So It’s the Democrats, Huh Ted?

Kevin Mannix Press Release: Kulongoski tells The Oregonian Washington State’s success is due to Democrats. Well, what about 20 years of Democrat governors in Oregon?

In a front page story in The Oregonian Governor Ted Kulongoski is asked about Washington State’s seeming success. He gives credit to the Democrats. But why then is Oregon still suffering after 20 years of Democrat governors?

That’s the question Republican gubernatorial candidate Kevin Mannix is asking.
Mannix notes that after more than three years in office, Oregon still faces the same problems Kulongoski campaigned on:

· Businesses are still moving out of state.

· We have the second largest class size in the country.

· We still have a broken health care system with 70-thousand people released from the Oregon Health Plan.

And, continued management problems in the Executive Department: the 172-million dollar shortfall in DHS being the latest example.

Mannix says, “What Oregon needs is a governor who will roll up his sleeves, work with both parties and find creative solutions to Oregon’s problems. The problems we face are not partisan issues.

“The problems we face are not about the party of the governor but about the person who serves in the office. Ted Kulongoski has been too willing to play politics. I’ll offer our state creative, workable ideas,” Mannix said.

Mannix pointed to his Teacher Corps proposal as an example of the kind of ideas he’ll offer to deal with Oregon’s challenges.

  • Dave A.

    I’m no supporter of “Bowling Ball Brain” Ted, but SERIOUSLY doubt anything Kevin says will come true. I won’t even mention the FACT – known to most people except Kevin – that after two losing campaigns – Kevin is perceived by most people as “damaged goods”.

  • Jay Bozievich

    The real success story in Washington was when Governor Locke embraced on new and bold approach to building a budget known as “Outcome based Budgeting”. It is an evolved version of “Zero-base budgeting” and could be used here in Oregon to provide more of the results citizens want for the amount of money that is available.

    The basic steps are:
    1. Determine how much total money is available.
    2. Settle on the 5-10 results that are a priority to the citizens. (also determine how to measure success in achieving the results)
    3. Divide up the “pie” between the desired results as a percentage of the whole to set the amount available to purchase that result.
    4. Request proposals for agencies, non-profits, privates entities or combinations thereof on how they would achieve the results and for what costs.
    5. Set up purchasing teams for each result and have them “purchase” the results desired until the use up the available funds.
    6. Monitor performance of achieving those results.
    7. Repeat steps 1-6 the next budeget cycle.

    For a more in depth description of the process Washington State used, find a copy of “The Price of Government” by David Osborne and Peter Hutchinson. I do not agree with the Authors on some of the causes for budget problems but the solution to the current style of “base level” budgeting is exceptional.

    • Jay Bozievich

      Oh, I forgot to mention, outcome based budgeting is something that Republicans have been pushing for years and Gov. Locke adopted it in response to a crises. Too bad sleepy Ted is not the same kind of leader. (It will also be interesting to see if Chistine the Usurper keeps up the good work of the previous legitimately elected guv or falls back to business as usual)

  • Chris McMullen

    Even though I’m not real big on Jeb Bush’s budget proposal, someone like Jeb is sorely needed in Oregon. I like this paragraph specifically:

    “Yet Bush, who has slashed thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions in spending since taking office in 1999, insisted he was being consistent with his past budgets, some of which were far stingier. His plan reduces the number of state jobs again, relying heavily on the final round of privatization of services in the Department of Children & Families. It also socks away $6.4 billion in reserves, fattened from higher-than-expected tax collections.”

    From here:

    Kulongoski is worthless.

  • Pingback: 3000 Twitter Followers for $1()