Goldy

71 percent… that’s the proportion of the general fund devoted to the criminal justice system in the 2006 King County budget proposed yesterday by Executive Ron Sims. And that’s a percentage pretty typical for counties throughout the state.

You hear a lot of jabber from the anti-tax folk about all the things government spends its money on that it shouldn’t spend its money on, but when it comes right down to it, local governments spend the vast majority of their money on the essential public services and infrastructure that the vast majority of citizens want. Another 15 percent of the general fund is spent on general government operations — a fairly typical overhead for a business or a government — and that leaves very little left over for the “liberal nanny state” stuff that the right likes to whine about.

Which of course is why, in the middle of a tight election, the Republicans could muster little criticism of Sims’ proposed budget, for if they controlled the Executive’s office, they wouldn’t know what to cut.

How ironic, that the GOP, which still claims to be the party of fiscal responsibility, is driving the federal government into historic deficits, while the much maligned liberal Democrats controlling Seattle and King County have managed their budgets so well as to receive the highest bond ratings available. Perhaps that’s one of the reasons why traditionally pro-business areas like Bellevue and Mercer Island are trending Democratic?

King County Executive Ron Sims delivered his 2006 Budget Address before the Council this afternoon, and one little tidbit that immediately jumps off the page is the news that Standard & Poor’s has upgraded the county’s general obligation bond rating to AAA. For the first time in its history, the county now enjoys the highest rating of financial stability awarded by all three major ratings agencies… and one of the highest municipal ratings in the nation.

In announcing the upgrade last week, S&P lauded the county’s “exceptional financial management through the spectrum of economic climates.”

“From 2000 to 2005, King County experienced economic fluctuation; it was also during this time period that a significant statewide property tax limitation initiative was introduced,” said Standard & Poor’s credit analyst Gabriel Petek. “In the midst of these challenges, the county has effectively achieved ongoing structural budget balance while continuing to incrementally increase its reserve levels in recognition of the need for financial cushion in an environment of limited revenue flexibility,” he added. “Moreover, the county has taken steps to address potential challenges to its very strong fiscal position. For instance, the county is facilitating the incorporation or annexation of unincorporated-but-urban areas within its limits–areas that are effectively subsidized by county services under the current regime.”
…
A structural challenge the county has grappled with is the pressure that Initiative-747 (I-747) places on county finances. In 2001, Washington voters approved I-747, which limits the growth of tax revenues to 101% of the previous year’s revenues, plus newly constructed development. Early in the current decade, this and other limits on revenue growth combined with regular growth in expenditures to produce a structural budget gap between recurring revenues and expenses. In response to the loss of tax revenues from I-747, the county budgets conservatively by assuming low growth in sales tax revenues and by reducing expenditures. In addition, management and staff have been creative in developing ways to make operations self-supporting and by contributing to projects that will provide increases in revenues other than property taxes.

According to an article in The Bond Buyer Online, King County joins Seattle as the only other municipality or school district in the state to achieve an underlying AAA rating from S&P… an impressive accomplishment by any measure.

Challenger David Irons says he wants to run the county more like a business, touting his exaggerated resume as preparation for running a government larger than that of thirteen states. But when voters go to the polls to choose who’s best qualified to manage the county’s $3.4 billion budget, I’m guessing they’ll stick with Sims, the executive who has led King County to the highest bond ratings in its history, at a time when many other municipalities around the state are bordering on bankruptcy. While Irons and his GOP allies are reduced to rehashing the 2004 election contest in a trumped up effort to cast doubt on Sims’ managerial skills, the financial experts — S&P, Moody’s and Fitch — all give Sims the highest grade possible on the executive’s most important management responsibility of all… drafting and executing the county budget.

If Sims had achieved these AAA ratings during an economic boom, today’s news would be a footnote rather than a headline. But by setting the county on such a sound financial footing at a time when revenues were shrinking and costs were skyrocketing, Sims deserves just as much credit as he’s earned for the county.

Darcy Burner has a new diary in the recommended list on Daily Kos: “Winning the House could stop the Iraq War and prevent more.” I urge you to read it and recommend it, not only because it’s great national exposure for a potential Democratic nominee, but because she makes some excellent points about why we need to take back Congress, and what we can all do to achieve this.

