Feed aggregator
Letters: Faith healing: Judging the Beagleys
Homeless man sentenced to 18 years for stabbing another to death in Portland
Homeless man sentenced to 18 years for stabbing another to death in Portland
Oregon says suspect in Gresham killing is fake dentist
Students from Washington State School for the Blind try skiing at Mount Hood
Garbage fire guts half of gresham duplex
Internet freedom as a diplomatic tool
Behind the OEA Endorsement
By Julie Fahey of Eugene, Oregon. Julie is a business consultant and a member of the 2010 class of Emerge Oregon. She observed the OEA convention as a member of the public (not as a member of OEA).
The OEA-PIE convention was held on Saturday in Eugene – by now we all know the major news coming out of the convention (Bradbury won the endorsement), but I thought the BlueOregon crowd might be interested in some observations about the day. The convention hosted candidates from a number of different races, but the main event was clearly the Governor’s race. The four candidates attending were Bradbury, Kitzhaber, Alley, and Lim (no Chris Dudley).
The convention was structured so that each candidate spoke to the entire delegate group for 10 minutes and then fielded questions from the floor for 10 minutes. Delegates also had the opportunity to get personal time with the candidates during smaller caucuses and in hospitality suites.
The Republicans candidates went first. Allen Alley gave a reasonably good speech that touched on government spending and what he learned on his tour of Oregon schools. John Lim was entertaining, though he spent at least 3-4 of his 10 minutes talking about how he would increase tourism to Oregon (odd for an audience of educators).
Nice as it was to see Republican candidates engage with the OEA (and vice versa), the main contenders of the day were obviously Bradbury and Kitzhaber. Bradbury’s speech was full of passion and energy – his central message was that we need to fully fund education in Oregon, though he was pretty light on the specifics of how (other than briefly mentioning closing tax loopholes). Presumably he included more specifics in the written materials submitted to delegates beforehand, and used the speech as a chance to connect emotionally with the group.
Kitzhaber’s speech came across as intellectual, thoughtful, and issues-focused. He was more subdued than Bradbury, but delivered more content in terms of his education priorities (early childhood education; performance-based school funding; revenue reform through shifting from an income tax towards a sales tax). I found one section of his speech particularly interesting – he talked about how “reform” and “performance” are words that can be off-putting since they’ve been used in the past by people attempting to undermine our current public education system. He countered that these words don’t have to be negative – we can reclaim them. In his comments on what reform could mean, he drew extensively from Powerful Learning, one of Linda Darling-Hammond’s books (a Stanford professor, rumored in 2008 to be a possible nominee for U.S. Secretary of Education).
When it came time for the floor debate, several people commented sincerely about how lucky the OEA was to have two excellent candidates to choose from. One of the delegates described his perception that one of the candidates (Bradbury) had been more like the cheerleader and the other (Kitzhaber) like the Head Coach, but overall it seemed that the crowd was favoring Bradbury.
The final vote tally was:
49,448Bradbury31,607Kitzhaber3,603No Recommendation796Allen Alley97John LimAfter Bradbury’s warm reception, and Kitzhaber’s mentions of “reform” and “performance”, I expected that the endorsement would go to Bradbury. But, I thought the final vote tally might be a little closer. I’m not sure how much of the endorsement was based on Bradbury’s passion and insistence that we can fully fund the QEM and how much was due to the fact that Kitzhaber’s talk of reform may not have sat very well with OEA members/leadership. During the floor debate, one of the delegates said that there can be a difference between a pro-union/OEA candidate and a pro-education candidate.
I believe the OEA endorsed the more pro-OEA candidate, but I think it remains to be seen whether they endorsed the more pro-education candidate.

