You’re gonna be hearing a lot over the next few days about the new Elway Poll that just came out, focusing on this November’s $17.8 billion Roads & Transit measure (shorter Elway: it’s damn close,) and I’ll be adding my own spin to the cycle as soon as I’ve had time to digest the numbers. But I wanted to quickly comment on another survey Elway summarizes, almost as an afterthought: that showing that when it comes to making the Director of Elections an elected office, voters aren’t nearly as enthusiastic as most of us assumed.
According to Elway only 45% of respondents favored an elected director, with 26% opposed and 29% undecided. No doubt proponents would rather have those numbers than the other way around, but it is never a comfortable position to have your measure under 50% this close to an election. It’s a small sample with a relatively high 6.4% margin of error, but dollars to donuts these numbers are raising a few eyebrows.
While I firmly believe the proposed charter amendment is politically motivated bad policy, pure and simple, I never thought there was much of a chance of defeating it at the polls. I could write essays refuting the opponents’ arguments… but arguing the facts is rarely a winning strategy, and I’ve publicly despaired the rhetorical challenge of convincing voters that “more democracy” can be a bad thing.
But perhaps voters don’t need all that much convincing? What the Elway Poll tells us is that voters are sufficiently skeptical of the measure that an adequately funded and competently crafted “No” campaign would stand a good chance of defeating it at the polls. Of course, there is no “No” campaign, and I can’t think of an organization with both the financial resources and the financial stake to fight one.
But if there was, they could win.
Voters can not be expected to make good public policy decisions when it comes to tax measures on ballots.
That goes for initiatives (like Eyman’s tax cut ballot measures).
That ALSO goes for propositins (like Seattle Monorail’s tax grab measure, and Sound Transit’s first tax grab measure, and Sound Transit + RTID’s upcoming MASSIVE tax grab measure).
Voters can be too easily swayed by one-sided, deceptive ads. There will be huge additional taxes needed for transportation even if ST2+RTID is approved. But the voters are not told what those will be, or how big they will be. So voters will have insufficient knowledge to make a good public policy decision on a measure like RTID/ST2.
And now Sims won’t give reasons to vote yea or nay! That is abdicating responsibility. Voters NEED electeds to put this unprecedented transpo measure into perspective, and to explain some of the implications going forward.
Not explaining what this thing means, and what implications it would have in light of the bigger picture of transportation and land use issues, is a failure of leadership. And that goes for Nickels, Sims, Chopp, Murray – none of them are explaining why (or why not) this particular measure is a good idea.
More significantly (in my opinion) is the political leadership is not explaining what Plan B and Plan C are. No question – they should put this plan into perspective by comparing it to the alternatives. And there are very good, much more responsible alternatives.
Obviously the business community likes it – but voters don’t know the details and they can’t possibly understand the implications.
The Elway Poll numbers are worse than useless because those being surveyed can not possibly understand the true implications of approval vs. non-approval.
“You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.” A. Lincoln.
Given what just went down at the King County Council refusing to by some software suggested by Sherril Huff and ripping into her for continued flummoxing at Records and Elections, I have to wonder whether there needs to be a pro-I-25 campaign at all.
For all the gory details go here .
Isn’t more democracy, rather than less, a good thing?
The Piper
Yes! After all, look at the 11% approval rating for congress!
Tim Eyeman has saved me thousands of dollars over the past several years. For that I say…..THANK YOU TIM!!!!
“Isn’t more democracy, rather than less, a good thing?”
No. Think I-695, Seattle Monorail, etc. Voters are idiots, and too-easily manipulated.
@5…CB…
Then let’s just eliminate voting altogether and appoint you benevolent(?) dictator.
Yet somehow I find Lincoln’s dictum more reassuring.
The Piper
Hmmm, Tarkus…
Is there a revenue-raising issue you would NOT characterize as a “tax grab?” Just curious…
Pip
Of course, it’s not a matter of “more democracy” vs. “less democracy.” It’s a straw man.
The issue is: should the largest and most populous (pop. 1,861,300) county in Washington find the most experienced and qualified elections supervisor in the country and hire him/her, or treat the office the way they do in Gray’s Harbor County (pop. 70,000)?
Piper Scott wrote: “Then let’s just eliminate voting altogether and appoint you benevolent(?) dictator.”
