Archives for May 2007

It’s no secret: the working poor don’t have things easy. The Food Stamp Program, which has existed since the 1930’s, was enacted nationwide in the 1974 to supplement the diets of America’s poor. So, who gets food stamps:

The Food Stamp Program is targeted toward those most in need. Of all food stamp households in FY 2003 (the year for which the most recent detailed USDA data are available), 55 percent contain children; households with children receive 79.3 percent of all food stamp benefits. Roughly 18 percent of food stamp households contain an elderly person and 23 percent containa disabled person. Approximately 88 percent of food stamp households have gross incomes below the poverty line ($18,100 for a family of four in 2002). Approximately 38.4 percent of food stamp households have gross incomes at or below half of the poverty line.

The food stamp benefit translates to about 3 bucks a day, or 21 bucks a week. Though the program was meant only to supplement their nutrition needs, these days food stamps recipients are more likely to rely entirely on the program. As inflation eats away at the buying power of the minimum wage, the working poor are earning less. Things have to change.

Some in Congress are trying to bring light to this problem:

Today, four members of Congress conclude the Congressional Food Stamp Challenge, in which lawmakers chose to live “on three dollars of food per day, the same amount an average participant in the Food Stamp Program receives.”

One of the participants, Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH), “stuck to the challenge” even as he traveled to speak at his alma mater’s commencement exercises, bringing along his “pasta and sauce, as well as the last of my jelly, peanut butter, and bread.”

But when Ryan had to go through airport security, things got dicey:

When I arrived I decided just to carry my bag on so I ran over to the security gate with my carry on. I step up to the metal detector, take my shoes off, place my bag through the scanner and come out the other side to the most dreaded words in travel, “Bag Check!”

As the agent sifted though my bag, I tried to recount what could possibly be in there that was threatening…my mouthwash? Toothpaste? Yeah, it was those two, but it was also my peanut butter and jelly.

He politely put the peanut butter and jelly to the side, closed my bag and gave it back to me. I was too astonished to talk. I took my bag and walked towards the gate thinking about the 4 or maybe 5 meals that she had taken from me. What am I going to do now? It’s not like I can just go to Safeway and grab another jar. I have .33 cents and a bag of cornmeal to last today and tomorrow.

A few congressfolks and the Governor of Oregon took the Food Stamp Challenge. Then again, millions of Americans take that challenge every day. Unlike these pols, it doesn’t end with a flank steak, red skin potatos, and a bottle of pinot noir.

UPDATE:

Many families do things like buy in bulk to keep costs down. This is impossible for most poor folks on a tight budget. Bulk is cheaper per person, but the upfront costs at the cash register make bulk buying impossible. Also, poor folks can get more food if they buy lower quality, hence the fatty ground beef versus the more expensive leaner beef. No wonder obesity is an epidemic for poor kids.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is in trouble. His problems have moved well beyond the scandal surrounding the firing of U.S. attorneys.

Last week former acting Attorney General James Comey gave testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee that can only be described as devastating to Gonzales:

Among other things, Comey’s testimony strongly suggests that Gonzales lied to the Senate during his February 2006 testimony. And some senators have noticed the discrepancy:

Gonzales said in 2006 that there was no “serious disagreement about the program,” a claim that flies in the face of the extraordinary testimony delivered by former Justice official James Comey yesterday. In the letter, the senators ask Gonzales if he stands by his claim

Comey’s testimony portrayed a Gonzales with genuine contempt for the Justice department while he was still White House Counsel. The testimony comes on the heels of a series of other scandals within the Justice department that have taken place under Gonzales’ leadership. As a result, the Senate is preparing for a vote of no-confidence in Gonzales that may be acted upon this week.

Today, President Bush still stands by his man:

“He has done nothing wrong,” Bush said during a news conference at his ranch.
[…]

“I frankly view what’s taking place in Washington today as pure political theater,” Bush said, sounding exasperated with the furor swirling around his longtime friend. “I stand by Al Gonzales and I would hope that people would be more sober in how they address these important issues.”

Reading Bush’s words, I have to wonder…is Bush even capable of recognizing when someone has “done something wrong?” It’s hard to imagine he can when I watch a video of him openly lying to the American people on the very same topic—getting court orders for wiretaps (White House transcript, 20 Apr 2004 ):

Bush didn’t have to lie here…he made a deliberate choice to lie.

Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) predicted yesterday that Gonzales would resign before the no confidence vote. Even so, Gonzales and Bush can hold out indefinitely.

