Bill Bradbury fails to follow his own election rules

HEY BILL, IF YOU DON’T FOLLOW YOUR OWN RULES, THEN WHY SHOULD WE?
By Dave Hunnicutt

As the state’s top election official, you’d think Secretary of State Bill Bradbury would understand and obey all election laws and rules, wouldn’t you?

After all, Bradbury never seems to have a problem “interpreting” the rules when it comes to imposing fines on unsuspecting chief petitioners or political action committees, and he sure can come up with clever “interpretations” when it comes time to knock out a few hundred signatures to keep a conservative measure off the ballot.

So Bradbury must be an expert in election law, right? Well think again.

In today’s advance sheets issued by the Oregon Court of Appeals, you will find a decision in Friends of Bill Bradbury and Bill Bradbury v. Oregon Department of Justice.

That’s right – Bill Bradbury sued the Oregon Attorney General’s office.

Why? Because in February, 2005, a complaint was filed with the Secretary of State’s Office alleging that Bradbury had not properly followed Oregon election law when he submitted his contribution and expenditure reports in his 2004 Secretary of State campaign.

That’s odd, because anyone who has ever been a treasurer of a political action committee knows that you are constantly under the gun to comply with every last rule promulgated by Lord Bradbury, including any “interpretations” that Lord Bradbury promulgates from the throne, whether they are disseminated to the public or not.

Failure to comply results in a fine and public flogging.

Shouldn’t Lord Bradbury have to comply with the same rules? Well apparently not, according to Lord Bradbury.

Whoever filed the complaint against Lord Bradbury was either smart or lucky, because a similar complaint had been filed against Attorney General Hardy Myers alleging that Myers had violated the exact same rule during his last campaign for Attorney General.

Because there was a pending complaint against Myers for the exact same conduct, Myers could not sweep the complaint against Bradbury under the rug. Instead, a special assistant attorney general from outside of the Department of Justice was hired to review the complaint.

The outside counsel concluded that Bradbury violated the very election laws that he is constitutionally bound to enforce as the state’s chief elections officer.

Bradbury sued, and today, the Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the outside counsel.

After today’s ruling, I’m hoping (but not holding my breath) that some reporter will ask Lord Bradbury one question — were you ignorant of the law that you are obligated to enforce, or did you simply think it didn’t apply to someone as important and powerful as you?

Share
  • Alan

    This obviosly means we need Secretary of State reform. Time to pass new laws to restrict his abilities and set up new bureacracies to monitor the office.

  • RinoWatch

    I love your term “Lord”.

    Mine, “Evil”. The shoe has fit him very well.

    So now I’ll refer to Billy as, The Evil Lord Bradbury.

  • Jim

    It is not Bill’s fault. It is likely the treasurer’s fault.

    Bradbury on things he is responsible for has done gone things to improve election laws in Oregon and stand up for global warming when other politicians wont,

    • Knee Jerk

      Bill Bradbury was the treasurer! The committee was Friends of Bill Bradbury.

  • Anonymous

    Bradbury’s traveling Global Warming show is pure fiction. His use of misinformation is beyond public disservice.

    He has no integrity, period.

  • Boring John

    Will the big “Zero” even report this or will the also “sweep it under the rug” since he is “their” guy?
    “Global warming”? Where have you been since 1998? Cooling and only the Sun spots can tell you why.

    • dean

      John….cherry picking science? 1998 was the strongest el nino of the century, and hence a very warm year. 2 years after then were as warm or warmer, and the longer term trends have not changed at all. Check out the full NASA records, and don’t fall for using 1998 as a base year.

      Sun spots? Please.

    • ICE

      I did not see this in the big O. Which could be that the secretary of State making news for being corrupt is no longer news, dog bites man.

  • PK2

    There are hundreds of campaigns that have minor errors and the Oregonian does not pick up every one. Good.

    Why the vileness? You may not like Bradbury but he has been elected by the people twice. He has served as Senate Presient as elected by his peers. That is good too.

    This may be embarassing to him, but by no means a reflection on the man or how the office was run. End.

    • Dan Meek

      Bradbury’s policy has been to assess massive fines against committees for any errors, no matter how trivial. I know of one committee he fined over $10,000, merely because one of its electronic reports had a blank line at the top of the file made the primitive SoS software not read it correctly. Even though the electronic report was corrected the next day, he fined the committee over $10,000.

    • Anonymous

      b-a-a-a ba-a-a

  • devietro

    I am withholding judgement but watching this carefully.

    Has anybody asked Rick Dancer his views on this?

    • RinoWatch

      Hopefully Dancer has boned up on the SOS job since his very Unimpressive performance with Lars On Feb 25th.

      https://rinowatch.blogspot.com/2008/02/candidate-rick-dancer.html

      Not holding my breath…..

      • Abraxia

        Why not sit down with Rick and actually talk with him, like some of us have done. If you get your information from Lars, then one has to wonder about your credibility.

        Say no to Lars, and say yes to actually getting off your butt and talking.

        • RinoWatch

          My credibility is not the issue, it’s Dancer’s positions on the issues. One being the many years put in to pass proof of citizenship to register to vote as well as other elections issues.

          Where was Dancer? Reading a teleprompter?

          • pk2

            Dancer was a sportscaster. Note. If he was a former sports umpire or referee that might make him better to say he is a arbritator of both sides. End note.

      • R.A.

        Saw Rick at the OFCR State Convention last weekend. He’s ready.

  • cc

    “This may be embarassing to him, but by no means a reflection on the man or how the office was run. End.”

    Oh, well…

    If you say so.

  • Catalyst Administrator

    A comment was removed. Calling a fellow commentor a “lazy idoit” is a personal attack and sloppy sniping not in jive with Catalyst.

    Next time just call the man “lazy”.

    • dean

      I’ve been called a lot worse on this site in the past. I would consider being called a lazy idiot a step up. Have the standards been changed?