Goldy

Jesse Hagopian is an award-winning history teacher at Garfield High School, an author, an outspoken activist, and a leader of the fight against excessive school testing. And yesterday, near the end of the MLK Day march, he was assaulted by Seattle Police without provocation.

As Hagopian explains in further detail on his Facebook page:

I was marching for Martin Luther King day today–amazing march! At one point after the big main march, group of bike cops set up a line to keep us from marching. Some people walked through the line, but I didn’t. When my phone rang, I turned away from the cops and began walking away to answer the phone. A cop then ran up in my face and pepper sprayed me right in the face. The milk has helped a lot and I’m beginning to feel better. Wish we had a better world.

Hagopian is a public figure of sorts, a fixture at social justice rallies and protests, and a relatively frequent subject of media coverage. He’s not known to be violent in any way, but he is known to be a leader. So not having seen the incident, here’s my bit of informed conjecture as to what might have happened: The police recognized him, saw him reach for his phone, and suspected he might be organizing activities on the ground. So they disabled him.

That’s right. My guess is that the police pepper sprayed Hagopian in order to prevent him from using his phone.

I suppose it’s possible the officer in question is just an asshole who indiscriminately assaulted Hagopian for no apparent reason (or an asshole who recognized Hagopian and saw an opportunity to assault him just because), but in any case, the point is that once again an officer assaulted an innocent person and got away with it.

And yes, pepper spraying somebody in the face is assault. If I were to walk up to you and pepper spray you in the face, I would be charged with assault. And if I were to walk up to a Seattle police officer and pepper spray him in the face I would certainly be charged with assaulting a police officer (assuming I survived the encounter). But police have learned from experience that they have near absolute impunity to pepper spray anybody, with no legal consequences whatsoever. It’s gotten to the point where they even laugh about it. Pepper spray—It’s funny! Ha-ha!

Note that the officer didn’t run up to Hagopian and punch him in the face. That would have left a mark. He would’ve had to then arrest Hagopian and charge him with something (usually resisting arrest and/or assaulting a police officer) in order to avoid facing charges of his own—which, you know, is a hassle. So he pepper sprayed him.

And yes, I can only presume that Hagopian was innocent of any legal transgression, based on the fact that he was neither arrested nor charged. Which raises a related issue: The stunning number of citizens who are pepper sprayed (i.e. assaulted) by police and charged with absolutely nothing. No arrest. No charges. Nada. Because under our current rules of engagement, you apparently don’t have to engage in illegal behavior, present a danger to yourself or others, or refuse to comply with a legal order to be assaulted by the police. The caustic chemical burning your eyes is evidence enough that you were a valid target.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m not totally opposed to pepper spray. I fully support its use as an alternative to deadly force. But its lazy and indiscriminate use as a means of crowd control or for forcing compliance from peaceful citizens should be a fucking crime.

About 2,200 guns were seized at TSA airport checkpoints last year, a 20 percent rise from the year before, and 230 percent more than 2005. And according to the New York Times, “a vast majority of the weapons were loaded and had bullets in the chamber.”

While defense attorneys and law enforcement officials said a vast majority of weapons cases at airports were honest mistakes, advocates of stricter gun laws said the number of incidents was alarming. “People say, ‘I’m so responsible with my gun,’ and here they are forgetting they have them in an airport where there are so many people and kids running around,” said Laura Cutilletta, senior staff attorney for the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in San Francisco.

The case of a toddler fatally shooting his mother after fishing a gun out of her purse in an Idaho Walmart in December shows how easily tragedies can occur.

We need to start treating gun violations the way we treat DUIs. Even a minor violation should result in a suspended license; repeat violations should result the permanent suspension of one’s right to own and carry a gun. These aren’t tragic accidents. Most “accidental” shootings are the result of criminal negligence by people who simply can’t be trusted to responsibly own a gun.