I’ve seen two lines of speculation swirling about the internets as to why Bush will stubbornly resist to the bitter end. The first is that there are secrets within the Justice Department that are so devastating to the Bush administration that he cannot risk losing a friendly Attorney General. If so, the potential damage must be large because Bush prefers a dysfunctional Justice Department to possible disclosure of “issues.”

The second (and less conspiratorial) reason is that Bush is waiting until the Senate is in recess to make a recess appointment of a administration-friendly AG. Or…maybe not.

Ultimately, there is only one way to force Gonzales out of office, and Robert Greenwald has launched a video and petition to help make that happen:

The impeachment petition can be found here.

The vengeful side of me is enjoying the impotence, and, yes…even the damage, caused to a rogue Bush administration as they cling to Gonzales while he drags them all over the cliff. In that sense, the longer he stays, the better. But as a patriotic American, I feel strongly that a well-functioning, effective, and lawful Justice Department is critical for our democracy. I sure hope Fredo falls on his sword soon.

I got a call this weekend from a volunteer from the Barack Obama for President campaign. It’s was a fund raising call, and I politely said that I was backing another horse. But, in the guy’s prepared text, he mentioned how Obama wants to “bring people together,” and “he’s been bringing people together his whole life.” He talked about how partisanship is ruining Washington DC, that to get things done we have to get past party labels to find solutions.

I appreciate the sentiment, but I’m not on board with it.

You can’t be talking ‘ceasefire’ while your enemies are training their guns on you. You can’t negotiate with them until you get their elbows pinned behind their backs and you hear them squeal. Senator Obama means well, I’m sure, but I think he misjudges what’s called for in ’08.

I like politicians who can work together. Seattle’s Rep. Jim McDermott has joined with Rep. Jim McCrery (R-LA) to work on healthcare. While they have their differences on policy, the goal is the same. They both want America to do something every other industrialized country does already: provide healthcare to all it’s people. McDermott favor a single-payer system in which the government plays a central role, while McCrery wants to fix the current system so it insures everyone. McCrery isn’t like a lot of Republicans. Most don’t care to solve these problems in a way that won’t give them total political victory.

I expect the sort of “play nice with the GOP” meme from folks like Joel Connelly, not a potential standard bearer like Obama.

Tonight on “The David Goldstein Show”, 7PM to 10PM on Newsradio 710-KIRO:

7PM: Save the whales? Hell, first lets save journalism.
If like millions of Americans you’ve been mesmerized by the live coverage of a female humpback whale and her calf caught 90 miles up the Sacramento River, then Dr. Denny Wilkens says you are an “overly sentimental sap” whose been suckered by the media — again. Wilkens is a professor of journalism and mass communication at St. Bonaventure University in New York, and he joins us by phone to talk about how newsroom cutbacks lead to parachute journalism.

8PM: Can the Netroots save the Constitution?
Just before the November election the Republican Congress pushed through the Military Commissions Act, which amongst other things eliminated the sacrosanct right of habeas corpus for US residents. Ari Melber of The Nation argues that restoring habeas corpus and other civil liberties should be at the top of the agenda for the netroots and other progressive activists. Melber, an expat Seattleite, joins me for the hour.

9PM: Are Washington’s taxes too low?
Sandeep Kaushik of the Washington State Budget & Policy Center says yes, and he’s coming into the studio with the statistics to back it up.

Tune in tonight (or listen to the live stream) and give me a call: 1-877-710-KIRO (5476).

Poor David Postman… reduced to the level of sharing the screen with lowly bloggers like me and Stefan. All three of us appear today on KING-5 TV’s Up Front with Robert Mak: KING-5 @ 9:30 a.m. and NWCN @ 8:00 p.m.

If you miss it, streaming video will be posted to KING-5’s website, um, eventually.

UPDATE:
Oops. Up Front is usually on KING-5 at 9:30 a.m., but today it is preempted by (gag) poker. It’s on at 4:30 p.m. today instead.

UPDATE, UPDATE:
The streaming video is now online. (Our segment starts about 40% through.)

Tonight on “The David Goldstein Show”, 7PM to 10PM on Newsradio 710-KIRO:

7PM: Are gas prices to low?
With gasoline prices once again hitting record highs it may seem like an odd time to argue for a hike in gasoline taxes, but argue the P-I editorial board did. And you know what? I agree. Sorta.

8PM: Have the lovely ladies of hate talk gone too far?
Hate talker Melanie Morgan got herself banned from the News Hour on PBS, after repeatedly dissing an Iraq War vet. Meanwhile, Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter are outdoing each other in their efforts to reach new highs in punditry lows. David Ferguson, blogging as TRex at Firedloglake, joins me for the hour.

