Goldy

Our state’s editorial boards love to complain about the budget impasse in Olympia, but for many years they have played a key role in the obstruction, consistently opposing any substantive new tax—especially on income—as fervently as the most dyed-in-the-wool anti-tax Republican. Until now:

A proposal in the Senate would apply a 7 percent capital-gains tax to 0.1 percent of the state’s residents, or about 7,500 residents. It would only apply to gains over $250,000 for individuals or $500,000 for couples.

Instead of punting to committees and next year’s Legislature, they should buckle down and make the choice to begin taxing capital gains.

That’s the Seattle Times editorial board making the case that a “capital-gains tax is best option to fund education.” Seriously. And while we’ve been seeing their position evolve over the past few months, it’s still pretty stunning to see them state their support for the tax so bluntly.

And then there’s this from today’s Olympian:

A key element of our state’s F grade for effort was the comparatively low percentage of the state’s economic output that Washington has invested through taxes into K-12 schools. Part of the problem is our over-reliance and regressive tax system that ignores a large share of economic activity including the sales of services and such income-producers as capital gains.

I sometimes joke that I’m the only non-lawmaker who still reads the editorial pages, but of course that’s not true. Editorial board endorsements may not be nearly as influential as they were even a decade ago, but they still play a role in shaping public opinion. Or at least, reinforcing it. And anti-tax legislators no longer have the “serious” people behind them in obstructing all efforts to tax income.

Washington’s tax structure is absurdly regressive. I’ve been saying that since my very first blog post, more than 11 years ago. There’s simply no arguing with that fact. And now the editorial boards have finally acknowledged that our revenue system is insufficient as well. Republican lawmakers should take note that they are on the wrong side of the editorial boards on this issue, and that if we fail to pass the additional revenue necessary to satisfy McCleary, the editorial boards won’t be shy about pointing out which lawmakers are to blame.

Given my fierce criticism over the years, you might think that I’d hate to give the editorial boards credit for finally advocating for responsible tax policy. Not at all. Responsible tax policy is all I ever really wanted. And it’s great to see the Seattle Times on board.

[Cross-posted at Civic Skunkworks]

Genesis 1:24-28
And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Genesis 2:7-22
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

[…] And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Discuss.

It’s maybe not the most shockingly dishonest thing the Seattle Times editorial board has ever printed—that would be this. But in terms of sheer disrespect for the intelligence of their readers, it’s hard to sink any lower than this unapologetic libel of Mayor Ed Murray’s proposed Move Seattle levy:

The size of Move Seattle is breathtaking. The property-tax bill for a $450,000 house would nearly double, to about $275 a year. That won’t help rapidly escalating rents or middle-class homeowners dealing with rising home values.

And you know what else won’t help rapidly escalating housing costs? Lying.

To be clear, Move Seattle would not double your property-tax bill. It wouldn’t even come close. It would double the amount you’re paying on the expiring Bridging the Gap levy, but that amounts to only a $145 increase on a $450,000 home—just 3.3 percent of the total property-tax bill (and a mere .03 percent of the value of your home)—not the 100 percent increase that the editors imply. Big difference.

To understand how breathtaking this lie is, imagine if “Property-Tax” Bill was an actual living, breathing human being. The editors’ assertion is so clearly erroneous, misleading, and defamatory that Bill could easily sue the paper for libel, and win big!

No doubt the proposed levy deserves careful scrutiny; all levies do. But so does the editors’ larger implication that Seattle homeowners are overtaxed: “Seattle is the city that doesn’t say no to taxes,” the editors emphasize in a pull-quote.

And yet according to the tax records on my own median-value home, my property-tax rate has actually gone down over the past decade, from 1.06 percent of assessed value in 2004 to only 0.96 percent in 2014! Compared to a lot of other cities, that’s a bargain, especially considering that we don’t even have an income tax. Despite rising property values, in raw dollars, my property-tax bill has barely outpaced inflation.

Yes, we pass a lot of levies here in Seattle, and we tend to pass them with ease. But these levies are constantly expiring. So while it may feel like we’re always being asked to raise our own taxes, our effective property-tax rate is actually quite low, and has remained low over time. In fact, tack on this allegedly “breathtaking” Move Seattle levy, and my property-tax rate would still be less than it was back in 2004.

