Archives for May 2011

Joni Balter has a column ostensibly arguing against the proposed Seattle mandatory sick leave (h/t).

But the idea of city government mandating paid sick leave, especially while small businesses try to recover from severe economic woes, is overbearing and tone deaf. If anyone is going to lead us out of the recession, it’s small businesses. This is the last thing they need.

Totally, let’s blindly trust business to do the right thing. For the economy’s sake. Also, there’s probably a public health concern here. Both with other employees and with the people those sick employees have to interact with (do you really want your waiter to have strep throat and no sick leave?). But anyway, it’s been done in several cities, how can we learn from their example? Did it hurt businesses? Were there measurable public health differences? Other consequences?

City Councilmember Nick Licata, who is proposing the idea, says San Francisco did something similar and did not experience a negative economic impact.

OK fine. Now, Joni, instead of addressing that please complain about the existence of San Francisco for like 3/4 of your opinion piece about sick leave?

Another proponent of the plan said, in essence, San Francisco is doing this, why shouldn’t we?

Good start, keep going!

For years, San Francisco has been the punch line for goofy liberalism. Citizens and government there do a lot of off-the-wall things Seattle need not emulate. This city decided to officially expand the name of pet owners to include pet guardians. More respectful, you know. In fact, Seattle should ban the argument that San Francisco is taking certain action and therefore Seattle should follow suit.

So your argument against mandatory sick leave in Seattle is that San Francisco calls pet owners “guardians.” Of course. Surely something about Happy Meals will seal the mandatory sick leave deal.

San Francisco has also effectively banned Happy Meals, or at least the toy given with meals that exceed set levels of calories, sugar and fat. I did not feed my children Happy Meals. I am as concerned as the next person about childhood obesity and junk food.

But come on. Where are the parents? Don’t they have work to do?

Because you need to hit certain nutritional requirements before you can add toys in with food in San Francisco restaurants, Seattle shouldn’t have mandatory sick leave. It makes perfect sense. Why didn’t I see it before?

Seattle doesn’t have to copy every bad decision San Francisco concocts. Indeed, Seattle should eschew that old saw, “San Francisco is doing it, why shouldn’t we?”

I like that the first time Balter used that phrase in the column, it was paraphrasing and by the end it’s in quotes. Either she forgot that she’s the one who made it up or she’s quoting herself. And it’s an old saw even though she made it up like 15 paragraphs ago (I skipped a lot of random SF nonsense for lack of jokes, you’re welcome).

NARAL Pro Choice Washington is pushing a bill in the special session to expand family planning services to 250% of the poverty line (it’s currently 200%). I’d like it to be for 100% of Washingtonians who want it, but this is a step in the right direction. It passed the state senate earlier this week, and has a hearing in the state house tomorrow. From their press release:

“This legislation is critical for women’s health,” said Lauren Simonds, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Washington. “In our current budget environment, expanding low-income women’s access to family planning care is a no-brainer. SB 5912 will save the state money, starting in the same biennium.”

“NARAL Pro-Choice Washington would like to thank the 30 senators from both parties who stood up for women and families and voted for this legislation,” she added.

Family planning funding is a smart investment. By increasing eligibility in the Take Charge program, the Medicaid Purchasing Administration’s most conservative estimate indicates net savings of at least $3.5 million over the coming biennium.

It has a hearing scheduled for the Ways and Means Committee tomorrow morning. You might want to see if you have a representative on the committee, and give them an email if you do. In this horrible budget cycle, there’s a chance for something positive.

(Via Political Wire.)

Public Policy Polling has released polling results in the 2012 Washington state gubernatorial race. Their press release gets right to the point:

McKenna, Inslee basically tied for WA Gov.

[…]The most likely match up for Governor of Washington next year looks like it would be a barn burner, with Republican Attorney General Rob McKenna starting out with just a 40-38 lead over Democratic Congressman Jay Inslee. With 23% of Democrats and only 13% of Republicans undecided at this point that looks like a sheer toss up.

The main reason McKenna is ahead of Inslee at this point is slightly higher name recognition.

(The same poll finds Inslee beating Rep. Dave Reichert (R-WA-08) handily, 42% to 36%.)

McKenna is the more recognized brand right now, with 60% of respondents having formed an opinion of him, whereas only 51% have formed an opinion on Inslee.

What I found interesting in the crosstabs is that, in a McKenna—Inslee match-up, groups likely to support Inslee have higher “uncertain” responses:

• Liberals 31%, conservatives 28%
• Women 25%, men 18%
• Democrats 23%, Republicans 13%
• 18-29 year olds 24%, about 13% for older voters

Thus it seems support for Inslee has the greater growth potential as name recognition improves.

– “a refresher course in the difference between consensual sex and assault”

– RIP, Harmon Killebrew.

– “And holy crap I literally made none of that up.”

