A
brief, not-super-informed comment about the upcoming Oregon primary.
The most interesting races are happening in Portland, where the mayor
and three of four city council seats are up for grabs. One of these is
easy (Carmen Rubio), one is a wildcard (position 2, to replace Nick
Fish), one is inevitable (Wheeler’s cruising, despite a very weak,
secretive term—I plan to vote Iannarone), and one is a battle royale—the
seat currently held by Chloe Eudaly.
Given all the possible slots, strong candidates might have challenged Wheeler or jumped into Fish’s vacant seat. Instead, they went after Chloe. Everyone wonders why, especially with regard to former mayor Sam Adams. It seems pretty clear: Eudaly has made lots of enemies, especially the neighborhood associations and landlords—powerful interests in the city. That tells you a lot: she has threatened the normal patronage system of the city, and the powerful don’t like it.
That shouldn’t come as a
surprise: it’s exactly what she promised and why people liked her the
first time around. Moreover, she’s not a doe-eyed idealist who can’t get
things done. That she has been so effective is exactly why there’s a
big effort to oust her. The biggest arguments against her are those like
Willamette Week offered: she’s not chummy. They seem especially piqued
that she “lectures” people: that, of course, is WW’s job. This, too,
impresses me: women with hard-nosed politics and prickly demeanors are always slammed (men are praised for the same qualities). She didn’t
care. Getting stuff done has been more important to her than embedding
herself in the clubby world of city power.
The biggest black mark against her is her right-sentiment-wrong-approach effort to reform the power of the neighborhood associations. Those groups have long been bastions of powerful NIMBYism that exclude poor and nonwhite Portlanders from decision-making. They have long been the source of enormous power—see the myopic, incompetent politics of Amanda Fritz—and challenging them is a dangerous political game few would attempt.
So Chloe has done what she said she’d do, actually made massive change in the way the city functions, and has refused to either be bullied into shutting up or softened her support for the poor and disenfranchised. Had Portlanders known in 2016 that she’d be running for re-election on that record, they would have been overjoyed. That’s why we put her in office.
I actually like Sam Adams as a man, but this race is an object example of his type of politics. It’s the most Sam Adams move Sam Adams could have made. He looked at the dynamics, recognized that he could tap into the anger, money, and support of those who oppose Eudaly, and offer voters tepid promises of technocratic, center-left policies. Unlike Eudaly, he’s not actually that effective at getting things done—and that’s a feature rather than a big for his backers, too. Of course, as WW notes, he is a really nice guy.
(Mingus Mapps also seems like a wonderful guy and I’d vote for him were he running for Fish’s seat.)
No politician in the city is going to defend the issues Chloe cares about. The City Council is far, far better off having her strident, insistent voice in there pushing for the issues she cares about. No one else will. I encourage you to vote for her.
Given all the possible slots, strong candidates might have challenged Wheeler or jumped into Fish’s vacant seat. Instead, they went after Chloe. Everyone wonders why, especially with regard to former mayor Sam Adams. It seems pretty clear: Eudaly has made lots of enemies, especially the neighborhood associations and landlords—powerful interests in the city. That tells you a lot: she has threatened the normal patronage system of the city, and the powerful don’t like it.
 |
| Andrew Theen/Oregonian |
The biggest black mark against her is her right-sentiment-wrong-approach effort to reform the power of the neighborhood associations. Those groups have long been bastions of powerful NIMBYism that exclude poor and nonwhite Portlanders from decision-making. They have long been the source of enormous power—see the myopic, incompetent politics of Amanda Fritz—and challenging them is a dangerous political game few would attempt.
So Chloe has done what she said she’d do, actually made massive change in the way the city functions, and has refused to either be bullied into shutting up or softened her support for the poor and disenfranchised. Had Portlanders known in 2016 that she’d be running for re-election on that record, they would have been overjoyed. That’s why we put her in office.
I actually like Sam Adams as a man, but this race is an object example of his type of politics. It’s the most Sam Adams move Sam Adams could have made. He looked at the dynamics, recognized that he could tap into the anger, money, and support of those who oppose Eudaly, and offer voters tepid promises of technocratic, center-left policies. Unlike Eudaly, he’s not actually that effective at getting things done—and that’s a feature rather than a big for his backers, too. Of course, as WW notes, he is a really nice guy.
(Mingus Mapps also seems like a wonderful guy and I’d vote for him were he running for Fish’s seat.)
No politician in the city is going to defend the issues Chloe cares about. The City Council is far, far better off having her strident, insistent voice in there pushing for the issues she cares about. No one else will. I encourage you to vote for her.
No comments:
Post a Comment