Goldy

File this one away for the general election.

Gotta hand it to my former KIRO radio colleague Dori Monson—he’s never so sure of himself as when he’s absolutely wrong:

Seattle restaurants are closing because of the coming of $15 an hour. … Seattle Magazine had a story about this. Queen Anne’s Grub restaurant closed Feb. 14. Pioneer Square’s Little Uncle shut down Feb. 25. The Boat Street Cafe will close May 30.

The restaurant owners said certainly there are a lot of reasons, but they said that $15 an hour is a major factor in all of this.

Uh-huh. Except, if Dori had actually read the Seattle Magazine piece, he’d know that not a single one of these owners mentioned the minimum wage as a contributing factor toward their restaurant’s closure. Grub’s owner sold out to pursue “future opportunities in this wonderful industry;” a new restaurant will open in its place. Boat Street Cafe’s owner is closing to focus on her three other restaurants and the two new ones she’s opening, while the neighboring Boat Street Kitchen expands into the cafe’s space. And Little Uncle’s owners say they closed because their “Pioneer Square location ultimately does not fit into the goals of our professional life and personal life,”—and are planning to reopen in a new location.

“We did not close our Pioneer Square location due to the new minimum wage,” Little Uncle’s Poncharee Kounpungchart told PubliCola.

“That’s weird, ha. No, that’s not why I’m closing Boat Street,” owner Renee Erickson told the Seattle Times when asked if her closure had anything to do with the minimum wage. (Yay, Bethany!)

So why isn’t Seattle’s $15 minimum wage a factor? It could be because it hasn’t happened yet! Also, the first step of the phase-in will have very little impact on these restaurants’ bottom line.

Starting April 1, small businesses (and these are all small businesses) will be required to pay tipped workers a minimum wage of $10 an hour. But Washington State’s minimum wage is already $9.47 an hour, so that’s not much of a raise. The ordinance requires a “minimum compensation” of $11 an hour—wage plus tips plus benefits—but most back of house staff at full service restaurants in Seattle already earn more than that. Maybe a few dishwashers will get a small raise. This isn’t restaurant armageddon.

In fact, restaurants close all the time—about 17 percent a year in Washington State, according to the article Dori cited, but obviously didn’t bother to read. And there is no evidence that Seattle restaurants are closing any faster than they normally do.

In any case, correlation doesn’t equal causation. So why Dori, who denies climate science, would find a handful of restaurant closures to be irrefutable proof of the “real world consequences” of a higher minimum wage, seems strange. Unless, of course, Dori couldn’t actually give a shit about the truth.

Because if there’s any company that is dedicated to protecting the best interests of its workers, it’s Boeing:

The Machinists union on Monday asked for an election so about 2,400 Boeing production workers in South Carolina can decide whether they want union representation.

The aeronautics giant immediately responded that a union is not in the best interests of the company, the workers or the state.

Also not in the best interests of Boeing workers, apparently, is keeping their jobs here in Washington State. Or something. But we should trust Boeing management to always do what’s best for their workers.

Exodus 31:15
Whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

Discuss.

If the Seattle Times editorial board is so “depressed” about Republican science denial, perhaps they might want to stop endorsing Republicans?

THE state Senate this week had a brief but telling debate about climate change. It ended, depressingly, with a mostly party-line vote that very well could have taken place years earlier, with Republicans resisting the science on humankind’s clear role in reshaping our global climate.

Seriously… how many of these idiots has the Seattle Times endorsed?

If there’s anything the Seattle Times editorial board hates more than the $15 minimum wage, it’s unions!

It is easy to substitute McDonald’s corporate face for the word “franchise” and feel no pang of sympathy. But in reality, franchise owners are often small, family-owned businesses, which get the use of a copyright, advertising, training and group buying discounts. In exchange, franchises typically pay between 4 and 7 percent of gross profits.

Unions dislike this business model and the low wages usually paid by quick-serve retailers, and have worked with some success to unionize fast-food workers. In the political pressure cooker of the $15 Now movement last year, Seattle Mayor Ed Murray and the City Council sided with the unions, and against the small-business owners who are franchisees.

… In siding with the union pressure, Seattle sided against not only fast food chains, but also against pet groomers, barbers, businesses providing in-home care to elders and people with disabilities, and others.

Yup, that’s the Seattle Times’ narrative, and they’re sticking to it: this is a struggle for survival by small, locally-owned businesses (like McDonalds, Burger King, and Subway) against the dastardly political machinations of the IBFFWS (the International Brotherhood of Fast Food Workers or Something), the all-powerful—yet curiously nonexistent—fast food workers union!

What a load of crap.