For those who don’t know, Darcy is seeking the Democratic nomination in WA’s 8th Congressional District, the seat currently held by Rep. Dave Reichert. I have had the opportunity to talk at length with both Darcy and the other declared candidate, Randy Gordon, and while they present very different personalities, I would be proud to have either represent me in Congress.

The 8th District has been trending Democrat for years. We can win this seat in 2006.

The gambling industry wants David Irons elected King County Executive…? Who’d have thunk?

Well, if you are a regular HA reader, you‘d have thunk, because I wrote about the $10,000 in campaign contributions he received from gaming interests, way back on September 8: “David Irons… gambling industry lapdog?” Now, thanks to an article in today’s Seattle Times (“Minicasino owners donate to Irons’ campaign“), a couple hundred thousand other voters are aware of what they might lose should Irons win.

A soon-to-open minicasino opposed by King County Executive Ron Sims has given more than $4,000 to David Irons, Sims’ opponent in the Nov. 8 election.

Kingsgate residents who oppose both the cardroom business and its efforts to obtain a liquor license are pressing Irons to detail his position on this cardroom, to be called Casino Caribbean, and on any expansion of gambling in unincorporated King County.

“We’re waiting for him to take a stand,” said Brad Roetcisoender, a neighbor of the casino and an organizer of the opposition group, Stop Neighborhood Casinos.

Don’t hold your breath, Brad. Irons is not going to come out and publicly support expanding gambling, but you know he wouldn’t be the beneficiary of such gaming industry largesse if he hadn’t privately assured his donors that he would, at the very least, step out of their way. Don’t get me wrong… I’m not saying that a political contribution is necessarily an indication of a politician’s stand on one issue or another… but in Irons’ case, he has a proven track record of privately telling donors and supporters what they want to hear, even as he maintains public silence.

Of course, Irons could prove me wrong, and unequivocally state that he opposes expanding gambling, and that he will work as hard as Ron Sims did to block the Kingsgate casino — which stands in the midst of a residential neighborhood, 500 feet from a day care facility and 700 feet from a community swimming pool — from getting a liquor license.

But he won’t.

Anybody who lives in the Kingsgate community, who opposes this casino, but votes for David Irons, is voting against their self interest… as would be every other King County resident who would object to having a casino or cardroom in their neighborhood. The decision to locate Casino Caribbean in a residential neighborhood is not accidental or unusual… it is part of an industry strategy that another Irons contributor, the Great Canadian Gaming Corporation, describes in a video to investors as “community based gaming.”

In the video, Great Canadian CFO Anthony Martin explains that people tend to game “in close proximity to where they live,” and so they have placed their casinos in the “bedroom communities” surrounding Seattle. He goes on to explain how these “local community casinos” were all purpose built to accommodate the slot machines that I-892 would have allowed. Last year’s failed Eyman initiative was entirely sponsored by the gambling industry, and Great Canadian was its largest donor.

What should be absolutely clear to voters is that the gambling industry — tribal and commercial — has a long history of using its money to manipulate WA’s state and local politics… and they wouldn’t be backing Irons if they didn’t expect to get something in return. That something may in fact be nothing, for all they need is a county executive, unlike Sims, who is willing to quietly sit back and not interfere with their efforts to expand gambling into our local communities.

Quite frankly, the residents of Kingsgate and the rest of King County simply can’t afford to gamble on David Irons.

Friday I attended opening night of the Intiman’s new production of The Grapes of Wrath, based on Frank Galati’s Tony Award winning adaptation of the John Steinbeck classic. Back in 1990 Frank Rich was the New York Times’ main theater reviewer, much feared for scathing reviews that were often more entertaining than their subject matter. However Rich was atypically effusive of the Steppenwolf Theatre Company’s “majestic” production:

“[Frank Galati’s adaptation] is true to Steinbeck because it leaves one feeling that the generosity of spirit that he saw in a brutal country is not so much lost as waiting once more to be found.”

