The irresponsible journalism of KGW

One of the stickiest issues so far in the Oregon Governor's race has been this video taped comment made by Chris Dudley:

"it doesn't make sense that our waitresses are getting tips plus the highest minimum wage in the country."

Last night on Live @ 7 on KGW, Anne Yeager took a scatter shot approach to discrediting the people who are RIGHTFULLY appalled by the quote, implying that Dudley was somehow taken out of context due to the editing of the video. In an appalling piece of slipshod "investigative reporting" Yeager's piece ALSO edited the video to leave out the question that Dudley was answering in agreement. And THEN, she sticks a microphone in his face and gives him a platform to backtrack the comment. There's no doubt that this quote has been reflecting badly on Dudley and that he would take it back if he could. He has been careful about the whole matter up til the September 9th venue where he said the quote. Jeff Mapes seemed to get it when he addressed the matter of Dudley's stance on the tip credit back in July and that Dudley didn't want to go on record about it at all:

"At any rate, it's clear that Dudley - who didn't rule out taking up the tip credit issue if he is elected governor - is a favorite of the Oregon Restaurant Association." (who incidently, as of this morning, have given $90K to Dudley's campaign).

I became aware of the quote from Blue Oregon on September 21st, before it was edited into the "short" version. The Democratic Party posted the full, unedited version on You Tube on September 20th. Judging by the comments on the Blue Oregon page then, we were outraged then because, oh I dunno... we understand English and nuance and context. Elements that apparently Anne Yeager does not understand.

To be sure, there has been a backlash against Yeager already this morning. My husband and I, being vocal pains in the ass, challenged her investigative methods on Twitter. We mentioned the fact that she left out the $90K donation by the Restaurant Association. She kept trying to put the focus on Dudley's idea of a training wage. And then she admitted that she didn't understand the "lingo" of "tip credit".

Did she even watch the video herself? Dudley pretty much breaks it down for her. But in case she or anyone else is still unclear about what "tip credit" means, here is a nice explanation and breakdown of how it works in North Carolina.

Note that tipped employees make $5.12 LESS an hour than non-tipped employees. Furthermore, it amounts to less payroll tax, Social Security, and unemployment insurance being paid.

At 00:43 into the "long" unedited version of the video, Dudley says "I agree" to the question being asked about employees making too much money and then uses a third party's story to corroborate his point. Is this not AGREEMENT? Dudley COULD have used the opportunity to praise people who wait tables for a living for the relatively low wage they make. No. Instead, he commiserated with the whiny, cheapskate restaurant owner who was complaining about how much money his waitresses cost him. He has NEVER addressed tip credit and Yeager failed to ask that when she had the chance.

So here it is. The full, unedited video of Dudley agreeing that minimum wage (which he incorrectly claims is the highest in the country) PLUS tips is too much money.



And yes, he does offer up a training wage as a "first" step: "that’s one area I would like to tackle first is to at least get a training wage going" The follow up question to that matter should be: "what's to stop restaurant owners from overly relying on young wait staff making training wage and putting older, experienced workers out of work?" Think you can handle that, Anne Yeager?

The really inexcusable part of Yeager's report is that Kitzhaber is tacitly being blamed for the video. It didn't require investigative journalism to unearth the source of the video... the unedited video has been posted from the start, by the DPO and, in turn, by Blue Oregon.

And finally, please note: As of today, Chris Dudley has still not stated where he stands on "tip credit". This question must be explicitly asked on Thursday's debate on KGW.

I am constantly amazed at how woefully inept the media has been on the Oregon Governor's race. This comes from having to do research myself that I often post here. But this incident fails every journalistic standard of fairness. I wish the media would put as much effort in finding out the identity of the tracker who disrupted the Urban League forum as they did in giving Dudley his opportunity to backtrack off this quote.

Anyone know who that guy is?

Dudley's Donors - Part 2

Be sure to see Part 1 of Dudley's Donors

Seneca Sawmills (Name filed on their ORESTAR record: Seneca Jones Timber Company)
Aggregate Donation to Dudley: $35,000


If you live anywhere in or near Eugene, you probably already know about the Cogeneration wood burning power plant that Seneca is bringing on line as I type. According to the Oregon Toxics Alliance's report (PDF here):






"This project is being marketed as a source of “green” energy, but it has the potential to be a significant source of air pollution in West Eugene.

