A “magnet for scoundrels”, huh?

I just fired off the following Letter to the Editor in response to this morning’s editorial in the Oregonian:

Your editorial, “Portland’s poorly conceived magnet for scoundrels”, is insulting to me and others who worked tirelessly to formulate or use Public Campaign Financing honorably. The Oregonian wishes to maintain the status quo of political patronage, keeping power for those who already have it and holding on to the influence of affluent people in Portland City Council elections. But biased reporting and repeated editorials, endlessly highlighting scoundrels who abused the new program rather than covering candidates who followed all the rules, do not change the facts.

Public Campaign Financing offered me, a community candidate who if elected would advocate for all citizens rather than a favored few, a realistic chance to win election to the Portland City Council without begging for money from developers and others with specific interests in future Council votes. It doesn’t entirely level the playing field. The Establishment will continue to find ways to help favored candidates from behind the scenes. What Public Campaign Financing does is allow honest people who find the current system disgusting, to participate in a whole new ballgame.

All candidates for office in 2008 should join the current Council in promising the program will be referred to voters in 2010. Another cycle is needed, using the revised rules, to make sure Portlanders are asked to vote on a tightly-run program rather than a flawed one.

Public Campaign Financing can help break the lock of wealthy and influential powerbrokers on Portland politics. Is that what bothers the Oregonian‘s Editorial Board?