It’s time to vote, and the fields are thick with candidates this year.
We say “it’s time to vote,” knowing that most of our readers who have already made up their minds have likely already cast their ballots. It’s the rest of you we have in mind, the ones who haven’t had a chance to work through things or, frankly, can’t see much difference between candidates.
We offer the following observations to help the decision-making process. We’ve had interviews with all the County Commission and House District 17 candidates listed here and we’ve listened to their answers. We look for candidates’ commitment to individual rights and to the values, outlined in our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, of life, liberty and happiness. We also look for experience or personality traits that will help them negotiate the maze of politics in Salem or Albany. We want candidates who can represent us, not in name, but in action.
We’re concentrating mostly on local races – the state house and the county commission – because those are the venues where Sweet Home needs vocal and active representation. Since the Democrats in these primaries are running unopposed, we’re concentrating on the Republicans.
Bear in mind, as we proceed, that these are only snapshots. They’re brief, simple observations gleaned from our conversations and experiences with these candidates, our review of their literature and of their track records.
Linn County Commissioner
Michael Spasaro
In two previous races, for sheriff and representative, Spasaro has come across ready to go in and shake things up, primarily regarding illegal drugs. He’s not part of the good-old-boy system, such as it is, in county politics.
Spasaro says he is focused on change, something he says he has experienced elsewhere. With that experience, he says he could guide the county through the changes facing us in coming years. We’re really not sure what this means.
He has had little government experience other than serving as a law enforcement officer for 30 years. Locally, he has served on the board of directors of the Linn County Commission on Children and Families. He talks a little vaguely when it comes to goals. He talks about safe, well-funded schools, government spending within budget constraints, creating a business-friendly environment, and such but says little to set himself apart from the pack.
Spasaro has not clearly stated his positions on matters of individual rights, which doesn’t mean he doesn’t value them.
He comes across as someone who would be a bulldog out there if he needed to be, but without a legislative track record we have to go with our guts on this one.
Will Tucker
Tucker is experienced in county affairs and knows the county inside and out. He doesn’t shy away from criticizing county operations and he appears ready to go to bat for individuals who need help with or from county government.
He’s had fairly significant local and county government experience – everything except an elected county position.
He is generally conservative with a self-described streak of maverick, yet he articulates his positions reasonably and calmly. As we’ve stated already, the ability to go to bat and make noise when necessary is something we constituents need, particularly in land-use issues.
Tucker has been part of a parks board that has become less reliant on tax dollars and more reliant on members of the public who actually use and benefit from the Linn County Parks system. We expect that he will, if elected, work under a similar notion.
House District 17
All four candidates have experience that could make them effective in Salem, but there are some stark differences in the way they come across to us. Marc Lucca and Bruce Cuff appear to have the most in common. Either would make an excellent representative in an old-school Republican way.
Bruce Cuff
Cuff has many goals and he’s clear when he trumpets them. The centerpiece is drastically cutting taxes, unlike any of his opponents. He is guided by principles of limited government. Not quite radical enough to advocate abolishing public education, he absolutely supports school choice for parents, whether vouchers or charter schools.
He is unlikely to achieve all of his tax cuts, perhaps none, but we can expect him to truly live up to the Republican opposition to new taxes; and he will be an unwavering voice for ending the rampaging tax-and-spend attitude of the current regime. He could help shift debate in a healthy direction.
Cuff does lack legislative experience. His only background in government is his service in the U.S. and the Oregon National Guard,
He is strongly conservative, socially, and his views are informed by a proper respect for the rights of individuals, something he says is the only purpose for law.
He believes in the ideals of this nation, even if he applies them imperfectly as did our forefathers.
Other key platform planks he cites are traditional marriage and family values and on making sure forests are a healthy, sustainable resource.
Marc Lucca
As a former legislative assistant to several state representatives and a Republican Party operative in seven counties in Oregon, Lucca should know the lay of the land. He says he has experience working with the Legislature and has developed contacts, has authored bills, has worked for immigration reform, increased timber harvests and supports traditional family values. He voices support for educational freedom. As a former reserve deputy sheriff for six years, he can be expected to have some understanding of the needs of and for law enforcement. He is believably anti-tax, but he doesn’t propose cutting anything substantial. He is a conservative, socially and fiscally.
He appears dissatisfied with the existing system, in which Democrats want to grow government while Republicans simply want to grow it more slowly. He offers the cliché desire to reform government and make it more responsive to the people. His interest in reforming government appears very genuine.
Lucca doesn’t exhibit the same vociferous disdain for taxes as Cuff, but in a perfect world, he would end the property tax (for you cynics: Without destroying important services, such as law enforcement), something he calls paying rent to the government. He opposes new taxes, but he doesn’t offer any other substantial comment for those who would prefer to roll back the government’s hand in our daily lives at the state level.
Sherrie Sprenger
Sherrie Sprenger appears to be an establishment Republican, although she says her decisions are independent of her party. Her answers to our questions struck us as vague, and getting a straight answer from her seemed difficult as she doesn’t come at you with strong positions and the philosophical grounding supporting them, making it difficult to discuss her positions.
Frankly, despite the backing of numerous Republican leaders who appointed her to the seat earlier this year, Sprenger has little more experience than others in the race and less political experience than Cliff Wooten.
She says she opposes new taxes, but didn’t suggest cutting them. She says she supports school choice, and she says the state should allow local governments the latitude to make themselves attractive to businesses.
She has helped protect small businesses from a disastrous recall law. She would like to make it more difficult to sell scrap metal, something that might curb the theft of metal.
She has been a deputy sheriff, which means she understands law enforcement needs. As a former board chair for the New Hope Pregnancy Center, she is decidedly pro-life. She’s also knowledgeable about the current state of education as chair of the Lebanon School Board.
In our experience, Sprenger has articulated no particular thoughts about the purpose of government, which leaves us worried that she can be influenced to sacrifice one man’s rights to another man if the “right cause” warrants it.
Cliff Wooten
Wooten is hard to categorize. He gives us indications that he is anti-tax, while offering no thoughts about reducing the tax burden. He says he signed the pledge for no new taxes, but he also strongly supports public social programs to help the needy, something that does not lend itself to curbing government excess and to which there are other, non-coercive, solutions.
Wooten is calm and rational, but shows little evidence of holding doggedly to individual rights the way we would like to see. When he talks about his experience as a politician, he appears to most value his ability to work together with people.
He’s served on a variety of government bodies, ranging from the Scio Mutual Telephone Association and the Scio Fire Board to the Linn County Commission.
He’s not shy about disagreeing, but he’s willing to listen carefully to those who disagree with him. He legitimately seeks explanation so he can understand the positions of others.
In economic development, he believes that returning to the woods is imperative, he believes that enterprise zones are the way to attract new business and cites a list of firms the county has recruited through that means.
State Senate District 9
Fred Girod is by far the most experienced of the Republican candidates for Senate District 9 and he’s solid from a rural standpoint. Herman Baurer apparently cannot return multiple phone messages, which makes us wonder how he could be a senator. Sarah Arcune responded very late to our inquiries to senate candidates. Some of her proposals smack of liberal, left-wing thinking, such as building housing for migrant workers, who would then be shipped back to Mexico so the housing can be used for local homeless during the winter, all on your dime. She proposes a WIC-like program for diabetics.
Similar to Republicans, Steven Frank is probably the candidate of choice on the Democrat ballot. Bob McDonald failed to respond to our inquiries.