Deuteronomy 23:12-14
Set up a place outside the camp to be used as a toilet area. And make sure that you have a small shovel in your equipment. When you go out to the toilet area, use the shovel to dig a hole. Then, after you relieve yourself, bury the waste in the hole. You must keep your camp clean of filthy and disgusting things. The LORD is always present in your camp, ready to rescue you and give you victory over your enemies. But if he sees something disgusting in your camp, he may turn around and leave.

Discuss.

Raising the minimum wage is very popular. So if Washington State Republicans were smart, they would join with Democrats in passing legislation that raises the state minimum wage to $12 an hour. Or if they really want to be dicks about it, they could try to negotiate the number down to $11.50, or maybe even $11, and still claim credit for increasing the minimum wage. It would boost our economy, make voters happy, and take a potent issue away from Democrats in 2016.

But Republicans won’t join with Democrats in raising the minimum wage. Because Republicans aren’t smart.

To be clear, if I were to walk onto the floor of Washington State’s house or senate chambers wearing a bulletproof vest atop my jacket and tie, I would be removed for violating the dress code. But asshole gun nuts like those pictured above are free to open-carry semi-automatic weapons into the galleries above the chambers. God bless America!

UPDATE: Lt. Governor Brad Owen has announced that openly carried firearms will no longer be allowed in the senate gallery:

Owen said it didn’t make sense to allow people to openly carry firearms while banning backpacks, signs and umbrellas.

Gee, ya think?

A stunning new poll conducted by Hart Research Associates finds that 63 percent of respondents support raising the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour over five years. A less ambitious proposal to raise the minimum wage to $12.50 an hour earns an even more overwhelming 75 percent support, including support from a majority of Republicans. The poll additional finds that 82 percent of respondents support indexing the minimum wage to inflation, while 71 percent of respondents favor eliminating the federal tip credit. The survey of 1002 adults was conducted January 5-7, and has a margin of error of +/- 3.1 percent.

The federal minimum wage currently stands at $7.25 an hour, and at just $2.13 an hour for tipped employees.

Why Democrats aren’t flocking to this issue, I just don’t know. It’s a political no-brainer.

So the apparent success of Car2Go in incentivizing members to give up their personal vehicles—about 2,000 Seattleites, according to the company’s statistics—got me thinking about a recent article I’d seen on what it really means to live and work “close” to transit.

The conventional thinking among urban planners is that few Americans are willing to walk more than a half a mile to a transit stop; after that, ridership supposedly falls off precipitously. But a new study on the impact of proximity to a light rail station on office rents in Dallas found that a quarter of the rent premium persists nearly a full mile from transit, and at least some rent premium can be detected as much as 1.85 miles away.

That’s right: Businesses are willing to pay significantly higher rents to be about a mile from a light rail station. Which clearly implies that a significant portion of their workers are willing to walk that mile. In Texas.

That doesn’t surprise me. I live about a mile from Othello Station, and Link Light Rail has become my primary means of commuting downtown to work. No traffic, no expensive parking, and rarely an unexpected delay. It’s simply much less expensive and more convenient than driving.

To be honest, the majority of days I don’t actually walk the full mile. On days I need to drop off or pick up my daughter on Mercer Island, I park just outside the restricted area around Mt. Baker Station—the closest station to the I-90 bridge. And, I admit, on many other days I drive halfway to Othello Station, due to poor time management on my part, or bad weather. (Mostly poor time management.)

But—and here’s my main observation—I already own a car. If I did not own a car, I certainly wouldn’t buy one to take me a half mile closer to the rail station. I’d just walk it. No big deal.

According to AAA, when you add everything together, the average cost of car ownership comes to $8,876 a year. Of course, you can own a car for less. I figure my car is costing me less than $5,000 a year. But that’s not nothing. And as our transportation options increase—rail, bus, Car2Go, ZipCar, taxi, and yes, even the economically predacious TNCs like Uber and Lyft—more and more Seattleites will choose to steer clear of car ownership.

