Brad Avakian for labor commissioner: editorial endorsement | OregonLive.com
PSU-AAUP Executive Council and Oregonian Agree: Brad Avakian should remain Labor Commissioner
After this year's campaign for commissioner of labor and industries, few people will use "Brad Avakian" and "decorum" in the same sentence. But at least Avakian's running a vigorous campaign, which is more than can be said of challenger Bruce Starr, whose effort to unseat Avakian has been perfunctory, at best. For that reason, and because Avakian has performed competently in a position to which he's well suited, voters should return him to office.
As commissioner, Avakian oversees a department that enforces civil rights and workplace laws and teaches employers how to comply with them. The position also provides a minor bully pulpit and the opportunity to pursue targeted legislation. Avakian, to his credit, has pushed successfully to boost funding for high school vocational programs and intends to encourage lawmakers to contribute further during the 2013 session.
Gov. Ted Kulongoski appointed Avakian to the position in 2008, when Dan Gardner jumped ship to work for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers in Washington, D.C. As a civil rights lawyer and a veteran of both the House and Senate, Avakian was clearly well qualified for the job and attracted only token opposition when he stood for election later in 2008.
That's different this time. Starr, a Washington County Republican, has served in the Legislature for well over a decade, first as a member of the House and now as a member of the Senate, to which he'll return if he loses next month.
Races for labor commissioner often pit businesses against labor groups, and this one's no different. Avakian's collection of supporters includes a large number of unions, and Starr's includes a number of business groups and chambers of commerce. It's no surprise that businesses would be more comfortable with Starr, the former owner of a small construction company. But their discomfort with Avakian is not great. He's more inclined than they'd prefer to seek more stringent workplace regulations, we're told, but he's someone businesses can talk to. And he's a heck of a lot better than Gardner.
As for Starr, well, suffice it to say it takes more to win statewide office than a collection of business and chamber endorsements and a reputation as a smart and thoughtful lawmaker. It's also necessary to make a compelling case not only for your own candidacy, but also, in this instance, for bouncing an incumbent who's performed competently. In his interview with The Oregonian editorial board, Starr did not. We wonder how much he really wants the job and how energetically he'd perform it if he won.
Avakian's campaign, in fact, made the best case for supporting Starr when it challenged him via email to repudiate a plank in the Republican Party platform that "calls for an absolute ban on abortion, with no exceptions in cases of rape, incest or where the life of the mother is threatened." Such wing-nut policy fantasies have absolutely nothing to do with the function of the Bureau of Labor and Industries, yet Avakian stood behind the email and even doubled-up on its offensiveness. Because Starr is pro-life, he suggested to us, he might be less inclined to defend the civil rights of women.
The episode was an attempt by the Avakian campaign to remind voters who the Democrat is in this nonpartisan race. We get it. Still, this could have been done without stooping to such a cheap shot.
If Oregonians were electing someone to ensure appropriate conduct on the campaign trail, they'd do well to avoid people who insinuate that their opponents are misogynists. Because they're electing someone to ensure appropriate conduct in the workplace and in public accommodations, however, they should stick with Avakian. He knows the job and performs it competently, and his opponent appears to be mailing it in.