Oregon Transparency Project: Political Contributions

---

Hank Ruari July 29, 2010 8:48 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Never. ever, underestimate the potent power of the poor-in-dollars but massive in multiplication of total votes, all of which count. That's major momentous message of the Obama campaign and carries overtones of more menace now for GOP meanly manipulating the tea-pot,which may well have more danger to scald than they can contemplate. That;s WHY factual face of fancy-givers, as exposed by transparency, may be fearful consequence when considered calmly, cozily and in powerful considerable detail. Quid-for-quo, seen in full advance, may be most muscular tool we can turn to, now...and amounts announced in advance, with names and numbers in full detail,may amount (no pun!) to purchase-provision so clear, if not clean, as to end it for one or the other...

---

Hank Ruark July 29, 2010 10:23 am (Pacific time)

Ersun et al:
  Once again we see why John Dewey, great philsopher and teacher, declared conversation as "the heart of democracy."

  My casual comment re power of bouncing/ball somehow here provided powerful political insights, opening up precisely the needed depth and desperate impacts of dialog on our soon-arriving key-choice of a leader to lead Oregon into thr 2st Century.

   AND "that ain't no game", friends !!
   SO --to make sure it ain't, and cannot be (easily) fixed, transparency becomes much more than "the name of this game."

  Which emphasizes again, and rightly so, the very large contribution made by any solid system for fully illuminating the sources of that fuel we all know "makes it go !" --the money that matters most.

   AND, via the system, WHO supplies HOW MUCH, WHEN and to WHOM...

---

Ersun Warncke July 28, 2010 1:10 pm (Pacific time)

Hank, the bouncing basketball is of course not a major indicator of governance skills, but I would not discount Dudley on that basis alone.  It should be taken into account that Dudley's constituency is basically a few dozen (at most) high net worth individuals, while Kitzhaber is representing hundreds of thousands of individuals who make up the core workforce of the State (this itself posses potential problems of another kind, which others have highlighted in such extensive depth and detail that I need not devote much time to rehashing).  Aside from friends in the athletic world, Dudley's supporters seem to be a rogue's gallery of "investment" and "development" types, which does not bode well.  Dudley's positions on "modernizing" land use planning (i.e. pillaging the land for private profit) are reflective of his supporters, and deeply contrary to the long term interests of our State.  Health care is a major area where Dudley has essentially no plan, while Kitzhaber has demonstrated understanding of the basic challenges and necessary policy changes for real reform, and he has the trust and support of the medical community, which is essential for real reform.  Serious health care reform would save far more in the State budget than further reneging on past PERS promises, and so on this count I would guess that Kitzhaber has the best chance of making changes that would actually address long term budget, tax, and economic problems.  As to negotiations with unions, which Dudley cites his experience in (on the other side of the table, and negotiating for multi-million salaries it should be noted), I simply reject this idea that the unions are purely "in it for themselves."  Teachers, police, firefighters, etc, are of course demonstrating commitment to public service on a daily basis.  Only in the looney toon land of Republican propaganda are they both lauded as courageous public servants and then dismissed in the same breath as money grubbing thieves.  These unions have shown time and again a willingness to accept compromises that reduce their compensation if there is an honest negotiation and a clear public benefit to be derived therefrom.  Cutting the retirement benefits of public servants in order to reduce capital gains taxes for wealthy speculators is obviously not a public benefit.  Politicians who push such proposals only increase the adversarial climate between the State bureaucracy and the front line workers who provide crucial public services, which makes it more difficult and expensive to get these jobs done.

---

Ersun Warncke July 29, 2010 12:19 pm (Pacific time)

A note on the "Misc Cash Under $100:" These small contributions are reported in aggregate amounts, so $10,000 may reflect 200 small donations reported together. Thank you to the people who emailed me to explain this.

---

Hank Ruark July 29, 2010 10:24 am (Pacific time)

Ersun et al: Once again we see why John Dewey, great philsopher and teacher, declared conversation as "the heart of democracy." My casual comment re power of bouncing/ball somehow here provided powerful political insights, opening up precisely the needed depth and desperate impacts of dialog on our soon-arriving key-choice of a leader to lead Oregon into thr 2st Century. AND "that ain't no game", friends !! SO --to make sure it ain't, and cannot be (easily) fixed, transparency becomes much more than "the name of this game." Which emphasizes again, and rightly so, the very large contribution made by any solid system for fully illuminating the sources of that fuel we all know "makes it go !" --the money that matters most. AND, via the system, WHO supplies HOW MUCH, WHEN and to WHOM...

---

Ersun Warncke July 28, 2010 1:14 pm (Pacific time)

Hank, the bouncing basketball is of course not a major indicator of governance skills, but I would not discount Dudley on that basis alone. It should be taken into account that Dudley's constituency is basically a few dozen (at most) high net worth individuals, while Kitzhaber is representing hundreds of thousands of individuals who make up the core workforce of the State (this itself posses potential problems of another kind, which others have highlighted in such extensive depth and detail that I need not devote much time to rehashing). Aside from friends in the athletic world, Dudley's supporters seem to be a rogue's gallery of "investment" and "development" types, which does not bode well. Dudley's positions on "modernizing" land use planning (i.e. pillaging the land for private profit) are reflective of his supporters, and deeply contrary to the long term interests of our State. Health care is a major area where Dudley has essentially no plan, while Kitzhaber has demonstrated understanding of the basic challenges and necessary policy changes for real reform, and he has the trust and support of the medical community, which is essential for real reform. Serious health care reform would save far more in the State budget than further reneging on past PERS promises, and so on this count I would guess that Kitzhaber has the best chance of making changes that would actually address long term budget, tax, and economic problems. As to negotiations with unions, which Dudley cites his experience in (on the other side of the table, and negotiating for multi-million salaries it should be noted), I simply reject this idea that the unions are purely "in it for themselves." Teachers, police, firefighters, etc, are of course demonstrating commitment to public service on a daily basis. Only in the looney toon land of Republican propaganda are they both lauded as courageous public servants and then dismissed in the same breath as money grubbing thieves. These unions have shown time and again a willingness to accept compromises that reduce their compensation if there is an honest negotiation and a clear public benefit to be derived therefrom. Cutting the retirement benefits of public servants in order to reduce capital gains taxes for wealthy speculators is obviously not a public benefit. Politicians who push such proposals only increase the adversarial climate between the State bureaucracy and the front line workers who provide crucial public services, which makes it more difficult and expensive to get these jobs done.

---

Hank Ruark July 28, 2010 11:53 am (Pacific time)

Friend Ersun: Thank you for your solid personal-professional effort to carry still further what's becoming a national trend: Concerned citizens seeking much more meaningful essential information inevitably shaping the democratic process. That trend --obvious to all who surveil D.C. dirty doings, noting WHO is doing WHAT to WHOM-- is coming home to each State Legislature and its own workings,not one day too-soon. Specific, precise, skilled data/analysis beats the hell out of constant cavil and its futile failing: Seeking huge attitudinal changes in the electorate far beyond what's psychologically possible, much less probable. BUT here we get to see what dollars were dropped from whom and where they went --key info for shaping our own decisions, knowing only too well those already negative-historied on the public record, and with ID now possible those opened to full survey and needed further surveillance. Honest, open, democratic contributions, clearly,cleanly on-the-record, surely beat out any covert control cannily contrived otherwise !! Cannot refrain from open, honest observation: Bouncing a basketball does nothing to prepare one for beating out a beneficent state-level budget.

[Return to Top]

---

©2025 Salem-News.com. All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Salem-News.com.