– I usually don’t do videos in open threads (I just forward to Darryl). But I don’t think you’ll want to wait until Friday night to see Dorothy Parvaz talk about her detention. Thank goodness she’s been released.

– Sounds like a scam.

– See you on the streets for Bike to Work Day, and I’ll probably go to the after party!

With the weather finally turning nice and more people commuting by bike, I thought it would be a good time to discuss biking through the red lights. I do it occasionally, but under pretty specific circumstances. Some people, God love them, don’t blow through any reds, and some people seem to barely notice that there are conditions (let alone the red itself) that might warrant not going right now.

First off, if you don’t want to ever blow a red, that’s awesome. It can be dangerous. It can mess with pedestrians. Even if it is safe, it’s still illegal. In a city that doesn’t jay walk much, I can understand the urge to sit at those lights. Also, one of my favorite things about riding a bike in the city is the interactions you get with other bicyclists while waiting for the light to change. They’re usually short conversations that don’t get much beyond “where are you going?” but it’s still fun to talk to like minded people for a minute or two, and you’ll miss a lot of it if you go through the light.

That said, I blow red lights occasionally. I also jay walk in much the same way: be safe and don’t be an asshole. So the main question is not when do circumstances warrant it, but when don’t they: Don’t ever go through a red if there’s traffic.* Assume they can’t see you. Even if they can see you, they quite reasonably aren’t expecting you to blow the light when they have the right of way. But even if you can reasonably guess how fast the next car is coming, and that you can make it, don’t blow the light. If traffic is coming in that circumstance, there’s still a good chance that you’ll force them to hit the breaks or slow down by taking their foot off the gas. If they have the right of way, they shouldn’t have to do that. Bicyclists demand that cars share the road; we ought to extend the same kindness to drivers.

Even when there aren’t cars around, you still have an obligation to be safe and not an asshole to pedestrians and other bicyclists. If there’s a reasonable chance you might hit them, just stay put until everyone is clear. If the pedestrian at the curb is looking like she might cross, but you’re not sure, stay put. Hell, get off your bike, so they know you aren’t going until they’re done.

After that, I say go for it.

[Read more…]

Who could have guessed that sending far-right Republican ideologues to Congress would backfire for the people who need government programs like Medicare:

Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-WA) came face to face with this growing movement at a town hall in Vancouver, Washington last night. Dozens of protesters encamped outside the meeting, waving signs like “Save Medicare: Tax the Rich.” When she tried to defend her vote on the GOP budget that would effectively privatize Medicare, “a chorus of boos and catcalls and shouts of ‘liar’ erupted in the auditorium.” The congresswoman was repeatedly called out by what the local press called a “rough crowd.”

It amazes me that there are people out there who voted for Herrera Beutler, but are now surprised that she’s voting to take away Medicare. What the hell did you expect? What part of Republican governance for the past 30 years hasn’t been clear? Modern Republicans don’t think government should provide safety nets to you any more. That means no Medicare, no Social Security. It means if you didn’t make enough money over your life – or if you’re one of those unlucky souls who gets a long-term illness that costs lots of money to treat – you need to look in the mirror and ask yourself why you didn’t have a good enough stock portfolio.

Please join us tonight for an evening of politics under the influence at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. We meet at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00 pm, but feel free to join some of us for an earlier dinner.

Not in Seattle? There is an excellent chance you live close to one of the 227 other chapters of Drinking Liberally.

I know…I shouldn’t pick on the pathetic. But I will anyway.

Two weeks ago, after an Elway poll came out with mixed news for Sen. Maria Cantwell, I did a preliminary assessment of Cantwell’s vulnerability to a Republican challenger. I didn’t find the minor weaknesses uncovered by the Elway poll overly concerning. The poll didn’t do head-to-head match-ups for a general election, but it did find 46% would vote to keep Cantwell in office, and 36% would vote to replace her—a result almost identical that at this point in the 2006 election cycle.  

My non-concern also reflected evidence from a much richer series of data from Survey USA’s regular tracking polls. They show Cantwell’s recent approval bouncing erratically from about 40% to 55%, with the most recent one at 49%.

Now Public Policy Polling has released a new poll that sheds more light on Cantwell’s lack of vulnerability. The poll finds her with 50% approval and 36 disapproval:

Cantwell is pretty universally well liked within her own party, at 80/7 with Democrats. She’s also on narrowly positive ground with independents at 44/40 and has a 17% approval rating with Republicans, which is a decent amount of crossover support (we generally found Patty Murray with a single digit approval with GOP voters over the course of last year’s campaign.)

The Republican who comes closest to Cantwell is an old favorite- Dino Rossi, who trails 53-40. Susan Hutchison and Dave Reichert do next best, both trailing by a 49-35 margin. Clint Didier trails 51-35 and Cathy McMorris Rodgers has the largest deficit at 50-31. Cantwell wins independent voters by 5-12 points in all of the match ups and picks up 8-9% of the Republican vote while only losing 2-5% of the Democratic vote.

