The state of Oregon is the home not only of friendly sentiment when it comes to third-party/independent presidential candidates but also has produced major voices of Republican moderation.  It is also small, which I believe ARP will find advantageous as it proceeds to organize the place.

    Senior Democratic Senator Ron Wyden is a traditional establishment liberal.  He supported NAFTA and GATT, voted against means testing and raising Medicare's eligibility age, and against the bipartisan Chafee-Breaux balanced budget plan from 1996.  He received fiscal responsibility ratings of 25% and 18% from the Concord Coalition in 1995 and 1996 respectively.

    I do not believe it would make sense for ARP to endorse or support this Senator in 2004.   Therefore we should be thinking about who we would like to see instead occupy this seat.  Our primary source for potential ARP or ARP-sympathetic candidates in this state should be among moderate Republicans.  There are two primary possibilities, as I see it.  The former chair of the GOP in this state, Craig Berkman, is interested in this seat and ran unsuccessfully in the 1998 GOP primary.  According to a letter to me from Congressman Tom Campbell, Berkman is a moderate Republican in Campbell's own image and well worth supporting.  He is the easiest alternative to contemplate for 2004.  Of course, there is an even more dramatic alternative we could consider, though the odds against it would be much greater, and that is persuading the highly respected moderate Republican ex-Senator Mark Hatfield to get back in the ring.

    Whichever way we go, it would seem inevitable that we must go with an ARP-sympathetic Republicrat rather than one of our own candidates.  There is simply no figure on Oregon's political horizon who strikes me as a viable direct ARP candidate for this seat.

    Junior Republican Senator Gordon Smith has little in common with ARP.  He supports free trade, opposed the bipartisan Chafee-Breaux balanced budget plan, opposes campaign finance reform along the McCain-Feingold model, and received only a 32% rating from the Taxpayers for Common Sense in 1998.  His seat is up in 2002.

    And he might very well be in political trouble at that time.  It is widely believed that his vote for impeachment could spell trouble for him in the future.  Unfortunately, there is no figure in the state who would seem to be a viable ARP or ARP-sympathetic candidate in this state as regards this particular seat.  Berkman would be unlikely to challenge an incumbent of his own party.  And as for Hatfield, he endorsed Smith!

    About our only option therefore would be to run a flag-planting campaign here, as I see it.  Perhaps one of our erstwhile allies in Oregon might be interested in helping us here.  I suggest a campaign based on Smith's weaknesses from our point of view, emphasizing our views on trade, on fiscal reponsibility, and campaign finance reform.  Fiscal responsibility should be our primary emphasis, because it is unlikely that Smith's Democratic opponent will be satisfactory to us on that issue.  Our goal should not be too difficult, -- winning 5% of the vote.  That total should be more than enough to prevent either Republicrat from winning an absolute majority.
 

    The Democratic incumbent here, David Wu, opposed fast track.  Other than that, he appears so far not to have shown much independence from Democratic orthodoxy.  For example, in 98 he ran quite a demagogic campaign against his Republican opponent on the subject of raising retirement age and lowering cost-of-living raises for Social Security.  On the other hand, his Republican opponent, Molly Bordonaro, appears not to have been any picnic either.  A relative of the ultra-right-wing Tom Bordonaro in California, who ran an unsuccessful campaign against Democrat Lois Capps in 98, she apparently is not your typical moderate Oregon Republican.  All of which means that in this district, which gave 24% of its vote to Perot in 92 and 12% of its vote to third-party/independent presidential candidates in 1996, is without a viable standardbearer for its centrist reform views.  For now, I believe we must content ourself with a flag-planting campaign.  Our goal should be to win 5% of the vote, probably sufficient to hold Wu, who received 52% of the vote in 98, to less than an absolute majority in 2000.
 

    Freshman Republican incumbent Greg Walden has an incomplete public identity at this time, but what little is clear is not promising.  He is a strong free trade advocate, having supported NAFTA and having taken a strong stance in favor of fast track.  He shared these positions with his Democratic opponent apparently, leaving ARP with precious few options here that I can see.  But this district is very sympathetic to third-party/independent presidential candidates, giving 27% to Perot in 92 and 15% to Perot, Nader, Browne, Hagelin, etc. etc. in 96.  I recommend therefore that we at least make our presence felt here.  We should run a flag-planting campaign, with the goal of winning 11% of the vote, which should be enough to hold Walden to no more that 50% in 2000.
 

    Democratic incumbent Representative Earl Blumenauer is a congressman starting his second term who shows some promise from our point of view.  As a candidate, he received the unusual endorsement of former Republican Senator Mark Hatfield, an indication of how much potential he has for nonpartisan leadership.  Since his election he has received ratings in the sixties from the Taxpayers for Common Sense.  Probably as a result of Hatfield's endorsement, he received NO Republican opponent whatsoever in 98.  As a result, there was a correspondingly greater showing for third party and independent House candidates, a total of 16% of the votes being cast in their corner.  This year Blumenauer voted for the Blue Dog budget.  Whether Blumenauer lives up to his early promise, and whether that 16% bodes well for the future of third party politics in this district remains to be seen.  For now, I recommend we endorse and support this unifying fiscally conscientious leader.
 

    Even before his leading role in the defeat of fast track, Peter A. DeFazio(D) was already listed by me as a probable Trojan horse, due to his opposition to NAFTA and GATT, and his support of the balanced budget amendment.  Now, having helped lead the probably successful fight to bury fast track, he is an obvious hero-in-the-making for ARP. Support him, leave him alone, whatever it takes, to help him win re-election in '00.
 

FIFTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

    We should seek to run ex-congressman Jim Bunn(R) against current incumbent Darlene Hooley(D), who won a lackluster 51% against Bunn when she last ran against him in 96.  One factor working against Bunn in 96 was a brouhaha over his 31-year-old chief of staff, whom he married during his previous congressional incumbency.  That may also have been why he chose not to push for a comeback in 98.  It should be our hope and intention to get him back into the ring for 2000.  Bunn has an interesting set of positions:  he opposed the welfare reform bill, because he felt it was too draconian and would encourage women on welfare to have abortions, which he opposes as a pro-lifer.  He supported the minimum wage increase and, significantly, also supported defense spending cuts, thus proving his sincere fiscal credentials at a time when far too many Republicans who mouth fiscal integrity are all too ready to push for budget-busting tax cuts and unlimited pork for the Pentagon.  As confirmation, there is the Concord Coalition's rating, which put his percentile in the upper fifties in his last two years in office.