by Carl Ballard — ,
– The legislature adjourns sine dud. Don’t worry, there will be a special session where there’s a brand-new chance to not get anything accomplished starting in a few weeks.
– A background checks initiative drive starts today.
– Jesus and Muhammad and the Question of the State
– I am not one who spent much of the Bush presidency trying to figure out how smart he actually was, but some of these (especially the Swedish Army!) are pretty yikes.
– The WMD Wing (h/t)
by Carl Ballard — ,
I love that my two favorite local politicians are hashing things out in the mayor’s race. In this case, they have dueling posts on Slog about sub area equity. Sub area equity is an important issue for a Seattle mayor who will have a seat on the Sound Transit Board of Directors. First, was Ed Murray, who I agree with in general, opposing sub are equity (I’m ignoring the political sniping in both; I’m pro political sniping, but not what I want to write about here).
Sound Transit’s sub-area equity requires that any money raised in one of the five sub-areas of the Sound Transit district must be spent in that sub-area. It may seem sensible on the surface, but it is really a terrible policy, originally cooked up by light rail opponent Rob McKenna (when he served on the King County Council and the Sound Transit board) as a way of forcing transit dollars that should have been spent in Seattle to be diverted to the suburbs instead.
Sub-area equity has done more harm to the cause of efficient deployment of limited transit dollars in the central Puget Sound—and thus more harm to Seattle—than any other single decision made in the last two decades of transit planning. It allocates dollars based not on density and demand for service, but on political geography. Instead of building a system from the inside out to maximize ridership and benefit smart land use decisions, it balkanizes the region and facilitates sprawl.
Sub-area equity needs to go. And it needs to be replaced with a more sensible policy that stipulates that Sound Transit dollars will be spent efficiently to add light rail where it will have the maximum impact in terms of moving people, i.e. in denser cities like Seattle and our growing inner-ring suburbs. Such a policy would ensure that Seattle’s transit needs are better accommodated – particularly our underserved West side Green Line communities including Ballard and West Seattle – while also ensuring that hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars are not diverted to building light rail in outlying areas where population densities are insufficient to support strong ridership.
I’m not sure it encourages sprawl (it brings transit to less dense places, but those places are already sprawling). But in general, I agree that there’s more bang for the buck in denser areas. And transit ought to be built more in our big cities and inner ring cities, and sub area equity is a hindrance to that. So fair enough.
Mayor McGinn has a response.
In fact, at the urging of myself and others, the Sound Transit board accelerated all of their planning around the region so we are prepared to go to the ballot in 2016 if the legislature gives Sound Transit revenue authority to support expansion.
All of that work falls apart if a Seattle mayor suddenly decided they wanted to change the deal. By attacking sub-area equity Ed Murray threatens to blow up Sound Transit. Sound Transit’s board was willing to advance these rail planning studies in Seattle in part because I pledged Seattle’s support to help complete the regional system. Communities outside of Seattle have been banking on future rail while the central portion has been built in Seattle. Proposing to end sub-area equity and take the money for Seattle is guaranteed to destroy the regional political coalition for rail and doom the chances of putting Sound Transit 3 on the ballot in 2016.
Further, sub-area equity protects Seattle. The recession significantly reduced Sound Transit’s revenues too, and they are working hard to meet their commitments elsewhere in King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties. We need to ensure revenue raised in Seattle stays in Seattle to support our projects – which is why Seattle needs to defend sub-area equity, not attack it.
Even though McGinn probably wrote the better piece, I still agree with Ed Murray on sub area equity.
by Carl Ballard — ,
Generally this piece on a bill to allow businesses to discriminate against gay people if God tells them it’s OK by Josh Feit is solid. But I have to object to this paragraph:
The bill’s main sponsor is Sen. Sharon Brown (R-8, Kennewick). Brown’s district is the home to a controversy that blew up in March when Barronelle Stutzman, who owns Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, refused to do business for a gay couple.
It makes it sound like the business is in her district but the gay couple just happened to be there. In fact, Senator Brown is prioritizing –or at least is allowing the law to prioritize — businesses in her district that want to discriminate over her constituents who are being discriminated against. This hurtful bill won’t just hurt people in Seattle, or just in King County, or the Puget Sound region, or Western Washington. It hurts people all over the state.
by Carl Ballard — ,
Goldy notes that the GOP caucus fundraising for Senator Mike Carrell — who needs a bone marrow transplant — hasn’t made them more sympathetic to the plight of people who need better health care. Who knows, maybe he’ll come around, and maybe the rest of the caucus will too.
But more likely, he’ll be back to pushing the line that we have to keep tax loopholes wide open, let alone not raise rates and that’s more important than caring for the sick. Or something about the state not being the best place to pay for it.
And to be sure, we all want Senator Carrell to beat this shit. You can donate here, if you’re so inclined.
by Carl Ballard — ,
– Valiant protectors of our civil liberties, except when we might actually need our civil liberties protected.
– Pause…allow the incredible affront of that shit to marinate…continue.
– King Street Station, your argument is irrelevant.
