Debates the Oregon Way
A Democratic candidate for governor outlines why inclusive debates are an important way to evaluate candidates and if private, for-profit media won’t hold them, he's got a new proposal.
Voters overwhelmingly supported limits to campaign contributions when they took the extraordinary step of amending the state Constitution to allow the Legislature to impose caps on contributions for candidates. Unsurprisingly, the Legislature did not. And when three initiatives were drafted to bypass the politicians and allow Oregonians to vote on limits themselves, Secretary of State Shemia Fagan, an establishment Democrat, struck them down on technicalities.
It’s disappointing when a local news outlet also ignores the will of the people by establishing criteria for participation in their gubernatorial primary debate. Namely, contributions of at least three quarters of a million dollars — giving an outsized voice to wealthy individuals and corporate and political action committee (PAC) donors.
I urged KATU to rethink the criteria that put emphasis on big money, and instead institute entrance standards that reflect the will of the people by focusing on the issues, the candidates, and their willingness to serve the needs of their constituency.
We proposed instead that participants in the debate must:
Be in the voters’ pamphlet, to ensure that only serious candidates participate;
Have a website, allowing voters to research candidates’ platforms;
Have six or more interviews from around the state, showing outreach to all Oregonians, not just those in the Willamette Valley;
Receive donations over $3,500, the limit for public disclosures on ORESTAR, assuring campaign finance transparency.
Instead of adopting the new criteria, KATU canceled the debates altogether!
This aptly demonstrates why campaign finance reform is so badly needed. Political ad spending for the 2022 midterms is expected to reach $7.8 billion. When establishment media outlets rely on campaign money, it’s no wonder they ignore all but the most well-financed candidates. We can’t rely on them to present an unbiased viewpoint when their only criteria for access and exposure is money. It’s clear we need a new way of vetting our candidates for office that isn’t based on the potential for ad revenue.
I believe debates are an important way to evaluate candidates. If private, for-profit media won’t hold them, I propose that our public universities do so. The students could host, moderate, and ask the questions, giving them a voice in our electoral process.
Just as it’s important to include all candidates, we need to include parts of the state outside the Portland Metro area. If multiple debates around the state are impractical, we should hold them on a rotating basis each election season. Possible venues: universities in Portland, Klamath Falls, Ashland, Eugene, and Corvallis.
I have several students volunteering on my campaign and am inspired by their political savvy, deep understanding of the issues, and the hope they exude as they work to make changes to a system that tries to exclude young voices. I’d love to see a new Oregon tradition every election season: Debates held at public universities throughout the state. If the establishment media wants to remain relevant, they can cover the debates there.
It will be impossible to make bold changes to things like healthcare, the housing crisis, and carbon reform without reducing the influence of special interests in Oregon’s politics. I am modeling this reform in my own campaign for governor by not accepting any corporate, special interest, or PAC money and limiting individual campaign donations to $1,000. Those that eschew big money in favor of the will of the voters should not be left out of the conversation.
Patrick Starnes grew up in a small village outside of Roseburg where his father worked at the lumber mill. After earning a bachelor’s degree in history from the University of Oregon in 1996, he began working as a cabinetmaker and in home restoration. He currently resides in Brownsville with his wife Mary.