To be clear, there is no fast food workers union, and while there was certainly a successful effort to organize fast food workers, there was no real attempt to actually unionize them—a virtually impossible task given our weak labor laws and the franchised structure of the fast food industry. So no, the mayor and the council most certainly did not “side with the unions.” They sided with the fast food workers who risked their jobs by walking out in demand of a $15 minimum wage.

The Seattle Times’ effort to spin this into a clash between small business and BIG LABOR is simply bullshit. The story of declining wages in America is the story of the declining bargaining power of labor, and fast food franchise workers are the most disenfranchised workers of all. “We beat them on the federal level, and we beat them on the state level,” International Franchise Association lobbyist Dean Heyl recently bragged at a meeting called by the Koch-backed ALEC to strategize opposition to local minimum wage hikes like Seattle’s. And that’s what this lawsuit is really about: a Koch/ALEC/IFA plot to keep fast food workers as powerless as possible.

Shame on the Seattle Times.

Numbers 31:7-18
They attacked Midian as the Lord had commanded Moses, and they killed all the men. All five of the Midianite kings—Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba—died in the battle. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword.

Then the Israelite army captured the Midianite women and children and seized their cattle and flocks and all their wealth as plunder. They burned all the towns and villages where the Midianites had lived. After they had gathered the plunder and captives, both people and animals, they brought them all to Moses and Eleazar the priest, and to the whole community of Israel, which was camped on the plains of Moab beside the Jordan River, across from Jericho. Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the community went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was furious with all the generals and captains[a] who had returned from the battle.

“Why have you let all the women live?” he demanded. “These are the very ones who followed Balaam’s advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the Lord at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the Lord’s people. So kill all the boys and all the women who have had intercourse with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves.

Discuss.

That former gubernatorial shoo-in Rob McKenna is a crappy lawyer is no secret. But writing on his blog (yes, McKenna is now a lowly blogger like me!), McKenna seems intent on proving that he’s also a really crappy economist:

As the House debated a $12 minimum wage, Rep. Matt Manweller (R-13), who is also a political science professor at Central Washington University, had apparently heard enough of tortured economic arguments from the other side.

His speech held the House in rapt attention – no mean feat. Of course, the bill passed anyway, on a party-line 51-47 vote, but Manweller’s speech is truly worth your time.

And McKenna is right: Manweller’s speech is truly worth your time… if you want some insight into the sort of bullshit Trickle Down orthodoxy that would have guided McKenna’s economic agenda had he won the governor’s mansion. But if you’re interested in learning how the economy really works, not so much.

Insisting that when wages go up, employment necessarily goes down, Manweller is “baffled” he tells us, that there are so many people who simply do not understand “the law of demand,” angrily denouncing the $12 minimum wage as “the most anti-science bill” ever! Which would be a powerful condemnation indeed, if “the law of demand” was, you know, an actual law. But of course, it’s not. Physics is a natural science, and the law of gravity is an undeniable natural law. But Adam Smith was a moral philosopher, and supply and demand, at best, is just a broad generalization. To insist, as Manweller does, that the labor market would behave in the exact same way as the market for carbon, or health care, or private jets, is just plain stupid. (As is that oft repeated straw man that asks if $12 is so good, why not $50?)

For all his apoplectic eye-rolling, Manweller isn’t actually a bad speaker, exuding an authoritative air grounded in a profound sense of passion, commitment, and total delusion. But the last gubernatorial candidate to follow Manweller’s advice on the minimum wage, didn’t do too well. So publicly fawning over “The Nutty Professor” speaks as poorly of McKenna’s political acumen as does of his economic.

Some time over the next few weeks or months there will be another mass shooting in Washington State, because there always is. And then another shooting a few weeks or months after that. And so on.

And we will eventually learn from family members that one or more of these shooters had severe mental health problems—because they almost always do—and at that point, Democratic state Representative Pat Sullivan’s hands will be soaked in blood.

Assuming Sullivan (D-Covington) is still a state representative, that is.

Late last week, at the behest of the gun lobby, Sullivan killed in committee House Bill 1857, which would have allowed family members or law enforcement to petition the court to issue an “extreme risk protection order” temporarily enjoining a person from possessing dangerous weapons. To be clear, this was no “coming for your guns” kinda bill: Such an order could not have been granted willy-nilly, but only on the finding of “clear, cogent, and convincing evidence” that:

• the subject of the petition poses a significant danger of personal injury to himself, herself, or another by having a firearm or dangerous weapon considering specific factors; and
• Ÿ the order is necessary because less restrictive alternatives have been tried and found ineffective or are inadequate or inappropriate for the subject’s circumstances.

