Oregon Senate; Steve Novick vs Chuck Schumer

by: petrichor

Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 16:31

early in the campaign it was common knowledge that schumer had brought their man in oregon back to recruit him to run again gordon smith, though it wasn't clear what financial, strategic or infrastructural resources they had offered him (or how it would affect that campaign he would run). as it became clear that the dscc was involved in the primary the merkley campaign took two tactics to deflect the issue:

1) to refuse to comment about the financial assistance.

2) to obfuscate about the nature of the dscc, insisting that it is an independent pac, like all other pacs, rather than a political party committee official affiliated with the democratic party.

finally, the bend bulletin (via mape on politics) revealed that to the tune of nearly $100k:

the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee paid $73,000 to an Arkansas company for an advance team to help stage his kickoff as well as $20,000 for research.

Now, from Roll Call via Loaded Orygun the whole saga is laid out in more explicit terms, the Hill see's it as a power stuggle between schumer himself, and the grassroots campaign being run by steve novick.

In seeking to upset state Speaker Jeff Merkley in the Oregon Democratic Senate primary next month, attorney Steve Novick is fighting against a Capitol Hill powerbroker with a proven record of shepherding his preferred candidate to victory: Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Charles Schumer (N.Y.).

on the dynamics of the race:

Novick, who previously worked as a political consultant for Gov. Ted Kulongoski (D) and several issue-advocacy campaigns, has been a feisty campaigner who has played up his short height -- he is 4-foot-9 -- and the fact that he has a hook in place of the left hand that he was born without. He has aggressively campaigned for an immediate end to the Iraq War, nationalizing health care and raising capital gains taxes.

Merkley has run as the slightly more reserved establishment candidate that he is.

... Novick's campaign believes voters are fed up with Washington, D.C., and are looking for someone who speaks his mind and stands up for principle, even if a few feathers are ruffled in the process.

so let me repeat one key quote in bold: Steve Novick "has aggressively campaigned for an immediate end to the Iraq War, nationalizing health care and raising capital gains taxes". i would add to that his unapologetic support for gay marriage, net neutrality, fighting poverty and impeachment and opposition to FISA, torture, and the unitary executive among other things.

in a primary where one prominent democrat after another declined to step up and take on gordon smith, steve novick--who wrote the template on how to beat smith-- stood up and took the challenge. in a race where his primary opponent was expecting a schumer lead cake walk to the general, he has run an unabashedly progressive, internet saavy campaign, and slowly gone from underdog to ahead in the polls. whereas his opponent has lined up most all the establishment endorsements, novick has receive key endorsements from influentual state leader and former "maverick" governor john kitzhaber, and key grassroots union support from the communication works, and oregon education association; largest state union with an actual democratic nomination process, winning the votes of union members by over a 3 to 1 margin. he has even peeled off a local union from the state based affiliate, with the threat off more to come.

for this he has been hit from the right by his opponent in push polls, and blog attacks as being a "pro-tax advocate", and "repeatedly supporting higher taxes". for being a "left-winger" (and even "communist"!), for voting for ralph nader in 1996, for "insulting democrats", and "not being loyal", etc. for pointing out the iraq blurring strategy early on, he has been accussed of "spreading gop talking points" (his opponent voted for a bill that partially resolved to "Acknowledge the courage of President George W. Bush ... and express our support for the victorious removal of Saddam Hussein from power"). the list goes on, because it is the hillary clinton "kitchen sink" stategy.  the once inevitable candidate, in desperation, starts throwing everying in hopes that something will stick, even if that means compromising their own principles, all the while taking weak, muddled positions on things like gay marriage, and tax equality.

so thanks to the advice (and money) of schumer and the dscc we have had a primary that could have been between two progressives battling it out on ideas reduced to a primary of the establishment marginalizing the grassroots. a once progressive now hitting attacking novick's progressive policy ideas as "pro-tax" and "left-wing". and i give credit where credit is due, merkley did have a great session as house leader last year, with the first democratic majority in all three branches in over a decade they released a lot of pent up good legislation. which is what makes his straying in the campaign all the more dissapointing--if he can't even take principled stands in the face of dscc money during the primary campaign, what can we expect of him in the senate? so no, no thanks schumer.

i'll give steve novick the final word:

disclosure: i have no affiliation with any campaign other than donating $200, computer equipment and handing out flyers for steve novick.