And the less we own cars, the further we’ll be willing to walk to transit. Having transformed the choice between walking and driving into a choice between walking and owning a car, a one mile walk—even a mile and a half—just won’t seem all that far.

Hey, remember all those times the Seattle Times editorial board lauded the so-called Majority Coalition Caucus—consisting of all 23 Republicans and just two turncoat Democrats—for their bipartisanship? Well, oddly, it seems that caucus math isn’t commutative:

But bipartisanship is already in short supply, just one day into the session. Moments after the two-thirds-rule vote, the minority Senate Democratic caucus engaged in their own parliamentary high jinks, getting conservative Republican state Sen. Pam Roach installed as president pro tempore, a top leadership position, over renegade Democratic state Sen. Tim Sheldon, who caucuses with the GOP.

Right. So 23 Republicans plus 2 Democrats equals bipartisanship, but 2 Republicans plus 23 Democrats equals the opposite. Weird.

Other than that, it’s not actually an awful editorial. I’m beginning to see a glimmer of hope that this revamped editorial board might even be open to endorsing new tax revenue.

In a hardy “fuck you” to turncoat Tim Sheldon, all 23 Democrats joined with two crazy Republicans to elect shooting-spree-waiting-to-happen Pam Roach the new President Pro Tempore of the Washington State Senate. Back in 2010, Roach was famously “physically separated” from her Republican caucus after an internal investigation found that she had repeatedly mistreated Republican staffers. In 2008 she was sanctioned by her caucus for creating an “intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment.” And now she’s their president. Hooray for Democracy!

And so in honor of President Roach’s unique brand of statesmanship, I proudly repost her famous “Roses” speech:

Looks like this is shaping up to be quite a productive legislative session.

It’s great to see the Seattle Times editorial board so enthusiastically on board in support of high quality early education. But honestly guys… the logical next step shouldn’t be all that difficult:

Talking about how beneficial early education can be for kids and families is easy. Finding money for it is a much bigger challenge.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

Early education has emerged as a promising strategy for closing the gap between low- and high-achieving students. Educators and lawmakers, both Democratic and Republican, are increasingly pushing early education as a necessity, rather than a merely “nice to have.”

Still, early education represents less than 1 percent of the state budget. During the 2013-2015 budget cycle, the state put $163 million into the Department of Early Learning.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

During this legislative session, which began Monday, lawmakers should take a hard look at how to significantly boost participation and funding in Washington’s early education programs.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

Statewide, about 41 percent of Washington’s children, ages 3 to 4, are enrolled in an early education program compared with a national average of 47 percent, according to Education Week.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

The state’s main pre-K effort is the Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program, known as ECEAP, that targets children ages 3 to 5 from families earning 110 percent or less than the federal poverty level. For 2014, that means an income of less than $26,235 for a family of four.

Last December, the Washington State Institute for Public Policy reported that children who participated in ECEAP scored better on standardized tests in third and fourth grade than similar children who did not attend the program.

ECEAP shows results, but participation is way too low. During the 2013-2014 school year, 48,259 children were eligible for the program, the state estimated. But the state only funded 8,741 and another 10,390 took part in Head Start, a federally-funded program.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

Therefore, about 60 percent — or more than 29,000 ECEAP-eligible students — were not enrolled in either the state or federal program.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

Gov. Jay Inslee has proposed pumping an additional $156.3 million into early education to add 6,358 slots for ECEAP as well as expanding Early Achievers, a state program that rates and trains child-care providers to provide early learning curriculum.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

The governor’s proposal recognizes the variety of ways to provide early education. Even if the state provided enough ECEAP for all eligible children, there are many other children not eligible.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

Some families prefer to send their kids to child-care centers or keep them at home with relatives. The state does not have a broad, one-size-fits all solution, but it does not have to.

