Ted Kulongoski is a former Oregon Supreme Court justice and lawyer. He was elected as an Oregon state representative in 1974 and served two terms before being elected as a state senator in 1978. Kulongoski was appointed by former Gov. Neil Goldschmidt as State Insurance Commissioner in 1986 and was elected as Oregon’s Attorney General in 1992. He most recently served as Oregon Supreme Court justice. He received his law degree from the University of Missouri. Kulongoski lives with his wife, Mary, in Portland.
Q: What experience do you bring to the table that makes you a unique candidate for governor?
A: I’ve had the opportunity to serve in private practice for my professional career as a lawyer. I’m a labor lawyer, that’s my specialty. I’ve had a great experience professionally representing working men and women in Oregon. I was elected and served two terms in the Oregon House of Representatives then two terms in the Oregon Senate. I was appointed by former Gov. (Neil) Goldschmidt to be the insurance commissioner. We consolidated about five or six agencies into the Department of Insurance and Finance. That gives me a management sense about it. I’ve actually sat down and restructured departments. I was the attorney general for the state, I was at the crossroads of all the major issues in the state in the 1990s, then I served on the Oregon Supreme Court. In doing what I’ve done, I’ve had this rare opportunity to serve in all three branches.
Q: Why should students take an interest in this primary election, and how are you campaigning to increase student turnout?
A: The reason I was on the court, and I was on a position that’s considered the ultimate position for a lawyer, is I believe government is important and it’s relevant in our lives. I think people make a difference and can make the government be responsive to a much wider set of concerns. Students should get involved because this is important in their lives, not just as students but as citizens of Oregon. I’ve visited campus, and I’ve gotten student organizations involved.
Q: Would you back initiatives to raise tuition at Oregon universities beyond the 3 percent per year cap?
A: I don’t. I still think the access issue is at the heart, in terms of our policy, of what our role is in this process. If you let tuition rates go up higher, you’re going to deprive quite a lot of people of the opportunity to go to college.
Q: Do you support higher pay for university faculty?
A: Yes. It’s an acute issue at our institutions of higher education. If we don’t do something about pay at institutions of higher education, there’s going to be a brain drain out of our institutions. We can only go so far on the quality of life, and ultimately we have to be competitive.
Q: How do you plan to help students afford college when scholarship funding in this state is being cut?
A: This state needs to look at creating an endowment that would actually say if a student graduates from high school in Oregon and meets a certain academic level and shows need, the state should provide those people with tuition paid for four year institutions, and for scholarships. Ultimately the only way we’ll be able to build a state system of higher education with what we all want, excellence, we’ve got to address the access issue and provide a way for citizens of this state to go to institutions and not be bankrupt when they come out the other end.
Q: Oregon universities are facing record enrollment rates, and at the same time funding is being cut. How do you propose that Oregon universities keep a high quality of education?
A: You can’t do it the way we’re doing it. What we have to look at is an endowment fund. The bulk of the money we’re giving is subsidizing the tuition rates. The trouble is there just isn’t enough money to do all these pieces, given the current structure of how we fund higher education.
Q: How do you plan on making yourself accessible to students if you’re elected?
A: Every position I’ve ever held, I’ve never heard anyone say that I’m not accessible. I travel, I go places and I like people. You’ll either be sitting in my office in the conference room or I’ll be down on your campus with you. Anything I can do to get you on my side and move you in that direction I’ll do. I’m more than happy to partner with students on a lot of these issues. It’s not just staying in Salem, it’s coming down into campuses and finding what these concerns are.
Q: Oregon’s resource-based economy often comes into direct conflict with environmental issues. How do you plan to balance these needs?
A: First of all, I do not buy into the argument that it’s one or the other. You can have both. Sustainable forestry is an objective to the state, sustainable agriculture is an objective for the state. Sustainable forestry is improving the watersheds, improving the health of the forest. I don’t believe this is an either or situation. We can have a healthy environment and a strong economy.
Q: In the event of another economic slump, would you be more likely to cut programs or raise taxes to balance the budget?
A: I’ve said all along that first of all on the economy I see a two pronged approach. The state’s general fund is based on the income tax. The truth of it is you have to look economically at how you grow the pie. Sometimes we become too infatuated with locating out-of-state businesses here. The government doesn’t want to do anything that inhibits the growth of income for people. The reality is we all benefit from it. The first prong is to see how we can benefit the economy. The state has to focus on the infrastructure issue. If you can’t move your products to market, you’re in trouble. The state has to focus on the infrastructure. The second issue is the regulatory environment. There should be performance standards on regulation. Lastly, we need to have a marketing strategy for Oregon that markets the uniqueness of the state and its products. The other prong of this attack is I think this is a time of opportunity for government. It’s time to make a critical assessment of what government does and how it does it. The public wants to know what we’re doing with the money we have. We can’t get there until we regain their confidence that their money is being spent wisely at this time. It’s an accountability issue: we have to do better with what we have.
Q: Do you think Oregon’s education system is adequately preparing students for college?
A: I’m not one who believes that Oregon has chronically funded K-12. (If schools were chronically poorly funded) you couldn’t have SAT and ACT scores we have with some of the highest scores in the country. The truth of it is the glass is half full, not half empty. Does that mean we can do better? Yes. Ultimately we need to recognize two things. When we ask for increased student performance standards, it’s going to cost more money. Secondly, there’s a diverse student population. Bilingual education is going to become a big factor in Oregon.
Q: What should this state do to keep Oregon’s top students at in-state colleges and universities?
A: There are a number of things. State universities have to become institutions of excellence. If a student believes that and believes we’re striving ahead, I believe they’ll stay and go to school here.
Q: U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft tried to overturn Oregon’s death with dignity law in federal court. Will you fight to preserve the will of Oregon’s voters or help the government overturn what some consider to be illegal legislation?
A: I will do everything I can to protect this state’s sovereignty. The people have made a decision on this issue. Ashcroft is wrong. Judge Jones has said so. One of the greatest things Gov. Kitzhaber will be known for is redefining states’ rights. Oregonians know best how to manage these resources and our lives. The truth of it is the Supreme Court has said the states are “crucibles of experimentation.” Ashcroft has violated the Supreme Court by denying state
s the opportunity to experiment and try new ideas.
E-mail reporter Brook Reinhard
at [email protected].