Not that you’d ever know this from reading the blatantly misleading op-ed pages of the Seattle Times.

Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.

Discuss.

I’ve been meaning to tear into Danny Westneat for his credulous puff piece on the state senate Republican majority, but haven’t had the time. Fortunately, Bill Lyne at the United Faculty of Washington State blog has done it for me:

On [higher education], he’s convinced that “the Republicans blew the Democrats out of the water. The GOP,” he tells us, “is proposing to slash tuition but at the same time send tens of millions of dollars to the universities to make up the difference.”  Representative Hunter said the same thing about this that we here at the blog tried to say to Westneat the last time he slobbered over the Republican tuition proposal: It’s not true.  The Republicans say they provide enough money to cover the tuition cut, but the cold, hard numbers in their budget say they do not.  Go read it, Danny.  Better yet, call the university budget offices and see what they say.  The Republican rhetoric on tuition sounds great, but the gap between that rhetoric and the reality of their budget would leave lots of students actually paying more in tuition because it would take them longer to get their degrees.

Read the whole thing. It’s worth it.

As for Westneat, well, sigh. I know he likes to think of himself as an independent voice adrift in a sea of partisan bickering—an equal opportunity eye-roller, or something. But more often than not, he’s just part of the problem, cynically working to erode the public’s faith in government rather than working to offer and advance creative solutions.

Which is a shame, because Westneat has both the talent and the platform to make a difference.

So, self-described “democratic socialist” Bernie Sanders, who has never ever run for office before as a Democrat, slaps the big “D” next to his name for a presidential run, and that’s totally kosher. In fact, a lot of rank and file Dems are thrilled with his candidacy. And now former Rhode Island senator and governor Lincoln Chafee declares his candidacy for the Democratic nomination, and the Democratic National Committee sends out an email welcoming the ex-Republican to the race, and that’s cool.

But local Dems wanting to endorse socialist Kshama Sawant for a non-partisan council race—that apparently is some sort of monstrous outrage or something.

Go figure.

Longtime readers know I’ve never been a fan of the Transportation Security Administration. So I wasn’t the least surprised to read this:

The Department of Homeland Security on Monday reassigned the acting director of the Transportation Security Administration and ordered the agency to revise its security procedures after screeners at airport checkpoints failed to detect weapons and other prohibited items 95 percent of the time in a covert test.

… In the investigation, undercover agents were able to get prohibited items through security checkpoints in 67 of 70 instances, according to ABC News, which first reported the findings.

I’m not a terrorist, but if I were, I’m pretty sure I’d have no problem sneaking prohibited items through airport security. In fact, no sneaking required. Twice, I’ve inadvertently passed bottles of water through security—once in the outer mesh pocket of my backpack, and once in my back pocket. On multiple occasions I’ve forgotten to take my toiletries out of my carry-on luggage before scanning. And once, I flew round trip between Seattle and Philadelphia only to realize after the fact that I’d left a 10-inch serrated knife in the bottom of my backpack.

Oops.

The truth is, there is nothing that TSA has done at the security checkpoint since 9/11 that would have prevented another 9/11, because that was achieved entirely by requiring reinforced cockpit doors. That was the weak point in the system—a secure cockpit door combined with the memory of 9/11 is all that is needed to prevent a similar tragedy. (On the other hand, a locked cockpit door apparently played a crucial role in enabling the suicidal crash of Germanwings Flight 9525, so there’s that.)

What would I do to improve the system? Drop the ban on liquids and gels,  and go back to simple metal detectors. One good bomb-sniffing dog would be a helluva lot more effective than a dozen TSA agents ogling at porno-scanners.

Commercial air travel is by far the safest form of transportation. TSA’s security theater mostly just succeeds in making it less comfortable and convenient.

If you want to know why the Washington State legislature can’t seem to pass a budget, it’s because Republicans have forgotten how to do math.

Oh, I’m not talking about budget math; Republicans have never been very good at that. I’m talking about electoral math. The Democrats control the state house. The Democrats control the governor’s mansion (and have for over 30 years). The Democrats control both US senate seats, six of ten US house seats, and seven of eight statewide executive offices. The Democratic nominee has won Washington State in seven straight presidential elections.

Washington is a Democratic state.