As long as children are receiving some form of high-quality instruction before they enter kindergarten, they are more likely to perform better in later grades.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

Funding for early education pales in comparison to K-12, but that system is taking center stage in the state budget discussion.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

State lawmakers are grappling with how to fund the McCleary ruling, a state Supreme Court decision mandating the state to fully pay for basic education. They also face Initiative 1351, a voter-approved measure that limits class sizes and calls for about 25,000 more school employees. Funding both could cost at least $4 billion during the next biennium, according to lawmakers’ estimates.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

Elected leaders, state and local, advocate for early learning as an investment that will make K-12 students more successful. During what promises to be a tough budget battle, lawmakers must keep in mind it is never too early for a child to succeed academically.

Um… we could always raise taxes.

Seriously. It’s great to see the Seattle Times editorial board finally put its weight behind high quality early learning. Now if only they would put their weight behind raising the tax revenue necessary to pay for it (you know, the way voters just did here in Seattle), we might finally get our state’s three- and four-year-old’s the high quality preschool they deserve and need.

State House Appropriations Committee chair Ross Hunter (D-48) is no idiot. He may not be as smart as he thinks is (hanging out in Olympia will do that to you, because his fellow electeds set such a low bar), but he’s no idiot. I’ve had numerous conversations with Hunter over the years, and there’s no question he’s smart. Often too conventional. Sometimes dead wrong. But smart.

But state Senate Ways & Means chair Andy Hill (R-45), well, I gotta wonder. Never met the guy. Never had so much as an email exchange. So it’s hard for me to judge his intelligence for myself. But what I can say is that if Hill is not an idiot, he sure thinks you are:

But Hill labels as false Hunter’s overall depiction of a budget shortfall in need of new tax revenue.

Hill says Hunter would like you to think it’s either raise taxes or make cuts. But, Hill says, “Remember, we’ve got $3 billion of new money.

Sigh. That old line again—that if the dollar figure of revenue goes up, there can’t possibly be a revenue shortfall, regardless of the rising costs of existing government services or the added costs of meeting new demands. I mean, let’s say your rent rose 7.9 percent last year (the actual average rent hike in Seattle last year), but your wages rose 2 percent. Hey: You’re revenue is up! So quit your whining!

Speaking of which:

“And Ross will say it’s all spent, but it’s all spent on optional things, like collective-bargaining agreements,” Hill added.

Yeah, “optional things.” Like paying government workers. Which, you know, is every government’s biggest cost.

To be clear, what Hill is referring to is the collective bargaining agreement struck between Governor Inslee and the Washington Federation of State Employees. State workers haven’t received a cost of living increase since 2008, a period of time over which inflation has eaten away about 10 percent of their wages. The proposed contract would give state workers a 3 percent raise in 2015, followed by a 1.8 percent raise in 2016—a two-year period over which inflation is projected to rise about 1.8 percent a year. By the end of 2016, adjusted for inflation, state workers would still be earning about 9 percent less than they did back in 2008, even with this raise.

But Hill argues that it is an “optional thing” to ever increase state worker pay again!

Sure makes the job of balancing the budget without raising taxes easy if you can freeze one of your biggest cost drivers by never giving state workers another cost-of-living increase again. Ever.

I’ve other work to do so I can’t fisk all of Hill’s idiotic arguments. But it doesn’t bode well for budget negotiations when the Senate’s budget writer is so vehemently professing such budgetary nonsense.

Leviticus 15:19-20
When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean.

Discuss.

Me: “Would you mind not parking in front of my trash and recycling bins? They won’t get emptied if they’re blocked.”

Lexus SUV-driving asshole: “Move your bins to your driveway.”

Me: “I don’t have a driveway.”

Lexus SUV-driving asshole: “Not my problem.”

I suppose one of the more shocking aspects of yesterday’s Charlie Hebdo massacre was that it happened in the West, where both laws and cultural norms tend to provide near absolute protection to freedom of speech and freedom of the press. “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,” Voltaire is often credited with saying, a quote that while misattributed, still accurately represents both Voltaire’s sentiments and that of the broader French tradition. Here in the US and other modern democracies, a journalist might occasionally risk his job by speaking his mind, but almost never his life or liberty. A free press is absolutely essential to sustaining a functional democracy; indeed, neither can long survive without the other.

