Gubernatorial candidates sit down to discuss one another’s plans for Oregon

Portland Business Journal hosted Oregon gubernatorial candidates Governor Tina Kotek and state Senator Christine Drazan for what has been billed as the one and only discussion the two will have prior to the election. As always, I’d like to remind you that I am not a savvy political correspondent. Or even a hamfisted unsavvy political correspondent. I just regularly vomit words onto the Internet. I will, however, do my best to share an objective assessment of the event and the views that each candidate shared during the discussion from my usual myopic startup lens. Much like I did with my analysis of both Kotek’s and Drazan’s published plans for Oregon.

I’m also — if embedding is allowed — embedding the entire discussion for you below. So that you can listen, assess, and make your own decisions about the candidates. Which I highly encourage you to do.

A note on the format because it shapes the answers. Suzanne Stevens, editor-in-chief of the Portland Business Journal, moderated. This was not a debate. Both candidates took the same questions in the same session — five minute openings, two minute answers, three minute closings, order drawn at random that morning. Drazan went first. The format rewarded preparation and punished rambling. And nobody got to interrupt anybody.

Campaign plans get edited. Repeatedly, by several people, over several weeks, until every sentence in the thing is one the campaign is willing to defend. That’s what makes a plan useful.

A live discussion is a completely different situation.

At a high level…

1. The one word I was obviously listening for — startups — wasn’t used by either candidate.
2. When it came to defending Oregonians, Kotek focused on Federal pressures. Drazan highlighted Portland City Council as a focal point.
3. One genuine agreement: real movement on the Corporate Activity Tax from both of them.
4. And finally, if this were decided by an applause-o-meter, I would say that Drazan elicited more positive reaction from the audience than Kotek did.

Let’s get into it my additional takeaways…

The grade

tl;dr Asked to rate Oregon’s competitiveness, Kotek said B. Drazan declined to grade but pointed to a report card littered with Fs. That is the entire event in a nutshell.

The moderator set it up with CNBC’s 2026 “America’s Top States for Business” ranking, which put Oregon 42nd. Our lowest placement in the two decades that index has existed. Down from 39th last year.

Kotek gave Oregon a B. She wants permit certainty and what she called “value based regulatory frameworks.” She noted that nine out of ten businesses here have fifty or fewer employees and need a level playing field.

Drazan declined the framing altogether. She said she doesn’t have to rate Oregon. Because outside groups already have. And they’ve landed somewhere between a D and an F on every list.

Where they actually agreed

tl;dr Both of them want Business Oregon rebuilt as a Department of Commerce. In line with the guidance from Kotek’s Prosperity Council. But they got there from different angles.

Kotek called Business Oregon a “high functioning agency.” She wants the agency redefined as a Department of Commerce. Wants workforce investment moved into it. Needs a global trade desk stood up and more proactive outreach. And wanted more tools in the toolbelt for the agency.

Drazan said Business Oregon is not a functioning agency. Her complaint was about the front door: businesses have no point of contact. And don’t know who runs the place. She said it’s mostly been used to pick winners and losers. While getting money out the door quickly.

Still she agreed that Business Oregon should become the Department of Commerce.

One of them thinks the agency is doing its job but the job is wrong. The other thinks the agency isn’t doing the job or engaging with business. They both seemed to be asking for a teardown and rebuild.

What neither candidate touched upon is: What actually goes inside it…? A Department of Commerce is a container. And whether a founder ever has a reason to call it depends entirely on what the Legislature puts in there. Neither candidate offered a glimpse into that. They just agreed on a naming convention. But that’s the actual question I know each and every founder and business leader is asking.

The CAT finally got specific

tl;dr Neither written plan told you where the Corporate Activity Tax threshold should land. Both candidates named a number today. They’re on the same side of it but very far apart.

For the founders who haven’t had the pleasure, allow me to introduce you to the CAT. It’s a 0.57% tax on any commercial activity above $1 million. Not profit. Activity. Plus a $250 flat amount. With registration and reporting kicking in at $750,000.

Which means it lands — dear startup founder — on exactly the type of venture backed, top line growing, intentionally unprofitable company you’re trying to build. At exactly the moment when your startup is burning the most cash. And has made the least money.

Fun.

Kotek started with a frame — the tax system has to be adequate and fair — and then got surprisingly concrete. She’s open to the Prosperity Council’s items like expanding the R&D credit, adjusting the CAT for different sized businesses, and creating protections for investing in Oregon companies. She also defended the CAT as an important state revenue stream. One that corrected thirty years of school underfunding.

Drazan focused on Oregon’s business taxes being too high. And then went further than the Prosperity Council did. She’s not suggesting we stop at $2 million. Because she doesn’t think $2 million is enough. Her phrasing was lower the overall cost. Not just rob Peter to pay Paul. She also named the estate tax as another culprit in the mix.

Kotek’s written plan never named CAT reform. Today she said she’d adjust it. Drazan’s plan named CAT reform. Today she said the floor is too low.

