Tomorrow night’s Debate Club about the presidential primary is an extra special bonus edition, in so many ways. For starters, we’ll be tuning into the Pennsylvania primary returns before and after the debate. Second, we’ll have uncommitted superdelegate (and Secretary of State) Bill Bradbury in the house. Third, there’s beer, of course.

Tuesday, April 22 the edge of Belmont All-ages! FREE

5:30 pm: Pennsylvania Primary Elections Returns Watching/Happy Hour
7:00 pm: Debate Club: Oregon’s Primary and the role of Superdelegates (followed by more primary election returns and conversation)

Join the Bus and the Portland Mercury for April’s edition of the co-hosted monthly forum, Debate Club — a comfortable mix of dialogue, democracy & drinks.

April Edition: Oregon Primary & Superdelegates
…with special guest, Secretary of State Bill Bradbury!

Paul Gronke (Reed College Political Science Dept. Chair) will moderate the discussion between Secretary of State Bill Bradbury, Executive Director of the Democratic Party of Oregon Trent Lutz and Scholar of Superdelegates/PSU Lobbyist/one of the Bus Project Founders, Jesse Cornett.

Come join some of Oregon’s experts on the Presidential Primary and the role of Superdelegates this year. Why is the Oregon primary so late? Should we move to a regional rotating system? Does Oregon’s primary even matter this year, or will the Superdelegates get the final say?

A 12-lane auto-friendly bridge leading to sprawl and pollution? Now, where have I heard that before?

From today’s Oregonian:

[The Columbia River Crossing] is also designed to accommodate expected population growth. The Portland-Vancouver metro area is forecast to grow by 46 percent, to 3 million people, by 2030. Clark County is expected to exceed that: Its population could rise by 65 percent in the same period.

Portland City Council members have said at recent public meetings they fear the consequences of enabling Clark County population growth with a new bridge. It could encourage more people to live in far-flung areas of Clark County, chewing up the landscape and adding car use.

As Metro Council President David Bragdon sees it, the challenge is how to build a bridge “without 100,000 people thinking they can move to Battle Ground.”

People buy homes and locate businesses based on the transportation infrastructure nearby, says Joe Cortright, a Portland economist who chairs Gov. Ted Kulongoski’s Council of Economic Advisors.

“If we build more capacity there, what we’re saying is we want more people to live in Clark County and commute to jobs in Portland,” Cortright says. “This is contingent on keeping Clark County barefoot and pregnant economically.”

Check out the whole piece in today’s Oregonian, which examines the potentially 12-lane bridge’s possible—hell, probable—impact on sprawl in Vancouver’s suburbs.

Then, come to Debate Club tonight! Metro councilor Rex Burkholder moderates a conversation with folks like Jill Fuglister of Coalition for a Livable Future and economist Joe Cortright—both quoted in the piece above—plus people who know this bridge project inside and out.

That’s tonight at Edge of Belmont, 3350 SE Morrison, 7 pm, free and ALL AGES.

I’m stoked about next week’s Debate Club—we’ve got a stellar panel to debate the merits of potentially building a 12-lane bridge between Vancouver and Portland.

I wrote about this issue for the paper that’s on the streets right now. I’m decidedly con on the big bridge, and would love to see transit and tolls roll out before we opt to build new lanes and invite new auto traffic. But hey, maybe bridge proponents will convince me that cars will run on angels’ tears by 2015, and the only thing they’ll emit into the air will be butterflies and rainbows? Totally possible.

Since I’m so freakin’ biased on this project, Tara Sulzen at the Bus Project took on the task of putting together the panel. And damn, did she do a good job. Also! We’re at a new venue, and Debate Club is now all ages!

Check it out:

The Bus Project and the Portland Mercury present March’s Debate Club: The Columbia River Crossing

Tuesday, March 25, 7pm

New location: The Edge of Belmont (SE 34th between Belmont and Morrison, Portland)

ALL AGES! FREE!

Join the Bus Project and the Portland Mercury for our monthly hot topic debate with Dialogue, Democracy and Drinks. What’s your take on what could be the largest public works project in Pacific NW history?

With Metro Councilor Rex Burkholder as Moderator and experts on both sides of the issue, (including state economist Joe Cortright of Impresa Consulting, Washington’s Clark County Commissioner Steve Stuart and representatives from Coalition for a Livable Future and the Columbia River Crossing) come to find out for yourself what the options are for the Columbia River Crossing. Who decides if we’re building a new I-5 bridge? What are the options on the table now? How much will it cost? Who is involved in the planning?

Don’t know much about it yet? Check out the CRC website for some info on how the debate breaks down.

I’m busy prepping questions for tonight’s conversation with Aubrey Harrison of Basic Rights Oregon, and Cecil Prescod of Love Makes a Family, as we talk about domestic partnerships and marriage.

Some of the questions on my list:

How does Oregon get from domestic partnerships for same-sex couples, to full marriage equality?

Should domestic partnerships be expanded to be available to more than just same-sex couples?

