Nov. 7 is drawing near, and in case you haven’t decided who you are voting for in Oregon’s gubernatorial race, here’s our breakdown.
Running as the incumbent is Ted Kulongoski, a Democrat whose recent approval ratings have slipped. It was even reported in The Register-Guard last December that former Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber was unhappy with Kulongoski’s leadership and was considering challenging him in the Democratic primary, though one month later, both he and State Senator Vicki Walker announced that they would not participate in the gubernatorial race.
Much of the criticism that Kulongoski has endured concerns Oregon’s financial situation. Of greatest concern is the state’s lack of a “rainy-day” fund that would be used to support government programs when times are tough.
Both Kulongoski and Republican challenger Ron Saxton have talked about creating such a fund, but they differ on how the fund should be created. Saxton advocates the elimination of the state’s “nonessential functions,” though he has not explicitly stated what he considers to be nonessential.
Also, Saxton, unlike Kulongoski, does not support reforming the corporate “kicker” law, which, according to the Oregon Center for Public Policy, is projected to cost the state $205.4 million in tax credits for 2007, with 86 percent of those funds going to multistate firms. Kulongoski has proposed that this kicker should be used to create the rainy-day fund, while Saxton argues that it should be reinvested in business development.
Saxton has repeatedly said that instead of debating about how we collect our taxes, we should be debating how our current funds are spent. But with the dismal state of our public schools, it is unrealistic to expect adequate funding without additional income. This lapse in Saxton’s reasoning is further highlighted by his reluctance to curb excessive campaigning and campaign contributions.
His reason for opposing campaign finance reform is that in states that have implemented these laws, the laws have been circumvented. This argument is weak considering his statement that “what separates our country, and our state, from so many others around the world is our respect for and commitment to the rule of law.”
Saxton is also firmly against the creation of new taxes, and has criticized Kulongoski’s recent cigarette tax hike, which he says is essentially a tax on the poor. This again stands in stark contrast to his views about the corporate kicker law.
But the issue of biggest concern to us is education. As we stated in (“Merit pay for teachers should be abandoned,” ODE, Sept. 28, 2006), Saxton favors rewarding teachers for performance, which would be measured by standardized tests. This system of educational administration serves only to keep wealthy districts on top and leave lower-income schools behind.
Saxton presents a welcoming image of Oregon’s future, but his political inexperience and corporate interests leads us to believe that he doesn’t have an adequate skills to deliver. And while numerous Oregon publications have issued statements voicing their support for Saxton, all of those statements have applauded Kulongoski for steering Oregon through economic hardship. For these reasons and more, the Emerald is endorsing Kulongoski for one more term as governor.