It is hard to watch a production of The Grapes of Wrath without unfairly comparing the performances to that of the 1940 film adaptation or the original Steppenwolf production (available on video), but while audiences accustomed to Henry Fonda or Gary Sinese may have trouble envisioning another actor in the lead role of Tom Joad, the Intiman cast did a wonderful job overall. And as always, the Intiman delivers a top notch production, including a piece of clever stagecraft that prompted my 8-year-old daughter to loudly proclaim “Cool!”

(While the show is ably directed by Seattle Children’s Theater Artistic Director Linda Hartzell, this is by no means a kid’s show, and I wouldn’t necessarily recommend taking the typical 8-year-old to see it. However, mine loved all 2.5 hours of it… though she’s still asking questions about the ending.)

Now I don’t generally do theater reviews, but I bring this up for two reasons. First, I wanted to plug tonight’s Open Minds/Open Dialogue panel discussion at the Intiman, “Soil, Salmon and Survival“, which explores the connection between The Grapes of Wrath and the land and water of this region. The discussion will be moderated by The Stranger’s Charles Mudede, and will include farm labor organizer and former migrant worker Rosalinda Guillen, salmon recovery expert and advocate Barbara Cairns, travel writer and novelist Jonathon Raban, and Millie Judge, who manages the Land Use and Environmental Law unit of the Snohomish County Prosecutor’s Civil Division.

The discussion starts at 7:30 PM, and is free to the public… but please RSVP via e-mail, or by calling 206-269-1901 Ext. 395. I wish I could be there, but my very busy daughter and I will be attending an equally engaging Girl Scout troop meeting instead.

The second reason I bring up The Grapes of Wrath is because as I was watching this classic story of the Joad’s struggle to survive in California after fleeing the Oklahoma Dust Bowl of the 1930’s… I couldn’t help but wonder what the arch-righty trolls on HA would make of Steinbeck’s infuriating tale of the abuse and exploitation these refugees suffered at the hands of greedy landowners. We have grown so accustomed to hearing angry, anti-union vitriol coming from the right, that we sometimes lose sight of the kind of brutal economic (and physical) injustice workers might still fear today if not for the efforts of organized labor. And it is also curious to note how seventy years later, the right is still employing the same red-baiting rhetoric.

The mark of a classic is timelessness, and The Grapes of Wrath is as relevant today as it was the day it was published. If you like great theater, go see the show.

It really sucks that the New York Times has put its columnists behind a firewall, but for those of you with access to their “select” service, I hope you read today’s column by Frank Rich: “It’s Bush-Cheney, Not Rove-Libby.” As the headline implies, Rich once again gets to the heart of the Plamegate scandal, that this is much more than just the story of a strategic leak intended to payback a whistle blower… this is about an administration that lied the nation into a disastrous war.

Now, as always, what matters most in this case is not whether Mr. Rove and Lewis Libby engaged in a petty conspiracy to seek revenge on a whistle-blower, Joseph Wilson, by unmasking his wife, Valerie, a covert C.I.A. officer. What makes Patrick Fitzgerald’s investigation compelling, whatever its outcome, is its illumination of a conspiracy that was not at all petty: the one that took us on false premises into a reckless and wasteful war in Iraq. That conspiracy was instigated by Mr. Rove’s boss, George W. Bush, and Mr. Libby’s boss, Dick Cheney.

Rich delves into the little known White House Iraq Group (WHIG), set up by White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card in August of 2002, and whose members include Karl Rove, Lewis Libby, Condoleeza Rice, Karen Hughes and Mary Matalin. Their mission: market a war in Iraq to the American people. Of course, WMDs were always the focus of the sales pitch, which explains the attempt to discredit Wilson and his debunking of the yellow cake uranium story.

And as usual, it’s the coverup that’s causing WHIG all it’s troubles.

It’s long been my hunch that the WHIG-ites were at their most brazen (and, in legal terms, reckless) during the many months that preceded the appointment of Mr. Fitzgerald as special counsel. When Mr. Rove was asked on camera by ABC News in September 2003 if he had any knowledge of the Valerie Wilson leak and said no, it was only hours before the Justice Department would open its first leak investigation. When Scott McClellan later declared that he had been personally assured by Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby that they were “not involved” with the leak, the case was still in the safe hands of the attorney general then, John Ashcroft, himself a three-time Rove client in past political campaigns. Though Mr. Rove may be known as “Bush’s brain,” he wasn’t smart enough to anticipate that Justice Department career employees would eventually pressure Mr. Ashcroft to recuse himself because of this conflict of interest, clearing the way for an outside prosecutor as independent as Mr. Fitzgerald.