Wow…a 17% approval with Republicans!

The head-to-head match-ups suggest that none of the Republican challengers can do any better against Cantwell than Mike McGavick’s dismal 39.9% result in 2006.

The bottom line:

Cantwell’s reasonably popular and the GOP doesn’t have anyone good to run against her.

This pretty much validates my statement from two weeks ago, “given the absence of a strong opponent on the horizon, I am simply unwilling to fret over a single Elway Poll….”

This new poll illuminates the state of the state Republicans: their candidate pool is nothing short of pathetic. There are almost no Republicans with any statewide appeal. Attorney General McKenna is about it, and he’s looking for opportunities elsewhere.

Last year during the I-1068 signature gathering effort (the legalization initiative that fell about 50,000 signatures short of the required amount to make the ballot), I encountered a number of people in the comment threads here and elsewhere who were at a loss as to how they could help. With that in mind, and with my extra free time over the past two months, I’ve helped Sensible Washington put together a new online resource for folks to help get I-1149 on the ballot this year. You can visit the page here or just click the screenshot below.

This page allows you find businesses that have I-1149 petitions on site. It allows you to locate the Sensible Washington coordinator closest to you in order to obtain petitions or turn yours in. And it has a compilation of festivals, sporting events, concerts, and other events between now and July 4th weekend where you can stand with a clipboard and help us get this initiative on the ballot in November. Get involved, and let’s get it done this year in Washington!

I’ve been critical of Gregoire for various things. And Lee has bee a lot more critical than me especially after the misguided veto of the medical marijuana bill. But unlike Lee, I’d have no problem voting for her again (although I hope she doesn’t run, and if she does, I’ll gladly support someone else in a primary). There are real and important ways that she’s better than Rossi would have been. For one thing, she doesn’t seem to hate teachers like The Seattle Times’ Ed Board.

They spend a whole lot of time not engaging with Gregoire’s stated reasons for opposing the measure (in short, we’re in the middle of revising the way we evaluate teachers because how we currently evaluate them doesn’t work). There’s a little dancing around that, but even then it’s pretty minimal.

It would be great to have the 82,000-strong union on the right side but not at a cost that would be borne by students betting their educational futures on the success of reforms. Requiring districts to take performance into account during layoffs represents a significant game changer. Layoffs are disruptive; robbing classrooms of good teachers is even more harmful.

Lynne (or whoever, but it’s Lynne Varner), just because you saw Waiting For Superman doesn’t mean that teachers are wrong. They’re the ones pushing for smaller class sizes and better teacher pay while your ed board keeps demanding tax cut after tax cut that has the effect of larger class sizes and worse pay. Teachers and their unions are the ones pushing for higher quality K-12 education in Washington.

I’d bet if you wanted, it wouldn’t be too tough to get the teachers on board with these sorts of reforms as part of a grand bargain: If you pushed for 25 student maximum classes and teacher pay in the six figures (for example) along with smarter evaluations of this kind, I bet you could get the teachers unions to support it. Instead you insist on something less meaningful (and quite possibly arbitrary). And your ed board insists on the things that have made gutting education inevitable.

Most teachers are good instructional leaders not threatened by accountability. Uncertainty about the shift is outweighed by the fairness and legitimacy promised from new teacher evaluations coming down the legislative pike. Some districts, including Seattle Public Schools, have adopted better evaluations.

The newer evaluations are still untested and in most cases not even through the legislature yet. Let’s impose them!

The only employees left to fear performance-based layoffs are those who aren’t performing. That’s not who the governor should be protecting.

Or teachers who think perhaps the system won’t work as advertised. Maybe, just maybe, teachers think that the same legislature that’s been slashing education budgets doesn’t have the best interests of children we’re trying to educate at heart.

– I know I’m just a filthy hippie blogger or whatever. Sure HA has accused people of fucking pigs. But at least none of us have given an elected official the TMZ treatment. As the kids say, time for a blogger ethics panel.

– Nixon is Fixin’

– Another reason why Seattle should fish or cut bait on White Center annexation. I hope they keep both libraries open (h/t Ivan on Facebook).

– Vulnerable User Bill signed!

– Hexapod Haiku! (h/t)

Genesis 2:3
Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

Discuss.

Last week’s contest was one of the toughest ever. It was won by Luigi Giovanni for his second in a row and by David D for getting the movie reference. It was the Burger King in Poughkeepsie, NY where they filmed the “Liter of Cola” scene in Super Troopers.

Here’s this week’s, it’s a location in Washington state. Good luck!

The comment threads are dominated by just a few people. Some are great, some are trolls. Some are somewhere in between. But there are a lot of people who don’t comment. So, here on a lazy Saturday is a chance for those of you who don’t comment or don’t comment much to say “hi.” Or don’t: who in their right mind would want to interact with some of the commenters. Comments from regulars will be deleted.