One of the problems with Portland’s Question 2 is how it would impact underrepresented people – particularly people in low-status, high-need populations and neighborhoods with little electoral influence. How can they get the attention of an executive mayor whose election or reelection doesn’t rely on their support?
At a recent forum I asked former Charter Commission Chair Michael Kebede, and he simply said that because Portland is progressive, “… people in Portland are less likely to elect someone who cares only about the most powerful.”
This answer troubles me. It should trouble all of us.
What happens when a tough problem isn’t popular, when what’s right isn’t easy, when the political pendulum does swing in the other direction? Those with no political influence are left in the hands of fate.
There are many reasons Question 2 is bad for Portland; perhaps the worst is its capacity to disenfranchise those who already struggle to be heard.
Sarah Michniewicz
Portland
Send questions/comments to the editors.
Success. Please wait for the page to reload. If the page does not reload within 5 seconds, please refresh the page.
Enter your email and password to access comments.
Hi, to comment on stories you must . This profile is in addition to your subscription and website login.
Already have a commenting profile? .
Invalid username/password.
Please check your email to confirm and complete your registration.
Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.
Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.