Yet weirdly, Republicans believe their three-seat majority in the state senate somehow gives them an electoral mandate to unilaterally impose their will on the rest of the state:

Sen. Don Benton, R-Vancouver, said Democrats are wasting taxpayers’ dollars by keeping lawmakers in Olympia longer.

“There’s just one thing standing in the way of a deal — the House Democrats’ unreasonable insistence on raising taxes solely for the sake of raising taxes,” Benton said in an email.

Right. It’s the Democrats who are standing in the way of a deal. Gimme a fucking break.

Look, the Republicans control the state senate, so they deserve something. Can’t pass a budget without them. No doubt about that. But compromise is a two-way street, and the problem is that today’s Republican Party is ideologically incapable of compromise on many key issues. For example, taxes. A majority of Republicans will never vote to approve something called a “tax.” For any reason. Ever. So they demand that the Democrats fold entirely on that.

Then there is transit. The Republicans largely have the transportation funding proposal they want—lots of tasty pork for their home districts. But they’re ideologically opposed to funding light rail, even when it’s not their money. And so they refuse to give Sound Transit the $15 billion in local taxing authority it needs to go to voters with a package that builds enough rail in each of the subareas to give it a chance of passing. Instead, they think they have an electoral mandate to insist on an ST3-crippling $11 billion in authority—not enough to get to either Tacoma or Everett, and not enough to get to both West Seattle and Ballard. Because Republicans can’t do the electoral math.

But the bigger danger would be if the Democrats can’t do the electoral math either.

The Democrats control two-thirds of state government. And if they want to hold on to the two-thirds they have (and have a hope of retaking the senate) then they can’t disillusion the Democratic base by rewarding the three-seat senate Republican majority for their uncompromising obstruction. Politically, capitulation is neither a responsible nor viable option.

The Republicans control only one-third of government. Give them a third of what they want. If Republicans want anymore than that, force them to make a case for it at the polls.

Exodus 35:2
For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a day of sabbath rest to the LORD. Whoever does any work on it is to be put to death.

Discuss.

Bill Finkbeiner, the former Republican state senate majority leader, has an op-ed in the Seattle Times urging lawmakers to give Sound Transit the full $15 billion taxing authority it needs to extend light rail to Everett, Tacoma, Redmond, West Seattle and Ballard.

Today, when we wonder how we are going to get from here to there in the future, the light-rail system, with all of its critics and detractors, looks like our best hope.

Somewhat fortuitously, our new growth seems to be centering in our urban cores. This is a sharp contrast to the last growth cycles, which saw new homes expand to ever distant exurbs. This new density increases the number of people who can realistically be moved in their daily lives by light-rail infrastructure and makes an even stronger case for the transportation solutions being offered by Sound Transit.

The Sound Transit board has asked the Legislature for the authority to present a $15 billion mass-transit funding package to voters in 2016, and the Legislature needs to give them that full authority, now.

Interestingly, the Seattle Times merely describes Finkbeiner as “a former state legislator,” rather than the Republican majority leader that he was (you know, back before the Republican Party went totally tea-bagger crazy). Not sure why they would want to hide this biographical detail from readers, as for all the cogent arguments that he makes, it’s Finkbeiner’s Republican pedigree that is the hook here.

A Republican enthusiastically endorses expanding light rail. That’s the story here.

That it is a story, well, that’s a whole nother story.

If Seattle businesses are closing up shop in response to our $15 minimum wage, you wouldn’t know it from our falling unemployment rate:

King County’s unemployment rate reach[ed] a low not seen since April 2008, data released Tuesday by the state Employment Security Department show.

King County’s unemployment rate in April was 3.3 percent, compared to 4 percent in March and 4.1 percent in April 2014.

Okay, monthly unemployment data is not seasonally adjusted, so the rate will surely rise in May and June as college and high school graduates join the workforce (like it does every year). And of course, it will take years—maybe even a couple decades—to fully suss out the employment effect (if any) of Seattle’s phased-in $15 minimum wage.

But again, if employers are cutting back on hiring in anticipation of rising labor costs—like $15 critics insist a rationally self-interested employer would—you wouldn’t know it from our falling unemployment rate.

But, you know, one crappy chain pizza place closed, so screw the data.