– Something close to 8% of ALL West, Texas residents were either injured or killed in the explosion.
by Carl Ballard — ,
Ugh on a stick, the state GOP.
Bailey was a guest last week on conservative talk radio KVI, where Republican State Chairman Kirby Wilbur is a frequent fill-in host. The two debunked the Dream Act as a way of damaging the Republican franchise rather than helping immigrants’ kids get an education. Democrats had just failed in a bid to force a Senate floor vote.
“It should be obvious, at least to anyone with an IQ above their waist size, that these (bills) have been picked for their political impact, has nothing to do with caring and compassion, to continue this mantra that Republicans are racists,” said Wilbur. “I mean, it seems to me it’s pretty obvious.”
Sen. Bailey agreed.
“It is pretty obvious that it is political. This bill has been brought forward at least twice before by (Sen.) Ed Murray, whgo is the sponsor of the Senate bill, at a time when both the Senate, the House and the Governor’s mansion were controlled by the Democrats and it begs the question: If this is such an important, absolutely needed bill, why didn’t it pass during those times?”
First off THAT’S NOT WHAT BEGS THE QUESTION MEANS! You mean it raises the question. Question begging is making a circular argument. When you use it wrong you sound like a dummy, and I hate you.* Second, if it’s just a trick, why not vote for it like a significant portion of the House GOP Caucus? Or at least let it come to a vote in committee? Or just let the people who want to testify testify? I mean honestly. Anyway, keep talking.
“Here’s another fact: If these (undocumented) students were added to the pool that already exists, underserved (sic) citizens, then the only way those students would ever get financial aid is if they are considered and given preferential treatment above citizens.”
Fact! Just look it up.
Anyway, after finding out about that, Rodney Tom knew just who to get mad at.
Tom has taken to blaming State Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, D-Seattle, for its failure. The “Senate Majority Coalition” offered Kohl-Welles chairmanship of the Higher Education Committee. She refused to take it, on grounds that the governing coalition was under Republican control and would leave her with no authority.
Tom sent out a legislative “session update” last week that sharply attacked Kohl-Welles. He was called to account by Murray for violating Senate rules by using the e-mail newsletter to deliver a partisan attack on a colleague. The update, too, was edited.
I guess she forced him to vote against allowing the vote on the floor of the Senate.
by Carl Ballard — ,
I don’t like the idea of sub area equity, although it may have saved Sound Transit politically by getting early buy in from the suburbs when Central Link and Tacoma Link were the biggest projects. Still, generally speaking, political solutions designed to reassure suburbanites that big mean Seattle isn’t going to take all of their money (when the opposite is generally true) and that put arbitrary restrictions on transit development aren’t my favorite. See also, 40-40-20.
So the fact that Ed Murray is opposed to it is somewhat of a positive for me (although his doing it in a way that specifically attacks building rail to from Ballard to Downtown is not helpful). But over at Seattle Transit Blog, Ben Schiendelman makes the case for Sub Area Equity.
Subarea equity originally existed because suburban legislators, in creating Sound Transit, wanted to make sure that suburban money didn’t end up spent in Seattle. As a result, Link implementation was at first slower. But now that Sound Transit 2 is passed, the North King subarea’s “spine” is fully funded. Most of the political pressure on Sound Transit is now to expand to Tacoma, Everett, and Redmond, and most of the board votes are outside Seattle.
In a Sound Transit 3 package, subarea equity is paramount to ensuring that we get a new line in Seattle – it ensures that Seattle’s contribution stays in the city, and political pressure doesn’t move money out to the ends of the lines.
Murray claims that his reason for wanting to remove subarea equity would be to focus transit investment in Seattle – but the outcome of removing it would be the opposite. As a transit advocate who wants Seattle to have more grade separated transit, this is scary because it’s a direct threat to a new line in the city, and it’s scary because a mayoral candidate should have a better grasp of the issues.
It does seem rather abhorrent to have sub area equity when we’re building Central Link and Tacoma Link and then not have it when we’re building out to the suburbs.
by Carl Ballard — ,
– Federal Way something something because guns make us safer.
– Opposition to the coal trains.
– If it’s a day that ends in a “y” Tim Eyman proposes an initiative that looks unconstitutional.
– Is a little class too much to ask? Yes, yes it is.
– New rules for South Lake Union passed out of committee.
by Carl Ballard — ,
– Happy Earth Day.
– There was a lot that we missed last week as we focused on West and Boston. I didn’t even realize that CISPA was up for a vote.
– McGilvra Place looks nice.
– I hate that background checks couldn’t get 60 votes in the Senate, but this narrative that Obama could just lean on some Democrats is ridiculous.
by Carl Ballard — ,
The Senate can’t get 60 votes on background checks at gun shows, and I don’t even know what to write anymore. I mean honestly. This is a measure with 90% approval, and it’s so on the margin of what needs to be done to prevent the type of violence that’s been happening.
