Archives for September 2007

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

7PM: What’s the truth about Roads & Transit?
There’s a big Roads & Transit package on the ballot this November — what exactly does it do, and what exactly does it cost? Jessyn Farrell of the Transportation Choices Coalition and Aaron Toso of Keep Washington Rolling join me in the studio to give the Yes side of the debate, and then Mark Baerwaldt, the man behind No To Prop 1 joins us by phone to give us the other side. $17.8 billion or $157 billion? We’ll try to bridge the divide or expose the lies.

8PM: What makes Peter Goldmark run?
Okanogan County rancher Peter Goldmark lost a tough race last November to Rep. Cathy McMorris in WA’s 5th Congressional District, but he’s jumped right back in the saddle, declaring this week his candidacy for Washington State Commissioner of Public Lands. Goldmark joins us for the hour by phone to outline his vision for the office, and to take your calls.

9PM: TBA

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

PROGRAMMING NOTE:
I’ll be filling in for Dave Ross Tuesday morning. Tune in at 9AM for a KIRO-exclusive on-air debate between Republican Dan Satterberg and Democrat Bill Sherman, candidates for King County Prosecuting Attorney.

From beyond the grave, Walt Crowley gets to the heart of why normally cynical folks like me can muster enthusiastic support for a Roads & Transit package that quite frankly, has some details that warrant little enthusiasm. In a posthumous guest column in today’s Seattle Times, Crowley looks back at our region’s transportation history and argues that we are at a tipping point that could herald the end of the ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) Age.

The RTID package does not satisfy the true believers on either side of the great lanes-versus-trains debate that has divided the region since the 1960s, but its approval would irrevocably tip the balance in favor of transit and other non-ICE Age modes of transportation, such as bicycles, ferries and electric vehicles. Personal transport per se will not cease to exist — it is too ingrained in our culture and economy — but petroleum-powered cars and their insatiable appetite for oil, concrete and real estate will no longer set the pace for future mobility and development.

[…] Passage of the roads-and-transit plan will not instantly unclog highways nor usher in some modern version of a 19th-century City Beautiful utopia overnight. It will, however, mark a tipping point not unlike the predicted thawing of the polar ice caps, a one-way threshold of no return. We will always need roads and highways, but once the momentum of transportation investment steers away from the gas-powered automobile in favor of transit and other alternatives, there will be no going back.

These two paragraphs represent Crowley’s thesis, but he supports it with a ton of historical perspective, so please read the whole damn thing before popping off in the comment thread. In Crowley’s memory, please lets try to have a reasoned debate for a change.

Speaking of which, a memorial service for Walt Crowley will be held Tuesday, 4 to 6 p.m. at the Museum of History & Industry, 2700 4th Ave. E., Seattle. In lieu of flowers, the family requests that donations be made in Walt’s honor to HistoryLink.org.

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

7PM: Should it be harder to raise taxes for schools, than for parks, roads, and other levies?
This November local voters will be asked to spend $17.8 billion for roads and transit, and it’s gonna be close. But should that this measure require the same 60% super-majority required of school levies, it wouldn’t stand a chance. The Legislature passed a constitutional amendment last session to impose the same “simple majority” requirement on school levies as required of other levies, and this November you’ll have the opportunity to approve it at the polls… by of course, a simple majority. Kelly Munn of People for Our Public Schools joins us for the hour.

8PM: Will WA voters finally get their “top two” primary?
Washington voters lost their cherished open primary after a legal challenge from both parties, only to see the favored replacement, a “top-two” primary, also tossed out by the courts. Monday the U.S. Supreme Court hears and appeal, and some legal experts predict the top-two might be reinstated. As an East Coast transplant I’ve never personally understood what the big deal is about declaring a party affiliation in order to vote in a party primary, so I’ll have Sec. of State Sam Reed on for the first half hour to explain it to me and take your calls.

9PM: Is Rudy Giuliani “white enough?”
That and other questions, plus your calls.

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

Six boys or young men have died in the US this year from a killer amoeba that lives in lakes, enters the body through the nose, and feeds on the brain. It is almost always fatal.

“This is definitely something we need to track,” said Michael Beach, a specialist in recreational-waterborne illnesses for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Um… ya think?

