A television joint appearance on KOBI
Better than nothing.
Not as good as it could be.
I feel bad expressing disappointment in a candidate forum held by KOBI television. They did something no one else has done: Get two candidates for the Oregon state senate together to answer questions. I congratulate them. I thank them. If it were easy and profitable then I suppose more TV stations would do it, so, again, thanks.
But it could have been far more useful to local voters.
The format of the 22-minute forum was a moderator asking brief questions of the candidates and seeing 60-second answers. Again, a congratulation: The moderator, KOBI news anchor Craig Smullen, exercised exemplary brevity and self control. He didn't try to be the center of attention. He didn't ask two-minute questions and seek one-minute answers.
My disappointment is in the questions themselves. Here are the first five:
Why should voters in Senate District Three vote for you over your opponent?
If elected, what would your top two priorities be in your first year?
illegal marijuana grows have caused chaos for law enforcement in Southern Oregon and for water consumption. What will you do if elected to cure these problems?
Homelessness. What steps can you take in the legislature to get cities like Medford or Ashland get additional funding for mental health needs in relation to the homeless?
What is an issue facing state government that isn't on Oregonians' radar that should be, and what steps would you take to address that issue?
What's wrong with those? Those seem likely to get candidates to talk about what they want to do if elected. Isn't that what we want?
No. Not really. Everyone wants to do good, popular things. If those things were possible or easy or didn't have entrenched opposition then they would already be done. Politics is the resolution of disagreement. It isn't wish list.
All of these questions got reasonable, conflict-free answers by fluent, intelligent candidates. They both wanted good law enforcement, homelessness solved, illegal marijuana grows ended, new problems addressed. Of course. Those questions don't get at the arenas of conflict and therefore avoid opportunities to resolve disagreement. They also don't tell voters anything useful.
Useful questions are ones that are uncomfortable for the candidates. I don't suggest that because I want to punish candidates. Nor am I attempting to come up with questions that will be "better TV," although I think that harder questions would, in fact, be better TV. Better questions would be:
To Democrat Jeff Golden:
---“Did you disagree with Kate Brown’s position on management of COVID and if so, in what ways?”
---"What have you done to keep the Democratic supermajority from running roughshod over downstate voters?"
---“The fire danger map created controversy. We are told it was your idea. What was your role in it, and would you change any part of the map?"
---"Would you support legislation to ban or limit Oregon women’s current right to abortions, and if so, what changes?"
To Republican Randy Sparacino:
---“Your TV ads complain about homelessness. We have homeless people here in the City of Medford. Have you done enough yourself? What should the state do?"
---"You were a public employee, paid by taxes. Are Oregon taxes too high, and if so, which taxes and programs would you cut?"
---"Do you agree with Trump that the 2020 election was stolen by Biden?"
---"Would you support legislation to ban or limit Oregon women’s current right to abortions, and if so, what changes?”
What is different about these proposed questions is that they get at the points of disagreement. These are the issues brought up in advertisements and public statements by the candidates. Jeff Golden warns that Sparacino would vote to limit or ban abortion. He would have that power if elected. Would he really do it? He may feel uncomfortable answering. Republicans may want a different answer than do Democrats. All the more reason to ask it.
Sparacino says that Golden is closely allied with Democratic governor Kate Brown's policies. She is unpopular. Let's hear if and where he disagrees with her. Golden may feel uncomfortable. His answers may irritate fellow Democrats. All the more reason to ask it.
If the answers to questions don't make the candidates uncomfortable, then the questions aren't worth asking. Politics is hard. It's easy to say "cut wasteful spending." Really? What spending? In Salem the senator has to cast real votes.
I am a citizen and voter, not a TV news producer. I don't own a TV station. I realize it is easy for me to make suggestions from the outside and in ignorance. Still, I watched the whole thing, including the commercials, so I share my opinion.
Again, thanks to KOBI.
Here is a link to the program: https://kobi5.com/news/politics-news/state-senate-district-3-candidate-forum-197566/
Having a moderator ask oral questions with a 60 second time limit for an oral response is so inadequate for today’s needs. We can do much better.