That’s movement from both of them in one afternoon. And it’s the most concrete thing for a company that’s about to cross a million in revenue without realizing a profit.

Honestly, it would be really helpful to have an actual figure before ballots go out. But realistically, I wouldn’t hold your breath.

The question nobody asked

tl;dr The question set covered taxes, permitting, Business Oregon, downtown, homelessness and Washington DC. Not one question was about where Oregon’s next company comes from.

We listened to perspectives on our competitiveness, our biggest advantage, Business Oregon, taxes, and downtown Portland.

Those are good questions.

They were OBI’s questions. Asked in OBI’s room. On behalf of OBI’s members. And it should come as a shock to absolutely no one that a business association asked questions that are top of mind for its specific members. And if what you’re building actually survives — or even gets out of the starting gates — every one of those answers will matter to you. Eventually.

But none of them were about startups. None of them were about business formation. None of them were about risk tolerant early stage capital. Or growth stage capital. Nobody asked either candidate where the next Oregon company comes from. Or how a person with a job and a mortgage and an idea gets to the point of quitting the job. Or what happens to that person’s equity if the thing actually works.

Like startups, the term QSBS never came up. Not by name. Not by SB 1507. Not as the argument a lot of us have been having all year. The closest anything got was Kotek listing “protection for investing in an Oregon company” among the Prosperity Council items. That’s at least QSBS flavored.

Personally, I would have liked to hear more from both candidates about starting in Oregon. And growing in Oregon. And investing in Oregon startups. But that wasn’t the constituency for this one. It was a different room.

And look at the wins Kotek reached for when she wanted to prove the state can deliver. She touched on Genentech’s $750 million expansion in Hillsboro with roughly 450 manufacturing and construction jobs. And Lam Research breaking ground in Tualatin. And a Lonza groundbreaking in Central Oregon. Those are real. And they’re impressive for a state that usually can’t even spell “economic development” let alone do it.

But they’re also three expansions by three large companies headquartered somewhere else. That’s recruitment. And recruitment is a legitimate and valuable thing for a governor to do. But it’s a different focus than formation. And new business formation is the primary driver of net new jobs. Not existing businesses adding roles.

Drazan’s most startup legible moments were the CAT threshold and the estate tax. Same as her written plan. Though she also said something that struck me. She mention that the idea only certain kinds of businesses should be incentivized to grow in Oregon is, in her words, “really problematic.”

There’s somethings there in not letting Salem handpick favorites. But that stance also has the potential to create friction with what the startup community needs. Like reconnecting QSBS. Or software R&D credit.

Every lever on the list treats one kind of company slightly differently than another. Not because those companies deserve more. But because they behave differently enough that neutral rules land on them unevenly. And that’s an issue that needs a resolution for the Governor going into the long session.

A little fact checking

tl;dr Things can get heated and challenging during a live conversation. It’s understandable. Drazan’s unemployment claim was high. Kotek’s big Lam win is on a fifteen year timeline.

I’m not scoring anybody here. But these are the numbers people will repeat in rooms all fall. So they ought to be accurate.

In her closing, Drazan said Oregon’s unemployment is the worst in the nation. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has Oregon at 5.1% in August, which is roughly third highest. Tied with California and behind DC. Against a national rate of 4.1%. Third worst is not worst. But third worst is still genuinely bad.

Kotek’s Lam Research number gets an asterisk of its own. The $1.5 billion is — in actuality — a fifteen year commitment. Not a lump sum. But it includes a $620 million R&D lab. With roughly 400 new permanent jobs. That’s a substantial long term bet on Oregon. And she’s entitled to claim it as a win. I just wanted to be clear that it is not a check clearing this year.

Two numbers that hold up exactly as stated, for balance. Drazan’s “north of 27,000” homeless Oregonians is right. The 2025 point in time count came in at 27,119, the highest ever recorded here. And the CNBC 42nd that framed the opening question is accurate.

But what about us startup types…?

OBI has a room. The Portland Business Journal has a room. When they want a couple of hours of undivided attention from both people running for governor, they get it. Because they’ve done the work. Because they’ve spent decades building organizations capable of making that ask and audiences worth showing up for.

That’s not a complaint about OBI. It’s a compliment. But it’s also the assignment. For us.

The Oregon startup community does not have that room. We have an enormous number of rooms. And orgs. And entrepreneurs. But we’ve never intentionally done the work. We’ve never politicked. We’ve never built the momentum and presence that would cause both candidates for governor to take us seriously. To take two minutes on early stage capital. To discuss how much a successful founder keeps at exit. To decide whether the next Genentech gets invited here or started here.

Nobody’s keeping us out. But we’re not making people notice us, either.

Too little too late definitely rings true here. Forty days is too late for the Oregon startup community to affect this election. But it is not even remotely too late to start building it for the next one. And to make plans for the long session. And the mayoral race.

Still, I implore you to go read Kotek’s plan, read Drazan’s plan, and read my take on both of them from Tuesday. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. And share them far and wide.

And of course, once you’ve done that, please use what you’ve learned and vote.