“Bush’s Brain” is the title of James Moore and Wayne Slater’s definitive account of Mr. Rove’s political career. But Mr. Rove is less his boss’s brain than another alliterative organ (or organs), that which provides testosterone. As we learn in “Bush’s Brain,” bad things (usually character assassination) often happen to Bush foes, whether Ann Richards or John McCain. On such occasions, Mr. Bush stays compassionately above the fray while the ruthless Mr. Rove operates below the radar, always separated by “a layer of operatives” from any ill behavior that might implicate him. “There is no crime, just a victim,” Mr. Moore and Mr. Slater write of this repeated pattern.

THIS modus operandi was foolproof, shielding the president as well as Mr. Rove from culpability, as long as it was about winning an election. The attack on Mr. Wilson, by contrast, has left them and the Cheney-Libby tag team vulnerable because it’s about something far bigger: protecting the lies that took the country into what the Reagan administration National Security Agency director, Lt. Gen. William Odom, recently called “the greatest strategic disaster in United States history.”

Whether or not Mr. Fitzgerald uncovers an indictable crime, there is once again a victim, but that victim is not Mr. or Mrs. Wilson; it’s the nation. It is surely a joke of history that even as the White House sells this weekend’s constitutional referendum as yet another “victory” for democracy in Iraq, we still don’t know the whole story of how our own democracy was hijacked on the way to war.

The consensus in the other Washington is that there soon will be indictments in the Plamegate investigation, but either way, it will be nothing compared to the scandal that prompted the leak: President Bush led the nation into war, based on a lie. No coverup can hide that ugly truth.

UPDATE:
Reader Kevin points out that Truthout has posted the full text of Rich’s column here. Don’t know if it’s legal or not, so read it while you can.

Of course I’m generalizing, but when cynics ask me the difference between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party — implying that there isn’t much of one — I like to point out that us Democrats actually believe in government, whereas Republicans… really don’t. Democrats believe that government of the people, by the people, for the people is a positive and necessary tool for improving the lives of all our citizens in a complex, modern society. Republicans believe that the government that governs least, governs best.

Again, this is a generalization; both parties have their contradictions and both represent a spectrum of ideology, but this hands on vs hands off philosophy is a convenient and useful metaphor. And I think Ron Sims’ announcement yesterday that he is proposing $20 million in next year’s county budget to buy land for greenbelts, open space and trail corridors is a great illustration of these two competing ideologies.

I’m not suggesting that many Republicans are going to come out against preserving open space, though I’m guessing some will object to the cost of the proposal. However, such proposals are really antithetical to the conservative ideology that professes a “free market” solution to nearly every problem. Take for example the proposal to buy the last remaining chunk of private land in the heart of Discovery Park:

The largest chunk of the county’s proposed funding — $2.7 million — would go toward helping the city of Seattle buy 24 acres of military housing in Discovery Park, which the Navy sold to a private developer last year.

Under a proposed $9 million deal, the city will buy the Capehart property that park advocates feared could have been turned into luxury homes or condos and permanently protect it as open space.

It is hard to argue that using taxpayer money to protect valuable land from private development is consistent with the Republicans’ “free market” ideology, yet our region would not boast the quality of life it does, if our forefathers had not shown the foresight to do exactly that. Public parks, greenbelts and trail corridors benefit all of us, but without an activist government to protect us from the tragedy of the commons, they simply would not exist.

It is convenient for Republicans statewide, and especially in King County, to complain that it is corrupt elections departments that prevent them from winning at the polls, for their real obstacles are much more daunting. Both the county and the state continue to trend Democratic, because more citizens agree with our ideology than with theirs. Voters want parks and greenbelts and trail corridors. Voters want better schools and libraries, and safer, more efficient roads and public transit. Voters want effective police, fire and EMS. Voters want the essential public services that only government can provide.