“This is a heat-loving amoeba,” Beach said. “As water temperatures go up, it does better. In future decades, as temperatures rise, we’d expect to see more cases.”

The amoeba, Naegleria fowleri, killed 23 people in the US between 1995 and 2004. It has already killed six people this year, three in Orlando, Florida, two in Lake LBJ, Texas, and one last week at Lake Havasu in Arizona.

Hmm. Perhaps our good friend Stefan should organize a national conference of global warming deniers at one of these prime locations? After all, who could possibly have less to fear from a brain-eating amoeba?

Hey…only a “half-glass empty” kind of person would claim that the GOP front-runners are afraid of black voters. They prefer to think of themselves as Powerfully White:

(This and about 50 more of the best audio and video political clips from the week are posted at Hominid Views.)

This poll was done before Ron Sims’ opinion piece in the Times came out, so the numbers have likely dipped. But still, a few points short of 60% is very good for a package like this.

Our latest survey of 600 likely voters taken within the RTID district on the 22nd/23rd of September shows the Roads and Transit measure continuing to hold a clear lead with 60% (57% vote for, 3% lean toward) with 37% opposed (34% vote against, 3% lean against). We have now seen eight polls (conducted by four different polling firms) since April giving the measure between 54 and 61% of the vote, with opposition between 32 and 39%. Transportation concerns continue to be the top issue in the Puget Sound area, and voters are
looking for solutions. Clearly, we enter the last six weeks of the campaign with a real chance to put this measure over the top, and are in a better position to win than I would have imagined possible eight months ago.

I’m one of the most pessimistic people I know in local politics, and even I’m buoyed by these numbers.

…stay away from your blog. At least that’s what I’m trying to do after this news.

There is an upside to this: I’m already thinking about who I want to support for King County Exec in ’09, since Ron is pretty much making it clear that he isn’t running again. One of my only rules is that the candidate has to have a consistent position on light rail. They can’t be for it…

…and then against it.

Got nothing planned for tomorrow? How about a free ride to Bellingham for the inaugural journey of The Washington Bus, a new brand of political activism that exercises both body and mind, and, um, features an actual bus.

The Bus leaves 9am sharp Saturday morning from Seattle’s Triangle Park, at the corner of Beacon Ave. S. and S. Stevens St. Fueled by a unique blend of youth-activism and bio-diesel, the Bus will cruise to Bellingham, where it will join dozens of local volunteers to walk neighborhoods and knock on doors for Whatcom County Council candidate Ken Mann. Mann is a true progressive who needs your help to spread his message that it is time to get serious about preserving Whatcom County’s rural heritage and keeping its towns and cities vibrant.

The Washington Bus is inspired by the Oregon Bus Project, a groundbreaking statewide group that engages young people in politics by connecting them as volunteers to progressive campaigns. It’s an amazingly successful model that is changing the face of politics in Oregon… or at the very least, making that face a helluva lot younger.

So if you want to do your part to help progressive candidates win throughout the state, it’s time to get off your ass and get on the bus.

This just in…

Ms. Hague,

I am writing to you to inform you that I have been given the full authority of the Bellevue Firefighters IAFF Local #1604 to advise you that they have pulled the endorsement that they have given you for your re-election campaign. At this point the Bellevue Firefighters IAFF Local #1604 will not be endorsing for this race. Item next, I will be pulling my personal endorsement as a Bothell City Council member for your re-election campaign. I, as well, will not be endorsing in this race. At this point you are to discontinue using our endorsements, and to have all references of them removed from all campaign material as well as Voter guides. Failure to do so will result in our issuing a press release stating our actions.

Respectfully,

Del Spivey

Bellevue Firefighters
IAFF Local # 1604

Bothell City Council
Member

There are a ton of Hague yard signs all over the district proudly sporting the “Firefighter Endorsed” placard. Looks like Hague’s army of enthusiastic supporters will be awfully busy yanking yard signs. (Or maybe, they could just ply Hague with wine, put her behind the wheel, and have her knock over the signs herself?)

I thought I was being clever when I titled yesterday’s post “The Daily Hague,” but it turned out to be prophetic. For the second day in a row, both dailies cover the unraveling campaign of the King County Council’s most famous barfly, thus sticking me with a repetitive headline. That’ll teach me.