Is it time to cede the word “marriage” to religious groups, and focus on civil relationship recognition that’s equal across the board?

Should government even be involved in people’s relationships?

We’ll have time for audience questions, as well. Meet us at rontoms at 6th and E Burnside at 7 pm. (Happy Hour goes until 6:30, if you want to show up early to partake in cheap eats, and we’ll have special Debate Club New Deal vodka drinks available, too!)

Debate Club is back tomorrow night, moderated by yours truly. What in the world could I possibly know enough about to grill people on? Why, domestic partnerships and marriage.

From the Bus Project’s stellar write-up:

Join the Bus Project and the Portland Mercury back at rontom’s this Wednesday for your favorite monthly hot topic debate.

Co-hosted with BRO and the Portland Mercury, we bring you an evening of perplexing progressive policy proposals:

Domestic Partnerships in Oregon—Is marriage next? Should it be?

We’ll be hearing from a few perspectives on what happens now that Measure 36, a Constitutional Amendment that defined marriage as “between one man and one woman” is finally BEHIND us! Now that the Oregon Family Fairness Act has created domestic partnerships for same-sex couples, what’s next for Oregon? What does marriage equity look like and how should the government be involved?

Come join in the discussion and hear what people are saying about domestic partnerships and marriage in Oregon.

Indeed, we haven’t invited the “marriage is one man and one woman” crew—they failed to refer domestic partnerships to the ballot, and they’ve yet to launch a repeal effort (the clock is ticking, folks…).

Instead, we’re focusing on the progressive reality, and the choices that face us. Aubrey Harrison, Basic Rights Oregon’s Metro Field Organizer, will be on hand to talk about what comes next in the quest for marriage equality. We’ll also have Cecil Prescod of Love Makes a Family, who has a much different perspective—a concept called “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage.” Prescod’s colleague at Love Makes a Family, Bonnie Tinker, has written about the idea for the Portland Alliance. It boils down to the idea of expanding the definition of family beyond romantically involved couples.

This strategy seeks access to a flexible set of economic benefits and options regardless of sexual orientation, race, gender/gender identity, class or citizenship status.

Practically speaking, this lets the elephant out of the family room: there are many families in our society that are effectively excluded from the protections and benefits offered through legal marriage. It is time to open up the dialog and ask some basic questions about family life and survival: Why shouldn’t the legal rights of marriage be granted to any two adults, regardless of sex or sexual intention? Sex and procreation are no longer required for a legal marriage. Many people live long and happy lives without ever living with a sexual partner or having children; many others spend a significant part of their life when their chosen family does not include a sexual partner. Why don’t these families count?

Why don’t our laws deal with the new ways families are forming and reforming? Most couplings and marriages are not lifelong; how do our laws deal with emerging family structures?

Why should de facto parents have to present themselves as sexually involved opposite sex couples to gain “legitimacy” for their children? Many children are raised by grandparents, relatives, step parents, and many are unrelated genetically or through marriage to the parents who raise them.

What happens to families who are effectively cut out of access to legal marriage and, therefore, to health benefits? The Salt Lake City council recently enacted an ordinance allowing employees to identify an “adult designee” who would be entitled to health insurance benefits in conjunction with the benefits provided to the employee.

When safety nets such as social security are under attack, what is the sense of simply adding one more group, same-sex couples who can afford marriage, to share the shrinking pot? We need to address the real issue of providing for the financial needs of all elders and disabled people.

Harrison and Prescod are both smart on these issues. I can’t wait to see them engage tomorrow night! 7 pm, rontoms, 6th and E Burnside.

Dr. Goudarz Eghtedari, one of the panelists at last week’s Debate Club on Iran, wrote in with his reaction to the news that Iran ended its nuclear program in 2003.

In My Opinion:

Last week I was invited to Portland Mercury’s debate club to discuss my opinions on whether it is needed to Bomb Iran or not. As part of my opening remarks I noted that one of the problems we face these days is the information that is withheld from us or simply we are denied of. Today something happened that proved my point like the light of the day. The National Intelligence Estimate report with regards to Iran’s Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities was released. It said that Iranians had halted their weapons program in 2003 and have not pursued it since then. That is about the same time that we now know Iran offered the great bargain to the Bush administration via Swiss Embassy in Tehran. According to Flynt Leverett, the senior director for Middle East affairs on the National Security Council (2002-3) and Richard Armitage the Deputy Secretary of State (2001-2005) that proposal was ignored and rejected under pressure from the vice president’s office.

Join us tonight at rontoms for a Debate Club I’m especially excited about: Should the US go to war with Iran?

I’ll be honest—I’ve got my head so buried in city politics that I haven’t got a clue what’s going on with Iran. Tonight, drink in hand, I expect to get quite an education from Dr. Goudarz Eghtedari, of the American Iranian Friendship Council, who’ll argue that the US really shouldn’t bomb Iran.

Larry Oeth, Treasurer of the Multnomah County Republican Committee, is going to make the case that the US needs to do something about Iran.