Democrats win because we share voters’ values.

Ick… what’s that smell? Oh… it’s open thread time.

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid announced today that Washington Senator Maria Cantwell will lead the Senate Democrats’ efforts to achieve energy independence by 2020.

“I am thrilled that Senator Cantwell has agreed to lead the Democratic caucus in this crucial effort to make America energy independent by 2020,” said Reid. “Her experience fighting for consumers during the Enron scandal and Western energy crisis make her the right choice to continue our effort to break our dependence on foreign oil and put working families ahead of the special interests.”

Sen. Cantwell was an early champion and national co-chair of the Apollo Alliance, whose mission is to build towards a sustainable and clean energy economy that will create millions of jobs and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. She has led congressional efforts to seek consumer relief in the wake of Enron’s fraudulent market manipulation schemes, and sits on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

“I look forward to tackling the task of making our country energy independent by 2020,” Cantwell said. “When the likes of Enron are allowed to gouge prices and manipulate markets, the only way to truly protect consumers from sky rocketing gas prices and jolting home heating bills is to diversify our energy sources.”

Sen. Cantwell has never been one of the most visible members of the Senate (hell… she’s not even the most visible Senator in WA state), but she has quietly earned a reputation amongst her peers as a leader on technical issues such as energy and the environment that have an enormous impact on the quality of life of the Northwest and the entire nation. The more voters know about Cantwell’s accomplishments in the Senate, the larger the margin they’ll give her in reelecting her for a second term.

Head on over to BetterDonkey.org to watch their new No on I-912 video… great concept, great script, great production values… great video. Really.

Just make sure to buy your viaduct tape at a true blue retailer like Costco.

Oh man… if this is the sharpest arrow in David Irons’ quiver, it’s gonna be an awfully boring election season.

Now that he and King County Executive Ron Sims have both come out on the same side of the two most contentious issues of the day, the Southwest proposal and I-912 (both candidates oppose them), Irons is reduced to following the lead of his paranoid delusional webmaster, Stefan Sharkansky, and his OCD-like focus on last year’s contested election for governor. Yesterday, both appeared as part of a press conference staged by Republicans on the KC Council, in which they held true to their party’s McCarthyite tradition, by waving before reporters lists of alleged illegal voters, without actually handing over any evidence to reporters or authorities.

The Republicans claim that they have discovered duplicate registrations for over 2000 voters, the bulk of them being women who are registered under both their maiden and married names.

“It’s a sad day,” Irons said. “We’ve lost the trust of the people.”

Yes Dave, it certainly is, and you certainly have. But then, that’s the whole point isn’t it? You’re totally willing to undermine the public’s faith in government if you think that might get you into office.

Of course there are duplicate registrations. There are always going to be duplicate registrations, in every county and in every election, as Secretary of State Sam Reed pointed out in an interview on KIRO radio today:

This problem of dual registrations is one that all 39 counties have. I had when I was county auditor.

The elections office gets no automatic notice when somebody changes their name or address, and for the most part it’s up to voters to change their registration correctly. Elections departments periodically run database queries looking for such errors (KCRE corrected over 9,000 duplicate registrations earlier this year) but there will always be some duplicate registrations on the rolls. The GOP’s attempt to imply that duplicate registrations are the result of negligence on the part of Dean Logan or his staff, is dishonest, mean-spirited and manipulative. This is a well known issue, and as Reed points out, one which will be partially addressed by the statewide voter registration database that has long been scheduled to go online in January of 2006.

I think that it’s very important that we have a clean voter registration rolls and obviously if they do have information that there are dual registrations I do think that it’s important that they challenge them. That’s part of Washington State law. Now I’m not up in King County so I’m not part of the politics going on with the election right now and everything but certainly it’s a legitimate issue and one we’re working on. We’re going to have a statewide voter registration system in the Secretary of State’s Office beginning next year and we hope to be able to help the counties a lot to clean up their records and to try to void as many duplicate registrations as I say occur everywhere.

Everything about yesterday’s press conference reeked of a candidate so bereft of issues, ideas and qualifications, that his only desperate hope is to tear down the other side, at any cost. How else can you explain an effort to criminalize several thousand women who married and took their husband’s last name, or to level an accusation so paper thin that the Republican Secretary of State dismisses it with an audio shrug?