9PM: Jerry Falwell is dead. Al Gore and Fred Thompson live. Why?
A touching tribute to the dearly departed Rev. Falwell, followed by discussion of why the two presidential candidates generating the most buzz and excitement are the two not running.

Tune in tonight (or listen to the live stream) and give me a call: 1-877-710-KIRO (5476).

I want to strongly emphasize that not all right-wing Evangelical Republicans are serial child rapists. But you know… some are.

A former South Dakota lawmaker is accused of molesting his own foster children and legislative pages. […] Former State Representative Ted Klaudt is accused of manipulating, molesting, intimidating and threatening teenage girls who the state of South Dakota paid him to raise.

[…] The first victim to come forward told investigators Klaudt offered to earn her enough money to pay for college by helping her donate her eggs to a fertility clinic. She says Klaudt used a fake email address from the supposed clinic agent to trick her into letting him perform what’s supposed to be a surgical procedure.

The victims say Klaudt touched them while they were foster children at his home here in Walker. But the girls say the molestation also happened in Pierre during legislative sessions while some of them also served as pages.

Five different girls now say Klaudt did things ranging from manual “breast exams” to the painful procedure of actually going inside of them with a speculum and collecting body fluids. The girls say when they cried, Klaudt gave them a beer and told them to toughen up.

Just drink the beer and quit your crying. Uh-huh. I guess this is what George Lakoff means when he talks about the “Strict Father Model” that defines conservative metaphors for morality.

It should come as no surprise that Klaudt repeatedly voted for bills that limited or prohibited abortions. And according to the inimitable Howie Klein:

Klaudt fancied himself a radical right Republican (and an evangelical) and in 2005 was a leader against the formation of the South Dakota Mainstream Coalition, meant to turn Republicans back towards mainstream conservatism.

By “mainstream conservatism,” I suppose Howie means not serially raping one’s foster children.

Some citizens are upset with Port of Seattle Commissioner Pat Davis:

Davis, who has been a commissioner for 22 years, is accused of malfeasance and misfeasance for her role in signing a memo extending payments of retired port Chief Executive Mic Dinsmore’s $339,841 salary by up to one year past his retirement date.

[King County Superior Court Judge Charles] Mertel ruled that the allegations of wrongful conduct in office are legally and factually sufficient to merit allowing the petition to continue.

“These are sad things when public officials are called to answer to charges like these,” Mertel said after issuing his decision, which allows the petition’s charges to be condensed into a 200-word ballot synopsis to be reviewed by his court Thursday.

“Maybe it is well justified, maybe it isn’t, but obviously the voters will have to answer that.”

The next step for Davis will be to appeal to the state Supreme Court. If not, or if she loses there, the “pro-recall” folks will need to get 149,124 signatures to place the recall on the ballot.

(Postman has more.)

Man…if only the process could be that simple for the PUSA!

Former Governor Booth Gardner seeks “death with dignity.” You know, as opposed to this.

See, this is why I’m really, really rooting for Rudy Giuliani to win the GOP nomination. In the words of Rev. James Dobson:

Speaking as a private citizen and not on behalf of any organization or party, I cannot, and will not, vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008. It is an irrevocable decision. If given a Hobson’s – Dobson’s? – choice between him and Sens. Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, I will either cast my ballot for an also-ran – or if worse comes to worst – not vote in a presidential election for the first time in my adult life. My conscience and my moral convictions will allow me to do nothing else.

Abortion, domestic partnerships, philandering, multiple marriages, dressing in drag… these are all reasons Dobson cites in asserting Giuliani is not “presidential timber.” And if Christian conservatives like Dobson can’t bring themselves to vote for the GOP nominee, many will stay home from the polls altogether, disadvantaging Republican candidates up and down the ticket. Democratic voters already tend to turn out in relatively greater numbers during presidential elections — imagine a close race in a rematch between Darcy Burner and Dave Reichert, in which the right-wing Republican base is turned off by a Giuliani candidacy.

I sure as hell am.

Councilman Raymond Shaw Reagan Dunn
King County Council

Dear Raymond Reagan,

I enjoyed reading your empassioned column in today’s Seattle Times hawking your “transparency in taxation” proposal. Like you, I have my King County property taxes paid through my mortgage company. It’s easy that way. But that means I don’t get a report on how my taxes are being spent.

Clearly this has been bothering you. On your web site, you stated that you were “stunned to learn recently that nearly half of the property owners in King County do not receive a summary of where their property taxes go.” I’m not sure why it took you so long to finally come to this stunning realization…. I mean, I was so upset when I first moved here that I did something about it.

