Endorsements II, Congress: Give Senator Smith the Hook

This year Oregon Democrats face a daunting array of good choices on their ballots. One of these is the choice of who will challenge the re-election bid of Gordon Smith. Senator Smith faces only token opposition in the Republican primary (see below). On the Democratic side, Jeff Merkley and Steve Novick have credible campaigns, and they each have reasonable prospects of defeating Senator Smith in November. Despite Candy Neville's strong showing in a poll of small sample size (the one in which she finished second to Mr. Novick, and ahead of Mr. Merkley), I have a hard time supporting a candidate who missed buying a page in the Voter's Pamphlet.

I recommend voting for Mr. Novick both on policy grounds and as having the better chance to win in November. Both candidates have similar positions on the current Iraq War (we should probably begin to number them for ease of reference) and both have good track records; Mr. Merkley's is in Oregon and Mr. Novick's is mostly outside Oregon, but I pay that difference little heed.

Mr. Novick does take one bold position: he wants to raise or eliminate the cap on social security taxes on high earners. It's never popular to support tax increases, and I credit him for this. More to the point, his campaign has caught fire in a way that Mr. Merkley's hasn't, and I believe that this makes him the better nominee for the fall campaign.

On the Republican side, Senator Smith faces only one opponent, a man named Gordon Leitch who is unhappy that in 1834 (sic) the United States reduced by 6% the amount of gold in its coinage. The other 94% has since disappeared also. Republicans may confidently vote for Gordon Smith as the better choice.

Democrats have three contested House races. In the First District, incumbent David Wu faces two political newcomers. Mr. Wu, who is a very nice guy, has demonstrated modest accomplishment in his time in Congress and is a regular target of Republican campaigns. It's reasonable for Democrats to renominate him, but it's also time for him to show more concrete results in Congress or to step aside in 2010 and give someone else a chance.

In the Third District, long-time incumbent Earl Blumenauer faces two challengers whose causes and gripes don't belong in Congress. Mr. Blumenauer should be re-elected. (Winning the Democratic nomination is effectively the same thing as being elected in this heavily Democratic district.)

In the Fifth District, Steve Marks and Kurt Schrader merit consideration. I give the edge to Mr. Schrader, who has served with distinction in the Oregon House and who understands the damage that the methamphetamine epidemic is doing to our state. Mr. Marks, a policy consultant who had worked in Governor Kitzhaber's office, is a fine candidate also, but should start his elective career in a state office.

The Republicans have two contested House races. In the First District, Claude William Chappell IV and Joel Haugen each want the chance to unseat David Wu. I don't think either one of them can do it, but Mr. Haugen is the better choice and gives the impression of being willing to work with House Democrats (who likely will command a majority come January) to accomplish his goals. Republicans should vote for Mr. Haugen.

Mike Erickson and Kevin Mannix are running for the Republican nomination in the Fifth District, the seat that Darlene Hooley is vacating. Mr. Mannix needs no introduction to the politically aware; Mr. Erickson is a political newcomer. Tempting as it is to recommend voting for Mr. Erickson simply because he isn't Kevin Mannix, I suggest that Republicans nominate Mr. Mannix. I have some concerns about a candidate who, as Mr. Erickson proposes, wants to reduce taxes and balance the budget. Mr. Mannix has a long record of service to the Republican cause and understands how legislation is made. He is the better choice for Republicans this year.