You extrapolated an absurdity out of what I wrote. If you were less concerned with obfuscating, and more concerned with debate, you wouldn’t have gone there.
“Eliminate voting?” Hardly a sound move. No, what should be done is that voters should reject the kind of ballot measures that Eyeman and SMP/ST put up for votes. On those kind of “macro” tax and financing measures, the elected representatives should pass the laws, not voters.
See that word *elected* Piper? Eliminating voting and dictatorships are a BAD idea. As is your reckless belief in some kind of ideal of “the majority should determine everything.” Thanks, but a representative democracy is better than what you tout – mob rule.
Why don’t you tell us why you think the voters did a good, smart thing by approving ST 1 and Seattle Monorail Project? Those OBVIOUSLY could have been put together better.
@2: Jeepers, Piper, looks to me like the system worked just fine in this case. The director of records & elections came to the council with a half-baked idea and was rebuffed. End of story, I would think.
Better yet, if she’d been seriously negligent or dishonest, they could have fired her, no need to wait for an election cycle.
Hm…this representative democracy thing might be just crazy enough to work!
-OM
If it wasn’t for Zappini , the council would have taken Ms. Huff’s recommendation at face value and bought said software.
Taking fire from the left AND the right is no way to do business. Clean elections should be a a non-partisan issue.
link to go with above.
When a democratically conducted election goes against someone, a response of “mob rule” evidences less a concern for good government and more a sour grapes attitude; elitists think the great unwashed should always kowtow to their agenda and POV.
You win some, you lose some…but in the long haul and for the long term, the people’s collective wisdom is amazingly astute.
As to whether King County should have an elected rather than appointed auditor…Let’s just ask if the people are satisfied with the performance of what we have now? Heck, even the Democrats on the KC Council would have to say, NO!” given the most recent kerfuffle over software and voting machines. Just when you think things can’t get any worse…they do!
At the statewide level, we elect an individual, the Secretary of State, who’s charged with overseeing elections statewide. I don’t see any groundswell to have that office put under the governor’s authority. Why not have the same for King County?
What everyone wants, or should want, are the fairest possible elections conducted in an unimpeachable manner. Have we seen that? Or have we seen something else?
Some years ago, the people of King County decided that the chief law enforcement officer needed to be directly accountable to them versus being a political appointee of the King County Executive. That seems to have worked out OK.
Given that sovereignty is vested in the people, not the government, the more times the people exercise it, the more often government gets reminded who’s ultimately the boss.
As for initiatives? They serve as a check against the intransigence of government, and they’re an integral part of Washington State governance largely because of the insistence of progressives in the 19th-Century who saw them as the people’s weapon against the control of vested interests, then railroads, et al, over the legislature.
Of course, not all initiatives are perfect. I, too, oft times scratch my head in bewilderment. But it isn’t about me…it’s about US: we the people. My POV on Prop. 1 may well get thumped; I’ll either learn to live with it or move.
Calling voters, “idiots” just because they don’t genuflect at the altar of your brilliance isn’t helpful, it’s elitist. Besides, how can you convince them to vote your way when all you do is insult them and their intelligence? Something about sugar and vinegar…
I-25 has qualified for the ballot and will be voted upon…twice thanks to the antics of the KC Council. Prop. 1 will also be voted upon. The people will decide, and ultimately the people will be the ones who both bear accountability and experience the impacts.
No minority rights will be trampled, no “mob rule” effectuated. Instead, the sovereign will of the people expressed at the ballot box (don’t get me started on the evils of vote-by-mail) will determine these issues, which is exactly what the Founders of the State of Washington intended.
Works for me…
The Piper
Not having a good day typing…
http://www.washblog.com/story/2007/9/18/19326/6168
@11…Delbert…
Amen!
The Piper
It’s only okay to go against the will of the voters if they’ve voted down a liberal idea!!! (well, that’s what I observe coming out of you folks far too often! Ya know–free speech for everyone but conservatives? When a con says something silly, you decry it; but when a liberal says something abhorrent, you simply dismiss it with a “free speech, ya know!!”)
#16: (doing my best liberal imitation) You can’t say “amen”! That’s mixing religion into politics!!!!! shriek!!!!!!
“Isn’t more democracy, rather than less, a good thing?”
