I believe this is just the Gov's people getting back at Portwood for taking a stand against the fee office reform package. Also it should be noted Mr. McNary may have broken a law since this happened while he was a State employee. He is now the director of the The Gaming Commission.

The letter was posted on the site. It was clearly sent before McNary started working for the state. There is no violation of law.

Does Jim believe that Governor Blunt spends any time worrying about what Portwood thinks about fee offices or anything else? I live in the 92nd, and we know Portwood has no clout anymore. He was not a committee chairman for the past two years. He's just a back-bencher with some seniority.

To answer your question Mary- yes I do! And it is not worrying, it is his ego!

How about we re-elect a conservative who is willing to stand up to fix a problem rather than a party-picked challenger?

"T" is right on. We don't need anymore of the governor's "yes"-men. We need people who are willing to stand up and fight for what is right for their constituents.
And as a matter of fact, the vote to name McNary to the Gaming Commission was on July 13; the letter was dated July 14, after he was elected to the post.

I think Pennell would be most surprised to hear that he's anybody's "hand-picked challenger." He filed for the seat in the spring, before the fee office issue heated up. I think Mary's got it right.

First of all, it is widely known that Rep. Portwood has not always stood by the Governor's reforms- at least for those who actually follow the Legislative Session- so this goes back before fee offices.
It blows my mind that people cannot connect the dots! Blunt appoints someone, the very next day he endorses a challenger to a Republican incumbent who in the past and very publicly recently has disagreed with the Governor's policies....wow!

Two things:

McNary started working for the gaming commission on July 17, according to stories I read.

If Portwood intends to win re-election by running away from Governor Blunt, he'll have a hard case to make. He was generally a reliable vote for the Republican agenda. Remember, he voted to cut the Medicaid benefits in the first place. And, according to that famous P-D editorial, he voted against any reduction on Legislators' health benefits.

Sherman Parker can credibly claim to be a maverick, but not Portwood.