Running for office should be like a job interview where the interview is conducted by the voters. Sadly, that is not how it works because most politicians would rather run opaque campaigns where they do their best to get name recognition while hiding their true intentions. Most candidates don’t give straight answers to voters’ questions (because they know that every time they do they are going to alienate a certain percentage of the electorate). Campaigns generally consist of statements of broad platitudes (e.g., “I want to cut waste” or “I want to improve education”) which sound good but, in reality, mean absolutely nothing without the particulars of how the candidate plans on achieving those broad platitudes.
So, what is my alternative?
Oregon, in general, and the Secretary of State’s Office in particular, can and should be doing better to reach out to registered voters (and especially young voters) to increase voter participation and to make voters better informed. My solution would be an electronic candidate forum (“ECF”) website, hosted by the Secretary of State (as part of her existing website).
Unlike a traditional candidates’ forum where the candidates:
· Sit up in front in front of the audience.
· are orally asked questions from a single moderator; and
· give oral answers.
With the ECF:
1. The ECF website, would open to viewing by anyone, but would allow only registered voters, who reside in the district where the candidate is running, to ask candidates questions (because only they would be represented by the person elected).
2. The voter/questioner would be identified by name and county (i.e., no anonymous questions).
3. Registered voters could ask as many questions (including follow-up questions) as they like.
4. Questions could be directed to all or just some of the candidates.
5. All questions and answers would be date stamped so everyone knows when the question was asked and answered (or not answered).
6. Candidates would be under no obligation to answer a question but, if a candidate either does not answer a question or gives a non-responsive answer to the question it is for each voter to decide how that non-response or unresponsive answer would affect his/her vote.
7. When a candidate answers a question, an email would be sent, by the ECF website, to the questioner/voter, letting him/her know that his/her question has been answered.
8. If a candidate changes or updates his/her answer, the original answer would remain, but the change would be date stamped separately and another email would be sent to the questioner/voter, letting him/her know that his/her question has an updated answer.
9. When a candidate files for an office (s)he would be told about the ECF. Whether a candidate chooses to participate is up to him/her, but regardless, all questions received would be emailed to them and then it is up to the candidate to decide whether to submit an answer.
10. The ECF website would be searchable, by word, by viewers.
11. The number of visitors to the ECF website would be tracked and that information shared on the site.
12. The ECF website would also allow a statement from each participating candidate with a 2,500-word limit on the statement’s length (this would be way better than the current paper voter pamphlet’s 325 word limit because it would be longer/more comprehensive and could be updated).
13. After the election, all questions and answers would be archived and kept for future review and accountability.
14. All the donors and the amounts they gave to a candidate would be listed for each candidate.
Right now, too many voters see politics as a rigged game that favors the rich, special interests and their lobbyists but leaves them, the common citizen, out. Consequently, many voters (especially young voters) feel their vote means nothing and accordingly they do not vote. ECF directly addresses voter apathy and cynicism by making candidates run campaigns that are:
· Responsive.
· informative/educational.
· substantive.
· interactive.
· something that voters feel empowered about; and
· something, in which, voters would use/want to actively participate in.
Please call me if you have any questions, comments, or concerns.
Jim Crary
14393 Highway 66
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Cell: 541-531-2912
Email: craryja@gmail.com
First, as the only locally owned station, KOBI is the only station willing to participate in local issues with debates and forums. You simply won't find that engagement from out of town corporate owners of our other local stations. Sad. So, congratulations to KOBI and their owner Patsy Smullin for a long-tradition of community involvement. Like the Medford Chamber, the station has in the past been Republican leaning, but not today. They work hard to be neutral and support everyone in their community. They also don't have the depth or interest or knowledge you have. Yes, it would be wonderful if KOBI reached out to people like for help in developing insightful questions. But your great questions would definitely increase audience push back from every party. Not good for business. Therefore, TV forums usually go for bland, big picture questions that generate "reasonable, conflict-free answers." Debates are different and KOBI's Governor debate had some outstanding questions.