2008 Vanguard endorsements

That all-important day we have been looking toward with anticipation is right around the corner. Nov. 4, 2008–Election day, when all the bumper stickers, voter registration clipboard stalkers, campaign ads, debates and SNL skits come to fruition.

Now in the final days while (hopefully) millions of Oregonians are mailing in their ballots, the Vanguard has crafted our political endorsements for this historic election year for you, the conscientious voter, to help with your voting decisions both national and local.

President: Sen. Barack ObamaIt has been an unhappy eight years since George W. Bush was elected president of the United States.

Our country is fighting two wars, suffering from soaring inflation rates and enduring the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Our schools are continuing to crumble, there are millions without healthcare and affording a college education is becoming even more difficult.

Barack Obama is not a knight in shining armor, and he will not cure all that ails this country.

What Obama does offer, however, is hope–the very word he used to launch his unlikely campaign four years ago with his stirring speech at the Democratic National Convention in Boston, and the thing Americans need the most in this time of strife.

The Vanguard believes Obama is the right person to tackle the unique challenges this country will face in the next four years. He possesses the even temperament, sound judgment and policies that will move the United States out of the abyss it is quickly slipping in to.

Many of Obama’s policies will have a direct impact on college students. He advocates for universal healthcare in a time when many college students have limited access to medical care.

Obama acknowledges that global warming is man-made and will invest in clean, renewable sources of energy that will not only save the environment but create millions of jobs as well. An Obama presidency would also mean tax breaks for the shrinking middle class, already under attack from rising costs and static wages.

He will also nominate justices to the Supreme Court that will protect our civil liberties and interpret the Constitution fairly, not only when it is politically convenient.

On matters of foreign policy, Obama and his running mate Sen. Joe Biden will restore America’s credibility abroad and help keep our country safe–not with unsubstantiated preemptive strikes but with real diplomacy.

This election is not about placing blame for the failures of the past; they are many, and to a degree we are all complicit. This election is about the future. It is about accepting where we are as a country and deciding, all of us, where we go from here.

Many have long considered America to be the shining city on the hill. Her lights now dimming, Barack Obama is the beacon that will once again brighten the path.

The other choice: Sen. John McCainWe appreciate Sen. John McCain’s service to his country, but over the course of eight years McCain has voted with Bush more than 90 percent of the time. More than that, he has conducted a campaign that has repeatedly focused on the negative and has featured numerous instances of poor judgment.

Among the most troubling of McCain’s policies is a $5,000 credit for healthcare instead of universal care. In addition, McCain’s aggressive and hostile stance toward the rest of the world represents the wrong attitude during a time where fences need to be mended, not bombed into oblivion.

Most egregiously, McCain, 72, chose as his running mate a political lightweight and social conservative in Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin. A vote for McCain is not a vote for another four years of George Bush, but it might be worse.

U.S. Senator: Speaker of the Oregon House Jeff MerkleyThe Democrat Jeff Merkley is not a home-run candidate for the Senate, but in this political season and with his competition, he doesn’t have to be. With Barack Obama poised to claim the presidency, the Senate has a chance to actually govern for a couple of years if the Democrats can increase their tenuous 51-49 majority.

That’s not to say that Merkley isn’t qualified–he is. Merkley has spent time as executive director for Portland Habitat for Humanity, he was a national security analyst for the Pentagon and he was president of the Oregon World Affairs Council.

It’s an impressive resume and we have no doubt that Merkley would advocate for important issues, including a middle-class tax break, ending the war in Iraq and protecting a woman’s right to choose.

Merkley would also provide another experienced voice on foreign affairs as it becomes increasingly important to fill the highest levels of our government with people who truly understand how the world should work.

The problem with Merkley is that he is a typical politician who often comes off as wooden, disingenuous and already a little too slick. Hopefully all that means he is ready to hold his own once he gets to Washington, D.C.