But perhaps the most embarrassing detail for Irons and his GOP comrades is that they seemed unembarrassed to stand there side by side with WA state’s most famous conspiracy theorist, our friend Stefan of (un)Sound Politics, whose tireless efforts to find patterns of fraud in KC’s voter databases borders on numerology, and whose aluminum-hat-analyses have earned him every last drop of incredulity he enjoys. Stefan actually had the temerity to stand before the assembled media throng and claim he was one of them, ignoring the fact that real journalists cover press conferences… they don’t conduct them.

This is what Irons and his fellow Republicans are reduced to… a bogus press conference on an over-blown none issue, with expert, objective analysis from the state’s best known partisan blogger… a man whose idea of reasoned debate is to compare Ron Sims to the brutal African dictator Robert Mugabe. At least I’ve always admitted I’m a propagandist, but Stefan doesn’t even have the honor to do that. And Irons clearly doesn’t have the sense to disassociate himself from a man who could be the inspiration for one of Aesop’s best known fables.

Are there thousands of duplicate registrations in KC and the state’s other 38 counties? No doubt. But after months of investigation and litigation election officials and GOP attorneys could only document a handful of double voters out of 3 million ballots cast.

“It’s a sad day that we’re here again talking about election flaws from this election and past elections,” Irons said.

It certainly is, Dave. But then again, apparently you have nothing else to talk to voters about.

A couple months back I questioned how David Irons could possibly provide effective leadership in King County when he refused to take a stand on the most important issue on the November ballot: Initiative 912. While he had declined to publicly state his position, sources told me that he had privately assured members of the pro-business Alki Foundation that he opposed the anti-roads initiative.

That post started a week-long vigil that ended when the Seattle P-I took up the fight and finally got Irons on the record opposing I-912. Sort of. Irons’ statement was a muddled equivocation that ineptly attempted to straddle both sides of a barbed-wire fence. And so a couple days ago the P-I once again took a poke at Irons, demanding that he show some of those vaunted leadership skills he likes to tout… and this time Irons finally spoke somewhat clearly.

“After reading your paper’s editorial,” Irons e-mailed us, “I obviously have not succeeded in reaching everyone on the importance of defeating I-912. Transportation is a cornerstone of my campaign and passing I-912 would be a tragedy to our community.”

In a subsequent telephone interview, Irons reiterated that he has been “consistent” on the issue. “I oppose I-912, for a litany of reasons,” said Irons. He also says he’s encountering more people who understand the negative implications of the initiative.

Uh-huh. Yeah Dave… there are a lot of things you haven’t succeeded at in life (businesses, family relations, etc.), but I think I can help you pin down why you failed to communicate your position on I-912. It’s got something to do with this technical thing us writers like to call “words.” For example, take a look at the statement you originally gave the P-I.

“In principle, I believe all major tax increases should go to a vote of the people. Personally I am voting no on Initiative 912. This is not the package that I would have put together. I believe it should have done more to reduce congestion. That’s why we need new leadership in King County that will advocate for more congestion relief.”

Great campaign “cornerstone” Dave… it’s a crappy transportation package, but you’re voting against the initiative that would repeal it, because… um… I guess it would be a “tragedy” to repeal such a crappy package. You call that “consistent”…? Consistently muddled.

But then consistency has never really been your strong suit. The gas tax should go to a vote of the people, but it’s repeal would be a tragedy. You campaign against the Critical Areas Ordinance, yet as a councilmember you push for stronger enforcement. And you mail out campaign literature promising to kill Southwest’s “ridiculous proposal”, while e-mailing a proponent of the deal that you are “open to this concept.” And how did you defend that last piece of flip-floppery?

Irons, a county councilman, said yesterday he has been consistent on the issue. He’s willing to consider a Southwest operation at Boeing Field, but only if it pays for road improvements

Share:

• Facebook
• Reddit
• LinkedIn
• Email
• Print

Advocates of Initiative 912 like to claim that their campaign is about setting priorities and demanding greater accountability. And so as a public service to I-912 campaign contributors, I just thought I’d point out that of the $161,173.75 in cash expenditures through the end of August, $66,717.62 went to Madison Communications, a company owned and operated by campaign “spokesperson” (and lying piehole) Brett Bader.