I-25 is not democratic. It stipulates that the elections director is voted on in February when people aren’t usually inclined to vote.
A radical minority can then hijack the position.
It’s cynical BIAW run politics at its wost.
If Sheryl Huff is screwing up the job then the council can lean on Sims to replace her. Problem solved. Let the elections director be someone competent to RUN elections (a professional) not someone expert at WINNING elections (just another politician).
The voters have definitely wised up.
They will resoundingly dump the local BIAW-funded Rovian Republicans in 2008.
They will also send a strong message to the Dems when the RTID fails – fix the tax system.
@19 & 20…YLB…
Non-sequitur city…
Given that you’re a member of a radical minority, you and your associates can hijack one of those February elections and get your own candidated elected. Have at it…
Sticking a juicy office like elections director or auditor or whatever on the February ballot ought to rev up voter turnout.
On the one hand you excoriate the voters and the process as BIAW-run, while on the other you claim they’ve wised up. Hmmm…
As far as Sherril Huff and screwing up the job? The question is longer one of “if,” but, rather, of “how much?”
Blogger, Jason Osgood a/k/a Zappini, outed Huff’s hassles before the KC Council, and he’s doing it, per The Seattle Times’ David Postman, “…from the left, in contrast to the opposition we have come to expect from the right and done much to make the movement a bipartisan success.”
I-25’s success will bring “power to the people” in the form of a non-partisan elected official and take it out of the hands of un-elected bureaucrats and their career
politician masters.
What’s not to like about that???
The Piper
Sooo…since you guys aren’t crowing about RTID winning in the polls, it must be losing.
Ron Sims knows that congestion pricing is the way to go, but he cannot burn all of his colleagues by coming out and opposing RTID. I wonder if he is thinking about not running for another term?
It seems to me you will start to see other politicians start to go neutral on this measure as people start to educate themselves on the specifics. I believe that Ron Sims has done some others a favor by providing political cover for them.
The other factor is that people sense that all the things people like Robert Reich and Paul Krugman have been talking about for years are starting to happen. I am not sure people are so willing to take on more taxes during a period of uncertainty.
The fact is, Seattle should take on the burden of completing light rail to Northgate, then if Snohomish County wants it, there should be sharing of the burden north to the County line. Then, Snohomish County can pay for whatever they want to do with it.
But this measure stinks like a fourteen year-old boy’s shoes, and should be defeated by an educated electorate. Anybody who says the people should not decide for their own good is just a fucking fascist. I’ll take representative government by an informed electorate over any other form of government.
Non-sequitur city…
Coming from a master of neither here nor there truthy factoids.
Given that you’re a member of a radical minority, you and your associates can hijack one of those February elections and get your own candidated elected. Have at it…
Rovian Bushite politics (see BIAW for the local version) has been mired in the 20’s and 30’s for a long time. I’m not in that minority.
Sticking a juicy office like elections director or auditor or whatever on the February ballot ought to rev up voter turnout.
The odds are against it. Why not put it in November? Ah… The easier it is for BIAW for put a radical in there.
On the one hand you excoriate the voters and the process as BIAW-run, while on the other you claim they’ve wised up. Hmmm…
Didn’t say that at all. BIAW, thankfully, has been failing. They succeed when people don’t pay attention.
As far as Sherril Huff and screwing up the job? The question is longer one of “if,” but, rather, of “how much?”
Non-sequitur – as old Pudge would say – shrug. It’s well within the council’s power to vote no confidence.
Blogger, Jason Osgood a/k/a Zappini, outed Huff’s hassles before the KC Council, and he’s doing it, per The Seattle Times’ David Postman, “…from the left, in contrast to the opposition we have come to expect from the right and done much to make the movement a bipartisan success.”
What’s the “movement”? If it’s accountability, I’m all for it. Hey if Sims with the council’s nod keeps making unsuccessful appointments it doesn’t make them look good at all.
I-25’s success will bring “power to the people” in the form of a non-partisan elected official and take it out of the hands of un-elected bureaucrats and their career
politician masters.
Non-partisan? Don’t make me laugh! This is a power play by a corrupt, radical ideologues.
What’s not to like about that???
The most populous county’s election department should be run by a professional – not a political hack at the beck and call of radical minority special interests – like BIAW.