I learned that there was something called “the Internets,” where all kinds of information is stored in a series of tubes. It was all very confusing and the information was difficult to find until I learned about “the Google.” Now, with a few seconds of work, “the Google” brings me to this tube. When I manipulate my mouse over the proper spot on that tube, and depressed the leftmost switch on the mouse, I find helpful reports on how my tax dollars are being collected and spent. A useful spending summary for 2007 can be found in this tube.

I was thinking…it would cost me a couple of extra buck in property tax to pay to have all this information mailed to me. Don’t you think this borders dangerously on an unnecessary tax increase and growth in government? (Funny…I never used to think of you as a “big government” type.) Instead of growing the government, why not just let people know how to find the proper tubes on the internets for this information?

I found another interesting tube as well: Taxfoundation.org. There I learned that Washington state residences have a tax burden that is just a hair above the average for the United States. The U.S. average is a state and local tax burden of 11.0%, whereas Washingtonians have a state and local tax burden of 11.1%. I noticed that, for the previous 30 years, Washington state residents have had about a 0.5% higher state and local tax burden than the U.S. average. So, the 0.1% we have now is pleasant, but perhaps a little alarming at the same time. I mean, do we really want someplace like Alabama to serve as our model for taxation and government?

Anyway, good luck with your “transparency” project Raymond Reagan, and may the tubes be with you.

Yours verily,

Darryl
Horsesass.org

Because people who do ride the bus know that this is a stupid idea:

Under its proposal, the I-90 center corridor would be acquired by Sound Transit exclusively for light rail between Seattle and the Eastside. Buses, vanpools, HOVs and all Mercer Island vehicular traffic now using this inner corridor would be rerouted to the outer lanes.

The result would be increased delays and congestion on all traffic moving between Seattle and the Eastside. The cost of building light rail to the Eastside would be $6 billion. The I-90 bridge would suffer a vehicle capacity loss of one-third compared with today. Even with an optimistic doubling of transit ridership, there would be a 9-percent loss of total (vehicle and transit) person trips.

Light rail would not give us either the flexibility or the capacity that rapid bus service offers at a small fraction of the cost. Bus rapid transit can share the center lanes, thus avoiding the one-third loss of vehicular traffic.

People who like Bus Rapid Transit are people who never ride the bus. BRT is cheaper because, almost all of the time, it sucks.

The fact that Phil Talmadge would sign on with rightwingers like former Sen. Jim Horn and the Washington Policy Center shows just how out of touch Talmadge is these days. Phil also campaigned hard for a new elevated Alaskan Way Viaduct. The vote for the new Viaduct failed in every Seattle legislative district except, you guessed it, West Seattle’s 34th LD (Talmadge was the state senator from West Seattle for years). Talmadge is opposite many Republicans on the Eastside like Connie Marshall, the former Mayor of Bellevue. She supports rail, but this one-kidneyed liberal Democrat from Seattle doesn’t. Weird.

What happened to the Phil Talmadge who told Tim Eyman to go fuck himself? The Talmadge who challenged a sitting Democratic Governor in 2003 for not being progressive enough? Phil gave an anti-war speech to the Democrats at the King County Convention that was fiery as hell back in ’04?

Go figure.

Futurewise and SEIU 775 are filing a complaint in King County Superior Court this morning, asking the courts to block Tim Eyman’s I-960 from the ballot, on the grounds that it is outside the constitutional scope of the initiative process. And, well… I just gotta laugh.

I know what Timmy’s reaction will be. He’ll be outraged, he’ll tell us, at this cynical attempt to prevent the people from voting on a citizens initiative. This is insulting. It’s undemocratic. It’s unprecedented.

In fact, it is not unprecedented, and I can’t tell you how much I look forward to skewering Eyman and his sanctimonious supporters in the press and elsewhere who echo his self-righteous condemnations of the complainants and their attorneys. For if these hypocritical defenders of the status quo are truly outraged by the prospect of such pre-ballot review, they had every opportunity to speak their minds concerning a similar case four years ago, yet remained strangely silent. Indeed the most sanctimonious of the sanctimonious — the Seattle Times editorial board — actually urged the courts to bar an initiative from the ballot on just such a scope challenge.

Of course I’m talking about I-831, my private joke cum baptism in hardball politics, a constitutionally protected initiative seeking to proclaim Tim Eyman a horse’s ass, that was summarily barred from the ballot by a stick-up-his-ass Assistant AG and an angry judge.