Just thought you’d want to know.

When it comes to slot machines, the house always wins, a lesson initiative monger Tim Eyman learned last year, when he was taken to the cleaners over I-892, by far his most lopsided political defeat ever. I-892 would have put 19,000 slot machines into hundreds of bars, restaurants, bowling alleys and non-tribal casinos, scattered through nearly every community in the state. But voters overwhelming rejected the proposal by a 62% to 38% margin… a landslide by any measure.

Yet, as the Tacoma News Tribune editorial board points out, Gov. Christine Gregoire apparently wasn’t paying attention:

Washingtonians made it clear last November that they didn’t want their state inundated with Las Vegas-style machine gambling. They didn’t want it even if their rejection cost them a tax break, which is what I-892 offered the electorate in exchange for doubling the number of gaming machines in Washington state.

Yet Gregoire’s negotiators have now come up with a deal that would let the Spokane Tribe of Indians operate up to 7,500 gaming machines in exchange for giving the state a share of the revenues.

And the compact with the Spokanes would be the least of it. Nineteen other tribes operate casinos in Washington, and federal law gives them the right to virtually any gambling privilege any other tribe obtains from the state. If the Spokanes get 7,500 slot machines, the state would be more or less obligated to give 7,500 machines each to the Puyallups, the Muckleshoots, the Tulalips and so on, provided they accept the same revenue-sharing arrangement.

No question, the Spokane compact was negotiated under direct instructions from the Governor’s Office, and some may find it curious that I would now use this forum to attack the decisions of a governor I have spent the better part of a year stalwartly defending. But I have an obligation to use what little influence I have to promote sound public policy… and the Spokane compact simply ain’t it.

If Gov. Gregoire signs this compact, setting the state irreversibly down the road towards an absolutely massive expansion of gambling, she will be making a huge mistake that will disrupt local economies and cause untold suffering amongst a new wave of problem gamblers and their families. Problem gamblers are not just an unfortunate byproduct of the gambling industry, they are its best customers, accounting for forty to sixty percent of its profits. And slot machines are the most addictive form of gambling ever devised, scientifically designed to create compulsion.

But the Spokane compact and its inevitable impact statewide would not only be a policy disaster, I predict it will be a political disaster for Gov. Gregoire herself. We’re talking about an explosion of slot machines — exactly what voters rejected in 1995, 1996 and again in 2004 — and the governor simply cannot afford to so blatantly ignore the will of voters who, however unfairly, already question her legitimacy. The people have spoken on the issue of slot machines, again and again and again, and signing this compact would be perceived as a slap in the face of the voting public.

Gov. Gregoire doesn’t have to take my word for it… she should go to the tribes who spent over $5 million opposing I-892 and ask to see their polling data. Opposition to gambling expansion cuts across demographic and party lines, and has been unchanged for at least a decade. Indeed, not a dime of the No campaign’s money was spent convincing voters that more slot machines would be bad for WA’s communities… all the tribes had to do was educate voters that I-892 would expand the number of slot machines, and that was enough to send the initiative to an overwhelming defeat.

If voters would resoundingly reject a slot machine measure that would have put money back into their pockets, why would they accept a similar compact that puts the revenues into government coffers instead? The people wisely decided that the tax revenues from these slot machines simply is not worth the impact on their communities, and Gov. Gregoire would be advised to heed their wisdom.

Dismiss me as a loudmouthed, political neophyte if you want, but Gov. Gregoire, I urge you to listen to voters. The citizens of this state simply cannot afford the Spokane compact. And neither can you.

King County Executive Ron Sims has rejected proposals by Southwest and Alaska Airlines to fly passenger service out of Boeing Field. Sims had originally been enthusiastic about exploring the Southwest proposal, arguing that consumers would ultimately benefit from cheaper airfares. But when evaluating the Southwest and Alaska proposals together, it quickly became apparent that the county airport could not support the higher traffic while meeting the impact criteria he had set forth.

“I have said all along that I would not endorse any proposal from any airline if it led to significant traffic and noise impacts,” Sims said.