As we tragically learned from both the Cafe Racer and Jewish Federation shootings, family members are often fearful of and for the shooter, but lack the legal tools to keep deadly weapons out of the hands of their mentally ill kin. The family of Isla Vista shooter Elliot Rodger even warned law enforcement that he was a danger, but lacking evidence sufficient for an involuntary commitment (an understandably high bar) there was no legal path to keep him from purchasing guns. Had something like HB 1857 been available, Rodger and his six victims might still be alive today.

The public testimony on HB 1857 was overwhelmingly supportive. Sarah Whitford, a cousin of one of Rodger’s victims, and a 47th LD constituent of Sullivan, pleaded with her representative to help prevent future tragedies:

“In the days that followed the shooting, we learned that the shooter’s family reported their concerns about his mental state to law enforcement, concerned that he was a danger to himself or others. In response, police visited his apartment and questioned him, but with no legal authority to search his belongings or seize his weapons, under California state law, they left. They left. It was a moment that could have prevented a mass shooting and saved not only Veronika and the other five victims, but the shooter, himself. And because of that moment – that very second when everyone who could have stopped this tragedy threw up their hands, genuinely helpless to do something – that is why I’m here.”

But Sullivan, who enjoys an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association, killed the bill, refusing to let it come up for a vote in the Appropriations Committee. And who knows how many more innocent people will die without this sensible reform?

It was a totally calculated political move on Sullivan’s part—only the problem for Sullivan is, he calculated wrong. Sullivan cravenly figures a Democrat like him needs NRA support to win reelection in his Republican-leaning swing district, and maybe that was true a decade ago when he first won his seat. But that was before Sandy Hook and a string of other mass killings (almost all at the hands of shooters who might have been stopped by the provisions embodied in HB 1857) changed the national conversation on guns. In fact, 57.4 percent of voters in Sullivan’s 47th LD approved 2014’s historic gun backgrounds check Initiative 594, almost two points better than the 55.6 percent Sullivan managed against an underfunded Republican opponent.

I-594 was so popular in Washington State that the allegedly almighty NRA put up only a token resistance. So does Sullivan really believe that the NRA is going to spend big to defend him against a pro-gun Republican? Did he really think there wouldn’t be a price to pay from a surging gun reform movement thousands strong (backed by the likes of Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, and my boss, Nick Hanauer) in retaliation for killing their number one legislative priority this session?

That’s just plain stupid. And it’s also a display of a stunning lack of political leadership on the part of House Speaker Frank Chopp for failing to impose the party discipline necessary to get HB 1857 to the floor for a vote. As majority leader, Sullivan is the number two man in the house Democratic leadership, and Chopp just let him commit political suicide. And the 47th isn’t a seat the Democrats are likely to win back anytime soon once Sullivan is gone.

Democrats need to understand that times have changed. It’s the NRA that’s now the paper tiger, and the gun reform movement they need to fear. And I sure hope it doesn’t require taking out Sullivan in 2016 to teach Democrats that lesson.

Most 1 percenters just don’t know what to do with all their filthy lucre. Some rich people collect art. Other rich people collect cars or even houses. But Nick Hanauer, America’s premier self-loathing plutocrat, seems intent on ostentatiously collecting ex-Stranger writers.

So welcome, Paul Constant, to Nicktopia—the land of milk and honey! (No, really: Both milk and honey are available in our office’s well-stocked kitchen, along with a variety of free snacks and beverages.)

If there’s anybody who knows what Paul is going through right now, it’s me, but I can honestly tell him that it gets better. The worst thing about leaving The Stranger is leaving our brilliant and talented co-workers behind. (And our awful/wonderful readers—God I miss Slog.) But as Paul will soon learn, the best thing about leaving The Stranger is just about everything else: more pay, more freedom, more influence, better working conditions, and potentially, a much larger audience.

At first, Paul will be doing pretty much what I was hired to do: read, think, talk, and write about public policy. Mostly income inequality, some guns. Our ambitious charge is nothing less than rewriting our nation’s economic narrative into one that recognizes the primacy of people over money. But over time, we intend to build out a little platform of our own where we can think out loud about a range of issues. So if, say, you lament the loss of Paul’s 2016 election coverage on Slog, don’t despair. You’re not alone. Nick didn’t hire Paul and me to silence us.

And finally, if the timing looks suspicious, I want to be clear that Paul did not leave The Stranger to come to work for Nick. We had no prior discussions. That Paul landed on his feet (and 28 floors up!) so quickly after his abrupt departure from The Stranger is a testament to Paul’s talent and work ethic.

So, yeah. Welcome, Paul. And don’t make me look bad by writing too much too quickly.

Proverbs 31:6-7
Let beer be for those who are perishing,
wine for those who are in anguish!
Let them drink and forget their poverty
and remember their misery no more.

Discuss.