The Times and others cheered the judge’s actions, but it was absolutely clear to me at the time the precedent he was setting. Indeed, the brief my attorney presented before the injunction hearing seems downright prescient in light of today’s news:

Many initiatives are presented to the people that are arguably unconstitutional or beyond the scope of the legislative power. For example, Tim Eyman’s Sound Transit Initiative would prevent Sound Transit from spending money on a “Link Light Rail” system. This proposed initiative is clearly beyond the scope of legislative power under Ruano v. Spellman and other cases holding that initiatives cannot seek to prohibit administrative actions. The Attorney General has done nothing to prevent Mr. Eyman from going forward with his initiative. Proposed Initiative 824 is a statement. The Attorney General has taken the position in the present case that statements are not legislative, yet nothing has been done to prevent Initiative 824 from going forward.

Allowing the Attorney General discretion to select initiatives for challenge based on their palatability would violate the First Amendment. If pre-ballot review is to be applied to some initiatives, it should be applied to all initiatives that are arguably unconstitutional or beyond the scope of legislative power.

We concluded our brief by demanding that if the court engages in pre-ballot review, a “writ of mandamus” should issue requiring the Attorney General to seek pre-ballot review of all initiatives that are “arguably unconstitutional or outside the scope of the initiative power.”

Eyman, the self-proclaimed champion of direct democracy, had every opportunity then to take a principled stand in defense of the initiative process, but he refused. So forgive me if four years later I shed no tears for the legal predicament in which he finds himself. That his own unconstitutional initiative should face a pre-ballot scope challenge is the logical, legal consequence of the court order that ended I-831. My only surprise is that it has taken this long for an enterprising attorney to build on the precedent.

“I-960 is not a valid initiative and it will never become the law, so we shouldn’t be wasting tax moneys counting signatures and placing it on the ballot. I-960 seeks to amend the constitution by initiative, which the Courts have repeatedly said you cannot do,” noted Knoll Lowney, lead attorney on the case.

Specifically, I-960 seeks to modify the referendum powers defined in the State Constitution by creating a mandatory non-binding referendum process for all tax and fee increases not already subject to constitutional referendum, and, it attempts to modify the constitutional process for enacting legislation, by requiring a two thirds majority for raising taxes. I-960 is arguably unconstitutional, and, since it intends to amend laws that cannot be amended, it is also arguably not “legislative,” and thus outside the scope of the initiative process.

Unlike the Times, I’m not going to urge the court to rule one way or the other. I’m not a judge. And much to my mother’s chagrin, I’m not an attorney.

But I’ve read the complaint and I’m familiar enough with the case law from my own legal adventures to understand that this is not a frivolous complaint, and that it should be taken very seriously by the courts. Pre-ballot scope challenges are permissible, and indeed, I would argue, are long overdue. In fact, even while defending my own initiative, I argued for “a statutory mechanism for reviewing the constitutional sufficiency of initiatives prior to the ballot.” All I wanted from the AG and the courts was that such pre-ballot review be conducted with fairness and consistency.

Still, consistency is not something we’ve seen from my friends in the media in terms of how they have routinely approached Eyman and his initiatives, and I don’t expect to see consistency now. I fully expect Eyman to cry outrage, and I fully expect the editorialists — eager to prove that they are not aligned against him — to join him in his hypocritical sanctimony.

So come on Seattle Times… I dare you to prove me wrong. Four years ago you editorialized against a joke initiative, urging the court to bar I-831 from the ballot simply because it offended your delicate sensibilities. Do you have the balls to stand by your defense of pre-ballot scope challenges as a legitimate legal exercise?

I don’t think so.

UPDATE:
Andrew has more at NW Progressive.

Hmm.

• April 19, 2007 – Doolittle steps down from the Appropriations Committee following the FBI raid of his home. Doolittle is under investigation for his work with convicted lobbyist Republican Jack Abramoff
• May 11, 2007 – The Republican Conference names Ken Calvert – under investigation for a shady land deal — to replace Doolittle on Appropriations.
• May 15, 2007 – The Republican Conference names Tom Feeney – under investigation for his work with convicted lobbyist Republican Jack Abramoff — to replace Calvert as the senior Republican on the Space Subcommittee of the Science Committee.

Of course, in the GOP’s defense, if an active criminal investigation was enough to disqualify you from a committee assignment, half the assignments would go unfilled.

Reverend Falwell, fond farewell:
Your soul has fled its mortal shell
And flown across the great divide
To savor at your Savior’s side.
Or so you think… um… so you thought,
Well, so, at least, your Bible taught,
While unbelievers who deny
Eternal afterlife, like I,
Think when you’re dead, well, you just die.

But if, when I give up the fight,
I’m strangely drawn into the light?
And there your reverent form I see?
Don’t laugh sir, that the joke’s on me,
For since I’ve never claimed nor known
Your Savior Jesus as my own,
If you should meet this faithless Jew
In Heaven or in Hell’s review,
Well, either way… the joke’s on you.