The P-I seems to be playing catch-up this week, a day behind on Hague’s financial disclosure mess, while the Times reports on efforts by a special prosecutor to readmit Hague’s blood-alcohol tests. Hague had signed a document verifying she’d been warned of the implications of taking the breath-alyzer test, but…

Judge Peter Nault “signed an order suppressing the blood-alcohol readings on the grounds that the implied-consent warnings were confusing,” Moberly wrote.

Um… of course Hague was confused by the implied-consent warnings. She was drunk.

Meanwhile, details of Hague’s PDC enforcement hearing emerged in an HA comment thread of all places, pretty much busting the victim meme being put forth by Hague and her drinking buddies. Jay had stopped by the PDC meeting to listen in to the ongoing debate on whether blogs deserve a media exemption (of course they do… the only real difference between me and Frank Blethen is that I’ve never shot a dog.) You can read Jay’s summary here.

But Jay stuck around for the enforcement hearings, and in HA’s comment thread he provides a telling report about the discussion involving Jane Hague’s recent settlement:

I stayed for the enforcement item on the agenda and saw the Hague discussion. A representative from the Jane Hague’s campaign read a statement on her behalf. PDC Commissioner Nolan talked about “the public being harmed by a public official who is in a position of great responsibility whose campaign finances are in a shambles.” While Nolan acknowledged that these violations and the penalty were agreed to by Hague and PDC staff, Nolan asked staff to consider larger penalties for similar violations in the future. While other candidates with business before the PDC at least called in , Nolan chided Hague for “not being present on her behalf.”

Commissioner Schellberg asked any candidates that are hearing this take the time to read the reports and be responsible for their campaign’s finances. Commissioner Seabrook finds it amazing that Ms. Hague was not aware of what was going on with late filings, missing information, and embezzlement. He complimented the staff in sorting all of this out.

Hague didn’t even bother to phone in? Hell, to his credit, even Tim Eyman shows up for his own PDC enforcement hearings. (I think he may even have a reserved parking spot.)

Through her spokesman Brett Bader, Hague keeps claiming she’s a victim, blaming her campaign finance and disclosure mess on a multiyear embezzlement by her treasurer. But the embezzlement, the late filings, the missing information and the $50,000 contribution that wasn’t, are all symptoms of Hague’s inability (or unwillingness) to be responsible for her own campaign finances.

As I’ve said before, this is all part of a pattern. Whether it’s enough of a pattern to dissuade voters from rehiring Hague, regardless of her challenger, remains to be seen.

This screenshot was taken at uSP. That’s quite a reading list: Dino Rossi’s Lessons and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. What’s next, Tim Eyman’s How I Fought Herpes and Won and Mein Kampf?
———————————————————————————————–

During his September 26 broadcast Rush Limbaugh described service members who advocate for a US withdrawal from Iraq “phony soldiers,” prompting anti-war veteran Jon Soltz to challenge Limbaugh to have him on his show and say it to his face.

My challenge to you, then, is to have me on the show and say all of this again, right to the face of someone who served in Iraq. I’ll come on any day, any time. Not only will I once again explain why your comments were so wrong, but I will completely school you on why your refusal to seek a way out of Iraq is only aiding al Qaeda and crippling American security.

Is Limbaugh man enough to meet Soltz’s challenge? Nah… he’s a big old coward. But why not call his show at 800-282-2882 between 9AM and Noon PST and ask him anyway?

We’ve all seen those “Reject R-67” ads the insurance industry is running, featuring a fake family making fake claims about how R-67 will raise your premiums, or the laughably fake law firm made out to look like a parody of your typical lawyer joke. Well the first “Approve R-67” ad just hit the airwaves, and it somehow manages to use a real person — not an actor — to speak honestly about the kind of real personal tragedy the bill addresses.

Personally, I find the real person more persuasive than the fictional one.

P.T. Barnum once famously said, “there’s no such thing as bad press, as long as they spell your name right,” a dubious maxim Jane Hague seems intent on putting to the test. For the umpteenth time this campaign season the King County Councilmember has found her ethical and legal travails chronicled in both daily newspapers, and you’ve gotta believe the bad headlines are taking a toll.

