some people in law enforcement, though not on the Oregon Supreme Court.

Barger was being investigated in a report of child sexual abuse; in the course of it, police seized and examined his computer. They did not find any saved pictures, videos or such - the kind of stored material that have formed the basis for similar cases in the past. But criminal charges based on the computer files did ensue:

Eugene police detective Williams, who was certified in computer forensics, took possession of the computer, made a copy of the hard drive, and used certain forensic software to examine that hard drive. Based on Williams's findings, defendant was charged with eight counts of Encouraging Child Sexual Abuse in the Second Degree, ORS 163.686, by possessing or controlling a visual recording of sexually explicit conduct involving a child. Each charge was based on a separate digital image that Williams found in the computer's "temporary internet file cache."

As Williams later explained at defendant's jury trial, temporary Internet files found in a computer are the product of an automatic function of a computer's web browser. Whenever a computer user visits a web page, the browser creates a copy of the web page and stores it in a temporary Internet file "cache," where it remains until the space is used up and written over, or it is erased. If a user calls up the same web page at some later date, the browser simply accesses the copy from the temporary files, rather than going through the slower process of downloading the same information from the web page. Computer users with ordinary skills would not necessarily be aware of that function or know how to go about accessing information stored in the temporary Internet file cache.

Williams testified that, when he received the computer, only one of the three addresses that had triggered Sullivan's suspicions remained in the web-address registry but that, by examining other Internet activity files, he was able to identify two other suspicious web addresses that someone had accessed in the recent past. Williams stated that he checked all three web sites and that all appeared to contain pornographic images of prepubescent girls and girls in their early teens.

Williams testified that he then searched for similar images that might be stored on the computer's hard drive, using certain words and phrases commonly used in child pornography. He acknowledged that he did not find any images of that kind that had been purposefully copied and saved in any user's personal files. He did, however, discover sexually explicit images of prepubescent girls in the computer's temporary Internet file cache.

The prosecution then presented the specific evidence that it asserts established defendant's guilt of the eight charges of Encouraging Child Sexual Abuse. The evidence included the eight digital images, all of which Williams had discovered in the temporary Internet file cache of defendant's computer, and which were the bases of the charges. Williams acknowledged that there was nothing about the images that identified what web site they had come from and that there was no way to know with absolute certainty whether the images had been accessed intentionally by a user or "were the result of pop-up windows or browser redirects." Williams further explained, however, that pornographic pop-ups and redirects occur almost exclusively when a computer user visits another pornographic web site.

After presenting Williams's testimony, the state rested ...

Now imagine you're bouncing around the web, following links or typing in, maybe not altogether accurately, urls. Suppose you land on a site like one of those - or something else, non-pornographic but nonetheless legally troublesome - and, appalled, immediately depart for somewhere else. (Remember the former porn site that used an address something like A lot of people stopped there in the early days of the web before finding out what it was.) That site's record is in your browser's cache. And according to the prosecutors, you've broken the child porn law (or some other, depending on the subject matter) and should be sent to prison.

The Oregon Supreme Court did not see it that way. It reversed the state court of appeals and circuit court, and said that "we are not persuaded by the state's theories as to how and why, in the absence of some additional action by a computer user beyond that proved here, the user could be deemed to 'possess' or 'control,' in any sense that this court heretofore has recognized, a digital image that he or she has called up on a computer screen. Instead, we are satisfied that the statute before us, ORS 163.686(1)(a)(A)(i), when read in the light of its context ... embodies a considered legislative choice not to criminalize the mere 'obtaining' or 'viewing' of child pornography without consideration. Thus, we conclude that the acts at issue here - navigating to a website and bringing the images that the site contains to a computer screen - are not acts that the legislature intended to criminalize."

The casual web user may have dodged a bullet on this one.