(And hopefully, both of them will tell us what, exactly is the problem that has everyone making such a fuss?)

Our moderator is a brainiac from PSU: Peter Noordijk, Ph.D student and international studies instructor.

See you there: 7 pm, November 27 at rontoms, 600 E Burnside. It’s free, and we’ll have delicious New Deal Vodka drinks mixed up just for Debate Club.

Join us a week from tomorrow as we host what’s sure to be our most intense Debate Club to date: Should the US go to war with Iran?

Arguing that the US should mind its own business (or, at least, not bomb Iran) is Dr. Goudarz Eghtedari of the American Iranian Friendship Council.

And making the case that the US need to intervene to stop Iran’s nuclear program, is Larry Oeth, Treasurer of the Multnomah County Republican Committee.

At the very least, the November 27 debate will give you a good primer on the issues at hand, so you can make heads or tails of the political spinning happening on all sides. Or, you might emerge from rontoms ready to launch an anti-war protest, or prepped to write a letter to President Bush urging swift action.

See you there: 7 pm, November 27 at rontoms, 600 E Burnside

The OLCC’s considering a policy that could open up the all ages music scene in Portland, by loosening up the rules on allowing minors into places that serve alcohol. Cool, right? We’re all for it—and hosted our last Debate Club about it. (And, perhaps you’ve seen Cary Clarke’s awesome columns about it, like this one.)

The OLCC had a hearing on it a few weeks ago—but there’s a hearing at city hall on the policy on Monday afternoon. It’s a holiday! You’ve got nothing better to do than get your butt down there and demand that the OLCC do their part to foster Portland’s all ages music scene.

4 pm, City Hall, 1221 SW 4th

More:

Action Alert - Multnomah Youth Commission Hosting OLCC Testimony on Proposed Rule Change

The Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) is currently accepting public testimony on a proposed change to the Minor Posting rule (OAR 845-006-0340). The rule change would allow music and entertainment venues to submit control plans which would allow minors on premises while alcohol is served. The control plan must detail how venues would prevent minors from having increased access to alcohol and limit their exposure to a “drinking environment.” If the control plan were approved by the OLCC venues could allow patrons under 21 into their establishment while alcohol was being served.

The Multnomah Youth Commission is hosting a public forum to accept testimony from the public on this rule change. Anyone is able to provide testimony but people under the age of 21 will be given priority.

The forum will be held on Monday, November 12th from 4-5:30pm (Veteran’s Day) at Portland City Hall in Council Chambers. Portland City Hall is located at 1221 SW Fourth Avenue.

If you are unable to attend, public comment can be sent directly to Jennifer Huntsman, the OLCC presiding officer at jennifer.huntsman@state.or.us. Public testimony is due by Tuesday, November 13th at 5pm.

These days, it’s hard to be a kid, what with all the peer pressure, difficult video games, and plummeting resources for education. But the worst part, at least for some Oregon teens, is that they’ve been effectively shut out of the local music scene due to statewide restrictions on minors in event spaces that serve alcohol.

It’s not a new issue, but for the first time in recent history, the Oregon Liquor Control Commission is considering ways to modify those regulations. Can the rules be changed to allow minors in bars that host shows? Should they? What precautions should bars take to make sure minors aren’t being served? Do venues even want to go through the hassle?

Join the Oregon Bus Project and the Portland Mercury for October’s installment of Debate Club to talk about the issue—and kick around some solutions—with Cary Clarke of PDX Pop Now! and Tom Erwin,OLCC’s director of legislative affairs and community relations.

The OLCC is taking public input on the regulations until mid-November—now is your chance to have your voice heard and be part of the discussion.

The Oregon Bus Project and the Portland Mercury Present
Debate Club
Rontoms
600 E Burnside
Tuesday, October 30, 7 pm (or 8 pm)

Of course, we recognize the irony of holding this discussion in a place where minors aren’t allowed. Hell, we even got an email about it:

So just a small quandary here. You’ve published a small piece about the potentialities of the OLCC revamping their outdated regulations involving minors allowed into music venues, art spaces, and theaters; and in this small piece invite the public to participate in the hearing. Great, awesome, fuckin sweet. I’m all for it. I worked at an alcohol serving all ages venue in central california called the Mainzer Theater, and a a lot of bands from Portland frequented our place whenever they found themselves stuck in the shit hole of california. While working there I was only 18, and had a blast. It was great; but, at this point Im still only a wee lass of 20, to be plus the necessary one year in February. Lacking this year in age leaves me with a small question; why the hell would you have a post event debate related to the regulations currently prohibiting minors from being involved in Portland’s indie music scene at a place thats 21 and over. I mean REALLY though, what kind of comprehensive debate can you have about an issue without including the group of people directly affected by a possible change? -erIca

We know, Erica! But that’s the rules. We’d like to have had the event at an all-ages venue, but, because of our motto of “Dialog, Democracy, and Drinks,” and because of the current rules governing minors in event spaces, our hands are tied.

But! If anyone under 21 has some questions they’d like us to ask, email us at news@portlandmercury.com.