Remember when Andrew Friedman, the virulently anti-$15 owner of the Capitol Hill bar Liberty was given precious column inches in The Stranger to warn readers that a $15 minimum wage would surely destroy local small businesses?

“Local independent businesses WILL close, many of your neighbors WILL be out of work,” the capslockian Friedman declared, arguing that his 5 percent margins were too small to absorb the cost of paying his employees a living wage.

Well, on Friday night, not quite nine months after Seattle’s $15 minimum wage was approved, and just one month before the first phased-in hike goes into effect, Friedman opened his second Capitol Hill bar, the ironically named “Good Citizen.” Which, if you take Friedman at his word, is kinda weird.

So I guess that makes Friedman either the world’s worst businessman, or a pathological liar.

Today’s suicide of Missouri State Auditor Tom Schweich, a Republican frontrunner for governor, didn’t strike me as much of a political story apart from the usual cautionary tale of how guns don’t make you safer. But this column from St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial page editor Tony Messenger just made the story quite a bit weirder:

I have no idea why Schweich killed himself. But for the past several days he had been confiding in me that he planned to accuse the chairman of the Missouri Republican Party, John Hancock, with leading a “whisper campaign” among donors that he, Schweich, was Jewish.

Unless he left a note, we’ll never know for sure why Schweich shot himself. But an anti-semitic smear campaign coming from the state GOP chair? That sounds totally believable. Missouri is one fucked up state.

In a guest op-ed in the Seattle Times, former Washington State Republican Party Chair Chris Vance argues that the state needs to lift the absurd 1 percent cap on growth in revenue from property taxes:

Counties spend 70 to 80 percent of their general-fund revenues on law enforcement, and the growth of those funds are not keeping up with the rate of inflation and population increases. Part of the problem is due to the fact that so little sales-tax revenue is generated in unincorporated areas.

But the bigger issue is the 1 percent cap on property tax revenue. King County receives 43 percent of its general-fund revenue from the property tax. The math is obvious: Capping that revenue growth at 1 percent a year makes it virtually impossible for the county to even keep up with inflation.

It’s not Vance’s arguments that are so significant here; as he says, “the math is obvious,” and always has been. What’s new here is that these words are coming out of the mouth of a Republican. If Republicans are beginning to admit that strangling local government isn’t the solution to all our problems, then perhaps there is hope yet.

The rest of Vance’s column, I’m not so sure of. But you can be sure of two things: 1) He just pissed off a lot of people in his own party by voicing this heresy outloud, and 2) he wouldn’t be writing this if there weren’t already other people in his own party voicing these thoughts privately.

I got an email this morning from Washington Healthplanfinder (Washington State’s Obamacare health insurance exchange) informing me that “an incorrect premium amount of $1229.61 was withdrawn from your bank account on Monday, Feb. 23.” And sure enough, it was. That’s exactly triple my actual monthly premium.

So I contacted the Exchange to find out how widespread this error was, and was quickly forwarded the following official statement from CEO, Richard Onizuka:

“On Monday, Feb. 23, the Exchange was made aware that a portion of Washington Healthplanfinder Qualified Health Plan customers had an incorrect amount withdrawn from their bank account during our standard monthly payment process. The issue affected 13,000 customer accounts that had previously set up automatic payment through their online account.

We are working closely with our system integrator, Deloitte, to reverse the incorrect withdrawals as quickly as possible, but no later than the next 48 hours. We have notified affected customers of this issue and will provide final confirmation when the payment issue has been resolved.

We apologize to our impacted customers and are working to correct the problem to minimize any further inconvenience they may have already experienced.”

Fortunately, I no longer work at The Stranger, and am no longer living month to month, so I had plenty of cushion in my checking account to cover this unexpected withdrawal. But I’m guessing a lot of the other 13,000 affected customers weren’t so lucky. I asked Exchange spokesperson Bethany Frey whether the Exchange would cover customers’ overdraft and bounced check charges, and she replied “Yes..”

… some of the banks may waive the fees automatically once the transactions are reversed. However, if the charges stand, customers can call our customer support center who will track the issue and send out a reimbursement.

It might be a hassle, sure. But it’s good to see the Exchange acting proactively.

Other than that, my experiences with the Exchange have overall been very positive. I initially signed up for Obamacare in the immediate wake of being fired, and received a generous federal subsidy and reduced deductible until I found full time work. The $409.87 unsubsidized premium I now pay for a silver plan with Group Health is a much better value than what I was previously able to buy on the individual market. (For various reasons I’m currently paid as a contractor, but in case you’re wondering, yes, my employer reimburses me for my monthly premium.) So I hate to see screw ups like this tarnish the reputation of a program that has benefited so many people.