NEWS

Sadler's Sense: Ben Westlund's Bid for Governor and Why He Makes Sense

By Russell Sadler, Jul 15, 2006

The public campaign for Oregon governor has been disappointingly unproductive so far -- a couple of barrages of negative ads on radio and television and staged debates with little substance.

But there is a real campaign taking place. It is happening in private homes all over the state. People invite friends to their homes or restaurant meeting rooms, the candidate arrives, talks a bit, then answers questions.

These private campaigns tend to produce a lot of information because they are not distorted by the presence of the media.

Ben Westlund, a former Republican state senator collecting signatures to qualify as an independent candidate for governor, stopped in Medford for a "meet and greet" last week. The gathering was organized by Bill Bartlett, who can be described as a moderately conservative Republican, and Ashley Henry, a liberal former Democrat who recently reregistered as an independent.

Rather than distorting the meeting for its guests by attending myself, I asked a friend to report for us. This friend is one of two people who read this column every week before you or even your newspaper editor see it. They are my Typo Patrol. What follows is a paraphrase of this person's written report of Westlund appearance in Medford:

There were about 25 people. The sponsors mined their address books. The people who turned out were politically aware but not ideologues. They appeared politically committed but disillusioned with both Republicans and Democrats.

When asked how he would deal with a state that is operating on borrowed money, Westlund's answer was "comprehensive reform to the tax system." That translates to making the income tax more progressive, raising the minimum corporate tax rate, and a 5% sales tax among other things.

He is also in favor of reviving the "fix" to the Oregon Health Plan that he and Kitzhaber came up with and that House Speaker Karen Minnis unceremoniously killed.

He is adamant about increasing support for K-12 but also for higher education. Oregon is 47th in the nation in supporting higher education. Only some states in the South are worse.

He is socially liberal -- voted for civil unions and assisted suicide -- and not afraid to be vocal about it.

My friend asked him how he planned to govern with a strident, partisan legislature. His answer was that the governor had to be visible, vocal and a leader. He is very bitter about the Republicans ordering him to hew to the party line.

That ends the report from my friend who attended the Medford event.

If Westlund fiscal program sounds a bit like Kulongoski's or Ron Saxton's it is because all three candidates recognize that Oregon's tax system has been so distorted and unbalanced by piecemeal initiatives over the last 20 years that any tax reformer has few options left.

No governor can pass tax reform alone. It requires three-fifths of the Oregon House and Senate -- new supermajorities imposed by initiative. Any tax reform plan requires a consensus and a Republican-dominated House refuses to join any consensus. The House Republicans are content to borrow and spend while refunding nonexistent "surpluses." Any Republican who objects is bullied into submission or driven from the party as Westlund was.

But even new legislative majorities may not be enough to overcome the growing abuse of the initiative.

The Oregon legislature is constitutionally prohibited from deficit spending. It must raise as much money as it spends, either by cutting appropriations, raising taxes or borrowing.

Voters using the initiative are exempt from this restriction. The budget-busting increases in state spending over the last 20 years have not been produced by the legislature, but by the voters passing initiatives.

Ballot Measure 5 in 1990 increased state spending by billions of dollars by reducing locally raised property taxes and substituting state income tax revenue, but failed to raise any new revenue to pay for the shift. Ballot Measure 11 in 1994 imposed mandatory sentences for certain crimes that required new prisons, but failed to provide any new revenue to pay for any of it.

And there is no end in sight. One measure likely be on the ballot this November limits increases in state spending to population growth and inflation. It is sponsored by the same Don McIntire behind that tax-burden-shifting Measure 5 in 1990.

The other dangerous initiative, financed by Loren Parks (who no longer even lives in Oregon) automatically couples exemptions in the Federal Tax Code to exemptions in the Oregon Tax Code, further depleting the Oregon treasury.

If voters approve both of these initiatives, it will not matter who is elected governor or which party controls the legislature. Republicans are not being realistic about the need for tax reform. Democrats will not support draconian budget cuts.

State Treasurer Randall Edwards has made it clear that Wall Street bond underwriters are unwilling to loan Oregon any more money secured by future tax revenues. Oregon will be unable to pay its bills with no prospect of borrowing the money to replace the "surpluses" it has given away. The result will be continued political paralysis.