That is why, beyond the obvious human tragedy, the assassination of political cartoonists has so united citizens of the free world in outrage and mourning. This was an attack on the most fundamental tenet of modern Western civilization, a principle on which there cannot be an inch of compromise if democracy is to survive.

That said, it would be a mistake to be too Western-centric in our celebration of journalistic courage while ignoring the thousands of journalists who risk their lives pursuing their profession in parts of the world where freedom of the press is denied either in law or in practice. According to Reporters Without Borders, 96 journalists were killed on the job in 2014, while thousands more were arrested, threatened, kidnapped, and assaulted. And a quick scan of the list of victims will find it dominated by Arabic and other Islamic names, journalists who faced death or imprisonment every day of their professional lives.

I have long blogged by the unofficial motto “write fearlessly, or don’t bother writing at all,” but that’s a pose of false bravado that’s easy to assume when writing from the relative safety of the United States. (Also, when writing from the relative obscurity of just another local political blog.) But I’ve always been left a little in awe of the journalists who fearlessly pursue their profession in parts of the world where mere words or drawings can easily get oneself killed, beaten, or imprisoned. Which is why for the past several years I’ve been proud to use as my avatar on Twitter, Facebook, Slog, HA, and elsewhere the following unflattering caricature sketched of me by Tunisian political cartoonist Imed Ben Hamida:

A couple times a year, in my role as foul-mouthed blogger, I meet with visiting foreign delegations, usually journalists, through a program run by the State Department, and administered locally through the World Affairs Council. And in the summer of 2009 I met with Imed and five other political cartoonists from Tunisia, Qatar, Egypt, Algeria, Bahrain, and Kuwait. Here’s how the State Department briefing document described that day’s program:

Designed for political cartoonists from the Near East and North Africa, this program will examine the role of a free, independent media in a democracy vis-à-vis political cartooning. Participants will examine the practices, techniques, and ethical responsibilities of political cartoonists, the philosophical beliefs underlying their work, and the impact that their cartoons have on history, political debate, public opinion and free speech.

I always enjoy these meetings, but I remember this one being particularly fascinating. It was a year and a half before the Arab Spring, and much of our conversation centered around issues of press freedom. They seemed both amused and surprised at the manner and degree to which I could savage government officials and other subjects without fear of reprisal, and I was curious about how they could effectively ply their craft given their own legal and cultural constraints. (The short answer: “subtly.”) But we all agreed on the crucial role of political satire in shaping an honest and effective public debate.

The point of this tangent, I suppose, is to remind ourselves that our battle is with a small group of Islamist extremist assholes, not the Islamic world as a whole—an Islamic world that includes political cartoonists not much different from those who were brutally gunned down in Paris. They may not share all of our values, but they share many of them. And my strong impression from our conversation was that far from hating our freedom, these Arabic speaking political cartoonists understandably envied it.

And so in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo massacre I continue to wear my Tunisian-drawn avatar with pride, and in a show of solidarity with political cartoonists everywhere.

Today’s cowardly massacre at the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo is both incredibly sad and incredibly infuriating, for reasons I don’t think I really need to explain. In fact, I am so outraged, that I’m momentarily at an uncharacteristic loss for words. And so pathetic as it is, the only thing I can think of to honor the lives of the courageous satirists who were assassinated today is to reprint my own pathetic cartoon of the prophet Mohammad:

I don’t pretend for a moment that I face any personal risk in posting this. I’m not nearly important enough. But lacking the words to fully express my outrage, I felt the need to make some sort of symbolic gesture, and this was the best I could come up with in the moment.

Personally, I’d rather not live than live in a world without satire. And I would hope that everybody in the media who shares this sentiment would err on the side of defiance rather than caution in honoring the lives of their fallen comrades.