The Seattle Times reports this morning that Hague has agreed to pay $9,500 in fines to resolve multiple public disclosure violations first uncovered by her opponent, Richard Pope. Hague and her spokesman, Bret Bader, continue to belittle the violations as “a small technical matter” and “a nuisance complaint,” but if so, that begs the question why she would agree to paying more than twice the $4,200 maximum fine the PDC can levy? Could it be that Hague feared stiffer penalties should the case be referred to the state attorney general for further action?

Looking at the scope of the violations, I’m guessing yes. In settling the complaint, Hague acknowledged that she:

• Filed three itemized reports of contributions 20 to 49 days late and six financial summaries 20 to 407 days late;

• Twice deposited contributions late;

• Failed to identify donors’ occupations and employers 37 percent of the time; and

• Received eight contributions over the limit of $700 per election.

On her surplus-funds account, Hague acknowledged filing late reports, failing to identify vendors who received payments, making prohibited expenditures for campaign lunches, and improperly reimbursing herself for contributions she made to other campaigns.

Hague was 275 days late in reporting a $7,547 contribution she made to her 2005 campaign to cover checks after the bank account was depleted by campaign aide Jennifer Hildebrand.

Bader, who’s Madison Communications has already billed the 2007 Hague campaign over $50,000, once again proves that Hague is not only incapable of keeping track of her money, she can’t spend it wisely either. At least not when it comes to damage control:

“These problem filings originated as a result of Jennifer Brzusek Hildebrand’s embezzlement of nearly $150,000 from the Hague campaign,” Hague spokesman Brett Bader said, “and they were forced onto the PDC’s agenda by Jane’s political opponent.

Hey Brett, thanks for a) Reinforcing the perception that Hague can’t manage money; and b) Continuing Hague’s pattern of blaming everybody but herself! Over the past few years Bader has been the primary consultant on such high-profile losing campaigns as Luke Esser, Bret Olson, Jeff Sax and Yes on I-912. If Hague gets beat by Pope and his couple thousand dollars worth of yard signs (and at this point a Pope victory is more than possible,) Bader’s public comments should be enshrined as a textbook illustration of how not to do crisis management.

The issue here is not just that Hague committed numerous public disclosure violations or can’t seem to manage her own campaign finances or lied about her college education or cursed out police officers after pulling her over for driving drunk… the issue is all these things taken together in context, and Hague’s insistence on shifting blame to others while refusing to come straight about her own actions. The issue here is trust.

And until Hague attempts to rebuild that trust by taking full responsibility for her DUI, her fictional diploma, her campaign finance turmoils and other actions, I’m guessing her headlines are going to continue to get worse.

If you said 50 cents a day (and a buck-fifty on Sunday), you’d be wrong.

At least, that’s according to “Slim” Jim MacIsaac, who’s goofball numbers are getting front page treatment at the P-I.

This is from an email received earlier today:

Using the same methodology reported in the PI to arrive at the $160B cost figure for the joint ballot measure, the Seattle PI costs a reader $60,000.

Here’s how it works: 50-cents per day for 6 days a week, plus $1.50 for Sundays. That’s $4.50 a week, multiplied by 52 weeks a year for $234 per year. But wait – those are 2006 numbers. Using MacIsaac’s terms, you go back to what you’ve been paying since 1996 and go forward to what you’ll pay through to 2057. Using ST’s/MacIsacc’s/PI’s annual inflationary factor of 5.2%, you deflate back to 1996, inflate up to 2057, add it all together and you get $60,075.37 – the true cost of the PI to the reader. I like Joel Connelly, but he doesn’t seem like much of a bargain at that price, now does he? Curiously, the PI does not use these figures to encourage purchasing their product.

But wait again – this is the “true cost” of the PI for one reader, not all readers combined. So, to find the “true cost” of the PI to the community you have to multiply the per reader cost by their circulation figure (since a growth inflator of 5.2% was already in the per reader figure, you don’t have to apply it again to the circulation figure). Keeping in mind that my degree is in Political Science, not Mathematics, the number I get is $7,943,946,401.21, or $8 billion.

I too love Joel’s column, but at 60k, that’s one expensive paper.