Sims had also promised that he would never approve a deal that required taxpayer subsidies. According to Sims spokesperson Sandeep Kaushik, a preliminary analysis had suggested that Southwest might be able to operate up to 85 flights a day while meeting FAA noise regulations, and with little or no road improvements in the area. But once the Alaska proposal came in on September 30, the calculus changed. The two proposals combined would have operated 185 daily flights from 16 gates, requiring substantial road improvements and generating significantly more noise.

After receiving legal advice that the county must give both proposals equal consideration, county transportation staff concluded last Friday that it was impossible to open Boeing Field to passenger traffic while meeting Sims’ criteria. Sims was formally briefed at a meeting yesterday, in which staff stepped him through the analysis, and laid out the costs that would be required to proceed with due diligence… including an Economic Impact Analysis and a half-million dollar Environmental Impact Study. Sims decided that it was pointless to proceed with the time and expense of continuing to study the proposals when it seemed exceedingly unlikely that either would be approved in the end.

And so today, Sims announced that he had rejected both proposals.

Personally, I’m glad Sims nixed the deals. I live near Boeing Field, and for purely selfish NIMBY reasons I didn’t relish the thought of increased traffic. I am also relieved to eliminate this issue from the current election debate, as it seemed likely that it might hurt Sims at the polls.

But I think it is important to reiterate in the wake of the issue’s demise, that Sims had never endorsed the Southwest proposal… he had merely expressed enthusiasm about studying it. As I reported last week, even in the midst of a wonkish policy debate at Drinking Liberally, Sims repeated his mantra:

The gist of Sims argument is that the Southwest deal would be good for consumers, while adding jobs to South Seattle. He wants to study the proposal, but would only approve it if noise abatement and traffic concerns can be adequately addressed with no public subsidy.

And the gist of Sims decision to reject the proposal was his conclusion that noise abatement and traffic concerns cannot be adequately addressed without public subsidy.

Now I’m guessing that the more cynical amongst you might dismiss the background information I provided, and accuse Sims of merely bowing to political pressure, and to that I say… so what? No doubt Sims heard from many constituents who were unhappy or even angry about the potential impact increased flight traffic would have on their Seattle neighborhoods. I know for a fact that he heard from me and other unabashed Democrats last week at DL. If public opposition helped influence his decision, that’s a good thing, right? We want our elected officials to listen to voters.

But one thing I’m confident Sims didn’t do was bow to political pressure from the Port Commission or Alaska Airlines or Southwest Airlines lobbyist (and former Sims’ staffer) Tim Hatley. Josh Feit in The Stranger tries to make a big deal over Sims reaction to being questioned about Hatley during his meeting before the editorial board, but this is just a load of something about nothing.

First of all, say what you want about Ron Sims, but I have never seen anybody seriously allege that he has ever used his office to line the pockets of himself, his friends or his family. Disagree with him on policy, criticize him on execution, despise him on ideology… but this is a man who entered public life for all the right reasons. If Sims took offense at efforts to insinuate Hatley’s lobbying into something sleazy, well… he had every reason. (Oh… and Josh… Hatley was hired to lobby reluctant members of the County Council, not Sims. Think about it… why spend your money lobbying the one guy who has expressed enthusiasm about considering the proposal?)

Second, while Sims was not at liberty to comment because he had yet to be formally briefed by staff, he was already aware that they had concluded the proposals could not meet his criteria… before he went before the editorial board last Friday. So I think that puts Sims’ reaction in its proper context… he was essentially accused of being unduly influenced by a lobbyist in favor of a deal that he knew he would likely soon kill.

Personally, I buy the story I previously laid out — that Sims found it pointless to pursue an expensive study of a proposal that clearly wasn’t viable — but whatever the motive I applaud his decision. Southwest came to him with a deal that promised to benefit both consumers and the county, and Sims enthusiastically proceeded to conduct due diligence. In the end, the numbers just didn’t work out, and so he rejected the proposal, based on the criteria that he set forth when the news first broke.

No scandal, no backtracking, no shady dealmaking. Just the sort of tough decision a county executive must make every day, regardless of the political consequences.