[Cross-posted to Civic Skunkworks]

Leviticus 11:20-22
All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be regarded as unclean by you. There are, however, some flying insects that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.

Discuss.

I’ll sure miss the rhetorical utility of describing Seattle as “the fastest growing big city in America” now that Austin has seized back that mantle, though we’re still one of the fastest growing big cities in America—tied with Ft. Worth for third—so, whatever. But if you ask me, the Seattle Times piece on the new census numbers kinda buries the lede:

Also in the new data: Seattle grew 77 percent faster than surrounding King County in 2014. This marks the third consecutive year that Seattle has outpaced its suburbs.

This trend is not just remarkable, it is historic. The surrounding areas of King County had been adding population at a faster clip than Seattle for more than 100 years, and it’s not just in Seattle where this trend has reversed: for the first time in many decades, the majority of big American cities are growing faster than their suburbs. And there’s absolutely no reason to expect this trend won’t continue for the near future.

Whatever the reasons for this demographic shift, it is a mixed blessing. Obviously, we want and need our cities to grow more dense. Dense cities are more walkable, sustainable, and energy efficient than suburban sprawl. So we want to encourage urban density. But the flood of newcomers is forcing housing costs up, and shutting many middle and lower income residents out.

Seattle added nearly 15,000 new residents in 2014, nearly 18,000 the year before that, and new construction is not keeping pace with demand. While this imbalance is not the only cause of our growing affordable housing crisis, we obviously need to build more housing—some of it outside the market. And to do this, we’re going to have to deny our NIMBYist instincts that welcome growth everywhere but in our own neighborhoods.

Homeowners love it when their own property values rise. They’ll just have to learn to accept the change that comes with it. And that change must include a taller, denser, and more in-filled Seattle.

In case you’re wondering, the Seattle Times editorial board isn’t too pleased with today’s one-day teacher walkout in the Seattle, Mercer Island, and Issaquah school districts, because the children!

The only clear consequence of Tuesday’s walkout by Seattle teachers is that students will lose one precious day of instruction.

Oh no! The children are going to lose one precious day of school!

This one-day protest extends the last day of school from Monday, June 15 — ending on a Monday is a strange decision itself — to Tuesday, June 16.

Wait. Um, doesn’t the second sentence in their editorial totally contradict their first? (Not to mention their entire thesis?)

I know, I know… their argument is that moving the day from now to then makes the school year functionally one day shorter, but that’s just plain stupid. Their lede is factually wrong. Jesus. What a bunch of fucking morons.

I was going to fisk their entire editorial, but if they’re not going to take their work seriously then neither am I.

Incumbents didn’t do so well at tonight’s 37th Legislative District Democrats endorsement meeting, with port commissioner Courtney Gregoire and city council members Tim Burgess, Sally Bagshaw, and Bruce Harrell all failing to win endorsements. It was a particularly poor showing for Harrell in his home district (well, one of his homes, anyway). Lorena Gonzalez, running to fill Sally Clark’s vacated seat, was the only council candidate to win an endorsement. It was “no consensus” for everyone else.

All in all, the 37th LD Dems displayed a lot of discontent with Democratic incumbents.

Of course, the headline match was between Socialist incumbent Kshama Sawant and establishment Dem challenger Pamela Banks—or rather, between Banks and the vote for “no endorsement.” The rules prohibit the 37th from endorsing any candidate who refuses to claim to be a Democrat, and that left Sawant ineligible for endorsement. So Sawant backers pushed for a “no endorsement” vote.

“No endorsement” led after three rounds, but not by the 60 percent margin necessary to win the day, so bizarrely, that led to a final “yes” or “no” vote on a dual endorsement for Banks and distant third, Rod Hearne. No crushed yes, leaving an official position of “no consensus.” (By the rules, a no consensus race can be reconsidered after the August primary.)

It was a victory of sorts for Sawant—a demonstration of her relatively strong support among active Democratic Party members. Establishment types like to soothe themselves with the idea that Sawant’s vocal support is a mirage: the result of the same 50 folks packing the room at every event, or something. But only dues-paying members and PCOs can vote at LD endorsement meetings. Sawant simply has a lot of support among rank and file Dems. And why shouldn’t she? No other candidate speaks more directly to Democrats on core Democratic issues than Sawant.