The other choice: U.S. Sen. Gordon SmithGordon Smith, a Republican from Pendleton, has ably served the state for two terms. He has worked on several bipartisan projects with Sen. Ron Wyden (D), and he understands the state’s rural areas, but the time has come for a change. He is not evil, but he does have uncomfortable ties to big business and has not proven himself to be the moderate he claims to be.

Secretary of State: Oregon Sen. Kate BrownKate Brown has long been a friend to Portland State and would make an excellent Secretary of State. She will ensure that Oregon has open and fair elections, will help create new jobs by making it easier for businesses to operate and will crack down on fraud. Brown has been in state politics since 1991 when she was elected to the State House. In this case, that’s not a bad thing.

The alternative is Rick Dancer, a Republican who left a career in television journalism to run for Secretary of State. He has no political experience and lacks the resume to lead Oregon through this tumultuous time.

Portland City Council, Position 1: Amanda FritzAmanda Fritz, a registered nurse, is on the ballot due to Portland’s run-off rule. She clobbered her opponent Charles Lewis 43 percent to 13 percent, but did not win since she received less than 50 percent of the vote. Fritz would fund basic services first, ensuring the city’s infrastructure continues to function. She is a friend to small businesses and would help guide the city through the tough economic times ahead. Also, Fritz would fight to keep City Hall transparent and accountable.

Ballot Measure 56: YesThis ballot measure seeks to repeal Oregon’s “double-majority” property tax law that requires a majority of voters to participate in March and September elections to validate the results. The law is undemocratic and disenfranchises voters who do choose to participate. The double majority is an unnecessary check, and even worse, it checks the power of citizens to choose their own laws.

Measure 58: NoBehind the veneer of confusing language and extreme vagueness, Bill Sizemore is using Measure 58 as an attempt to milk taxpayers for what appears to be a noble pursuit: To ensure all students quickly and efficiently learn English.

We ask that you refrain from taking the bait.

This measure places strict deadlines on how long students may attend English immersion classes before being thrown into classes with only English instruction. Currently, students are allowed to attend English immersion program classes until deemed proficient enough to attend English-only classes.

In addition, this measure also takes the decision-making power out of the hands of educators, which could become a dangerous slippery slope.

Ballot Measure 59: NoMeasure 59 would create an unlimited deduction for federal income taxes on individual taxpayers’ Oregon income-tax returns. If the measure passes, it would reduce the amount of revenue available for state expenditures. In plain English, important things such as higher education would receive less money. More than 70 percent of Oregonians would receive no additional break, while its richest citizens would keep more money.

Measure 60: No This measure would eliminate the perks of seniority for teachers and base pay raises solely on classroom performance. However, neither “seniority” nor “classroom performance” are defined within the language of the measure.

Also, school districts would be asked to make layoff decisions based on how successful teachers are at teaching particular subjects.

We should show our appreciation for those responsible for teaching Oregon’s youth, not force them to continually demonstrate their competence in the classroom.

Ballot Measure 62: NoAnother Kevin Mannix measure, Measure 62, seeks to distribute 15 percent of lottery funds to crime prevention, investigation and prosecution. In a time when lottery funds are already going to take a hit next year-in part due to the smoking ban in restuarants and bars and the failing economy-it would be foolish to cut the lottery pie into even smaller pieces. Under Measure 62, schools will suffer, including Portland State.

Ballot Measure 65: NoThere are two main problems with Measure 65, which seeks to drastically alter Oregon’s election laws. The measure would place all prospective candidates on the primary ballot, including minor parties and independents. Currently minor parties and independents nominate candidates directly to the general election ballot. That isn’t the problem.

It is problematic, however, that the top two vote-getters would appear on the general election ballot, regardless of party affiliation. This could lead to a situation where two Democrats (or Republicans) appear on the general election ballot because they received the highest amount of votes in the primary.

The other problem is the cost. There would be a one-time cost of approximately $100,000 for computer programming changes, plus an additional cost of $327,000 for additional printing costs and postage every two years. The measure does not affect the amount of funds collected for state or local government. The state is already strapped financially.

This measure would do nothing but complicate the election process and make it more costly as well.