Is ‘non-partisan’ for Secretary of State a dirty word?

The Oregonian had an editorial this past Sunday arguing for a non-partisan Secretary of State. The source itself will make some want to toss out the idea before an even cursory examination, but I think it is worth a discussion, especially in light of Bill Bradbury’s unabashed servitude to the Democratic Party of Oregon and all of its underlings. Given the statewide record of Republicans in recent history, I can’t help but think a non-partisan Secretary of State office might actually play to our advantage, at least in the currently rocky political environs. A candidate with as much plausibility as a Bruce Starr or Jason Atkinson would be given the credit of their personas and records without all the preconceived notions that jump into voters minds when they see an “˜R’ in front of their name.

Of course, ultimately showing people that the values they hold dear are the values that Republicans stand on is the answer. But until we can do that effectively, maybe a non-partisan Secretary of State isn’t such a bad idea.

Should Oregon have a non-partisan Secretary of State? Would this help or hurt Republican candidates for the office?