Gordon Smith is a formidable foe – well respected within the powerful establishment yet still retaining appeal among the masses for his perceived moderate stances on Oregon issues like the environment and civil liberties. In addition, Smith’s affable charm is in stark contrast to Ron Wyden’s uncomfortable persona, the comparison akin to Kennedy versus Nixon when it comes to charisma.

And I’ve run into thoughtful, moderate Independents and even Democrats over the years who say they like what Smith has done for our state – that even though he’s a Republican and “somewhat” conservative, he represents Oregon well, and that he’s actually very even handed in his decisions.

Well, Oregonians should be up in arms over Smith’s record. His recorded votes on everything from supporting the war to denying seniors equitable health care can be found at the bipartisan Project Vote Smart site.

I thought a summary of Smith’s record should be the obvious starting point in de-cloaking his “moderate” label. Most of the numerical ratings here were compiled back in 2003 but I’ll highlight specific votes from his recent term that should be the basis for a successful campaign to be run against him:

Rated 0% by the ARA, indicating an anti-senior voting record. (Dec 2003) Zero percent? Red flags should be going up all over the place with this background.

Rated 14% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003) These numbers are not surprising and I’m not sure many moderates are aware just how militant his views are on the pro-choice/pro-life issue.

Rated 40% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002) – as conservatives go, this isn’t as bad as I might have thought. Remember, though, it doesn’t include any of the lock step Republican votes for the President over the last 5 years .

Rated 57% by the NEA, indicating a mixed record on public education. (Dec 2003) This is a tough issue to use against Smith with urban flight for families causing more schools to close in the city of Portland – there’s a natural tendency for people to look to vouchers and alternative programs when their kids are forced to change schools.

Rated 86% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record. (Dec 2003) Having such a strong pro-business / anti-consumer view should be troubling to everyone who fears the influence of coporate America.

Rated 0% by SANE, indicating a pro-military voting record. (Dec 2003) Voting for all things military seemed to be the fashion between 9/11 and the buildup to the war for Republicans and Democrats alike. His record since is more symbolic of Smith’s fealty to the current administration.

Rated 0% by the AFL-CIO, indicating an anti-union voting record. (Dec 2003) That’s right – another zero. How anti-union can one person be? Does he not think that unions serve some positive purpose? It’s amazing to me that any civil service employee or union member would even consider voting for Smith based on this record alone.

So here are specific Smith votes from his last term that help define his current stance:

Voted YES on confirming John Roberts for Chief Justice and Samuel Alito as Supreme Court Justice . (Sep 2005) Even though Roberts has proven to be a stalwart conservative, most law groups gave him high marks for being fair and I can’t fault Smith for his vote here. Justice Alito has been an even more polarizing figure than Roberts and unfortunately his legacy thus far has not been one of open mindedness. It always strikes me funny how the right wing in general and this administration in particular loves to rail against activist courts – unless of course the activism favors them. Plus, Smith rubber stamped the selections of John Ashcroft for Attorney General, Michael Chertoff for Homeland Security chief and John Bolton for UN ambassador. Straight party line votes with no voice of moderation among them.

Voted NO on Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Amendment. (Nov 2005) A vote against helping Medicare beneficiaries who enrolled for the prescription drug benefit in 2006. Although it eventually passed with a wide majority, Smith remained steadfast in voting against all forms of this legislation.

Voted NO on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005) Gee, no partisan politics here. In times of war, there will be inefficiencies – I think most people understand that. However, to lose crate-loads of cash, numbering in the billions of dollars, with nary a second thought by most Republicans in Congress, that really is unforgivable. And this, again, comes back to the party line. Perhaps Smith is scared that this could blow the lid of the relationship between friends of the administration and the last Congress.

In summary, Smith is seemingly given a long rope by party leaders when it comes to the environment – “go ahead and wave the green flag, just mind the timber interests and don’t stray far from the president on core issues.” Well, six years of unabashedly toeing the administration’s line is long enough. In a kinder, gentler world where differences between conservatives and liberals, populists and libertarians weren’t filtered through hate radio, and where an administration didn’t thinly veil its threat toward dissenters, perhaps a voice like his had a place. But not today – and not in Oregon. That independent voice Smith claimed to espouse is now a distant memory – a ninety plus percent record of voting with the administration will do that.

Moderates and Independents need to take a long, hard look at the Gordon Smith they elected. Seniors, union members and pro-choice advocates are not welcome in his world view. And once people realize his interests are tied implicitly to big pharma, the military industrial complex and pro-lifers, maybe his Democratic opponent actually has a hope to defeat him. That candidate, Jeff Merkley, will have to distance himself from party courtesans and run his own race if he is to have a chance. More on that later.

This entry was posted on Monday, October 15th, 2007 at 4:58 pm and is filed under Elections, General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.