Until today, Matt Wingard’s political future looked bright. Wingard, a 34-year-old former TV reporter and Congressional aide, is running for a normally safe Republican seat in House District 26, which includes Wilsonville.
But in response to whispers circulating in Salem, Wingard came forward today with information that could damage his prospects, even in a district in which Republicans enjoy a 14 percentage point registration advantage.
In an interview in WW’s office, Wingard admitted that he pled guilty in 2001 to a a misdemeanor after striking his then-7-year old son. There is no record of Wingard’s crime in the Oregon Judicial Information Network because Wingard subsequently convinced a Washington County judge to expunge his record. (Expungement is supposed to erase all trace of a crime from the official record).
“Today, my son’s mother and I have reconciled and get along well. Both she and my son are supporting my campaign,” Wingard said in a written statement he presented WW, along with letters from both attesting to their support. (Read them here.)
“But this is politics, and I have recently learned that private investigators have dug up these old court documents and they will be used against me in the race for House District 26.”
Wingard says he deeply regrets striking his son, whom he says received a lump on his head but was not hospitalized. “I accept responsibility for what I did,” Wingard says.
Wingard says he has told supporters of his past. He says Rep. Jerry Krummel, who is vacating the seat Wingard seeks, remains supportive, as do other local leaders including Sen. Larry George, (R—Sherwood) and Rep. Kim Thatcher (R-Keizer).
But Wingard’s wounded prospects may have broader implications for which party controls the House, given that it could cost the Republicans a safe seat in their battle to reverse the Democrats’ 31-29 advantage.
Already, one key Wingard supporter has changed his mind. Wingard says House Minority Leader Bruce Hanna (R-Roseburg) has withdrawn his support, asked Wingard to return a $1,000 campaign contribution. Wingard says Hanna told him the Republican Party may recruit another candidate to contest the primary.
Wingard says he’s staying in the race and is confident of winnng. He has not decided whether to return Hanna’s contribution. “I don’t think voters care about this kind of mudslinging,” he says. “This race is about one issue and that’s transportation. I’ve been working on that since 2001 and people in the district know I’m a political fighter.”
- Updated: “The Law” threatens to sue Elaine Franklin in a State House Race Update: H
- Bradbury: No Go For Republican Candidate in House District 29 Would-be
- Trial Lawyers Lend Oregon Senate Candidate Barton $50K Democrats
- Starting Gun Pops for Hot MultCo Commission Race Let the s
- One More Candidate Surfaces in Senate District 22 One more
The original version of this story incorrectly said Newberg was in this district. Our error.
Hank Stern
Managing news editor
It boils down to one question: what are his views on programs and other legislative items that deal with child abuse and violence against family members by other family members? Does he support legislation, and does he have any plans or proposals to make on this issue. Where is his interest and empathy towards other embroiled in the same situation.
Another spin on this is from a Republican blog:
http://www.nwrepublican.blogspot.com/
Can anyone say circle up the firing squad?
Repubs like to eat their own… tastes like chicken.
Hank,
Is the girlfriend dependent upon support payments from Wingard?
If so, she’d be risking a lot to speak out against him. It raises the question that her support and her son’s support of Wingard includes an element of financial coercion. If somone hit my child, I can guarantee you I would NEVER support them running for public office. 2001 is not that long ago.
Anon,
I’m not sure the child support argument holds up. I paid state ordered child support for eleven years. In most cases it is paid directly to DHS and, for the most part, is done as an employer ordered payroll deduction. Denying support also would only add fuel to the fire.
His biography says that he started a consulting firm in 2002. I would think you need some maturity to do that, yet a short year prior he was so immature as to hit his child hard enough to cause a bump.
I do understand that people make mistakes. I would like him to explain his current personal philosophy on child rearing. I would also encourage him to use his position now to advocate for child abuse prevention and education. His perspective could provide a compelling arguement to fund such such programs, assuming he actually understands that what he did was wrong.
Is the girlfriend dependent upon support payments from Wingard?
We don’t know the answer to that, I’m afraid.
A bump on the head? Dude, that takes some serious force to inflict. Poor little kid. I’m going to enjoy watching this SOB’s career go down the toilet.
You dolts are mostly ‘tards. Leave the man alone. And like the boy as already asked, leave him out of it.
Behave like Tiger, don’t make a mountain outta molehill. The noose was just a mistake, and so was this. Get over it.
You sure the noose example is the best one, Anon445? GolfWeek’s editor lost his job over it just today.
And he didn’t even hit his kid.
Who has not made a stupid mistake in their life? Do we not all change? If you have never done anything that you regret or that you should not have done, then …you have a right to judge but to my knowlage there is not one perfect human being! So unless you are the only living perfect person …..try to immagine your mistake being told to the world and then being juged by them
The editor got re-assigned…. no job loss here. Tiger is cool, you not so much.
"Re-assigned"? They replaced the editor and made a public apology for his actions–sugarcoat that however you want: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/18/golfweek.cover/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
But we’ve gotten waay off-topic here, thanks to your absurd non sequitur. How are the noose and the bump on the head related? Only in this: Just as a sportscaster shouldn’t be so easily let off the hook when she makes a cavalier comment about lynching a black man, Matt Wingard shouldn’t be given a pass when he sends out a letter claiming the criminal case against him for striking his son was "an over-reaction." Wingard may very well have learned and moved on, but he had a chance to make a statement against child abuse right here, and he chose not to take it.
Oh, and Anon9:46, thanks for letting me know where I stand on the cool-meter, but I don’t think I’ll be taking my tips on coolness from a guy who looks at his digital watch to find out his name.
If he hits his kid, who else has he hit?
Every legislator is a "mandatory reporter" for abuse activities and criminal acts. Who will Wingard report to? Himself? Not on my watch!