Attempts to compare the plant’s emissions to all sources in the County as a whole (including vehicle or wood stove emissions) is overlooking the fact that this power plant will be one of the single largest sources of air pollutants in Eugene and Lane County.

Air pollution facts:
• As proposed, the power plant would be the 2nd largest emitter of NOx and CO in Eugene, the 4th largest emitter of NOx in Lane County, and the 7th largest emitter of CO in the County.

• The power plant would be Eugene’s single largest emitter of styrene (a carcinogen), acetaldehyde (a carcinogen), hydrogen chloride (causes respiratory illnesses), and napthalene (a carcinogen). Furthermore, all of the existing sources of those toxics are located in one neighborhood - West Eugene.

• At 1.7 tons, the proposed plant will be Eugene’s 3rd largest emitter of formaldehyde (a carcinogen). All 9 existing sources are located in West Eugene.

• At 1.4 tons, Seneca will be the 4th largest emitter of toluene (a carcinogen). 19 of the 21 existing Eugene’s toluene sources are in West Eugene.

• A natural gas power plant of the same capacity would have significantly less emissions


Stronger Pollution Controls (NOx)

• As proposed, the power plant would be the 2nd largest emitter of NO in Eugene and the 4th in Lane County.

• The plant would emit and 186 tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx).

• A natural gas power plant of the same capacity would release 115 tons.

• According to the EPA, NOx causes respiratory problems and aggravates heart disease. It can damage lung tissue and cause premature death.

• NOx is a major component of ground-level ozone and global warming."

Wow! I don't know about you, but all the assurances in the world wouldn't make me feel better about living near this thing. Environmentalists used to get happily excited about biomass plants for energy generation until they found out what these plants do to the neighborhoods situated near them.

Just a cursory Google search on pollution violations of this type of plant yielded the following results:

State settles pollution case at wood-fired plant
New Waterbury powerplant cited for pollution violations (I checked other sources, it is a biomass plant)

Closer to home, this article came out in the Oregonian today:
"Freres Lumber (Note: CEO is also a Dudley contributor) fired up its biomass plant in 2007 as part of the green power rush, banking on tax breaks to generate steam and electricity at its Lyons mill by burning forest slash and mill waste. But proposed rules from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency -- including new regulations on boiler pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the plants -- could force the company to sample emissions more and put "pollution controls on top of pollution controls," Freres executives say. The proposed regulations would make it very difficult to operate the plant, says Kyle Freres, a vice president. "And I really don't think new plants would have much incentive to start up." "

ENTER CHRIS DUDLEY!

Just what is Chris Dudley's stance on the environment: a well-known local Republican says on his blog that Dudley has dodged this question when asked. So he speculates (with much disdain and imagined eye-rolling) that Dudley believes in man-made causes of global warming. I would say, in typical Dudley fashion, he's merely dodged the whole subject. I was able to find something a bit more official-looking as far as a stance here comparing the Republican candidates for Governor before Dudley won the primary

(Under Environment/Energy):

"Chris Dudley: Would focus state policies to promote, not stand in the way of, sustainable development of ranching, timber and agricultural industries. Supports Oregon's emphasis on green economy but should re-evaluate state subsidies for renewable power. Says he is open to liquefied natural gas facilities but doesn't see public appetite for oil drilling off Oregon coast."

So the truth lies somewhere between "promoting" ...timber (et al) industries and if you consider biomass renewable power. Greenpeace does not consider it renewable, and neither do I since biomass is fueled largely by our forests. Until someone asks Chris Dudley specifically about this matter, we're just going to have to take it on faith that all Seneca (and Freres) will get in return for its donation is a Christmas card. The citizens in and around West Eugene would probably like more reassurance.

Further reading: Interesting article about biomass and why enviros aren't thrilled with it-
http://www.ecofriendlymag.com/sustainable-transporation-and-alternative-fuel/biomass-power-renewable-or-rotten/