Background checks and limits to the amount of ammunition that can be fired before reloading are where the debate is. Maybe it’ll be a bit tougher for the worst people to get guns. Maybe the next killer will have to reload and maybe move on before he’s killed as many of the children in a room. Maybe only 10 or 15 kids will die in the next attack. Nothing to address handguns, or urban crime more generally. And that is too fucking much.
I don’t know what to say, except maybe thank God Gabby Giffords can still write.
I watch TV and read the papers like everyone else. We know what we’re going to hear: vague platitudes like “tough vote” and “complicated issue.” I was elected six times to represent southern Arizona, in the State Legislature and then in Congress. I know what a complicated issue is; I know what it feels like to take a tough vote. This was neither. These senators made their decision based on political fear and on cold calculations about the money of special interests like the National Rifle Association, which in the last election cycle spent around $25 million on contributions, lobbying and outside spending.
I don’t know what I can possibly add to her piece, except a determination to keep working. And of course fuck Instapundit.
by Carl Ballard — ,
This story is great.
A West Virginia high school student is filing an injunction against her principal, who she claims is threatening to punish her for speaking out against a factually inaccurate abstinence assembly at her school. Katelyn Campbell, who is the student body vice president at George Washington High School, alleges her principal threatened to call the college where she’s been accepted to report that she has “bad character.”
[…]
But it didn’t end with a simple difference of opinion among Campbell and her principal. The high school senior alleges that Aulenbacher threatened to call Wellesley College, where Campbell has been accepted to study in the fall, after she spoke to the press about her objections to the assembly. According to Campbell, her principal said, “How would you feel if I called your college and told them what bad character you have and what a backstabber you are?” Campbell alleges that Aulenbacher continued to berate her in his office, eventually driving her to tears. “He threatened me and my future in order to put forth his own personal agenda and make teachers and students feel they cant speak up because of fear of retaliation,” she said of the incident.
Despite being threatened, Campbell is not backing down. She hopes that filing this injunction will protect her freedom of speech to continue advocating for comprehensive sexual health resources for West Virginia’s youth. “West Virginia has the ninth highest pregnancy rate in the U.S.,” Campbell told the Gazette. “I should be able to be informed in my school what birth control is and how I can get it. With the policy at GW, under George Aulenbacher, information about birth control and sex education has been suppressed. Our nurse wasn’t allowed to talk about where you can get birth control for free in the city of Charleston.”
So, first and foremost, the kids are OK. Despite adults lying to them, they know what’s up. That’s true of sex. It’s true of drugs. It’s true of plenty of life. Lying to people you’re trying to educate can’t work out well.
But here, I want to say that even if you accept the principal’s and the assembly speaker’s notion that abstinence only education will lead to people waiting until marriage to have sex, and you think that’s a good thing that it’s not a good thing to teach.
Imagine someone who attended that assembly and waited until they were married to have sex because of it. Wouldn’t they still want to know how effective birth control was for real? If their partner had had sex before they married our hypothetical student and had got a disease, wouldn’t they want to know what was effective at preventing getting it? I mean this seems pretty basic. If you keep that sort of info from them until they’re married, it doesn’t just magically become available on their wedding night.
by Carl Ballard — ,
– This fucking week. A large explosion in Texas has killed dozens.
– It’s the deadline for bills not related to the budget came and went this week. Now marital rape is illegal in all cases and localities can set their own speed limits sometimes.
– There’s a lot to take in about the “children and vagina’s” guy. On top of the gendered fuckery that the piece mentions, there is also the fact that he tried to say I’m just smarter than all of you despite the fact that he used the possessive for no reason. (h/t)
– I know the straw poll of the 43rd district is meaningless, but McGinn beating Ed Murray who represents the district and everyone else is indicative of something.
– And in somewhat more meaningful polls, it looks like Rodney Tom is less popular with his constituents (pdf) than he once was.
– Blair Butterworth’s memorial service is this Sunday at Town Hall.
– I can’t find anything to quote in this Lindy West piece making fun of a list-of-women-men-don’t-want-to-marry piece without the rest of the context, but it’s amazing.
by Carl Ballard — ,
In the wake of the bombing in Boston, oddly enough I didn’t make the connection for a few days in my own mind that I’ve been to the finish of a marathon. I’ve had friends compete in the Rock ‘n’ Roll marathon in Seattle and followed their training in conversations with them and on social media. It’s a type of dedication that I can’t imagine, and that leaves me inspired.
A few years ago, a friend posted pretty much every day “only X days until the marathon” for a few months. I don’t mind: that’s what Facebook is for, and it’s pretty quick to scroll past it. By coincidence, I was on First Avenue that day and there were a bunch of people looking over the entrance to the Battery Street Tunnel cheering. I stopped by and looked for that friend, even though I had no idea when he’d be passing.
I didn’t see him, but I loved the energy and enthusiasm of the people cheering right there toward the end. I stayed and cheered for nobody and everybody for about 20 minutes until moving on. I went about doing other things and then went back an hour or so later, and new people were cheering on new runners. Other than the fact that the runners were obviously going slower, the scene was pretty much the same, so I cheered again for a while.
Since then I’ve done that again or been at the finish for the marathon. It’s absolutely wonderful. And even if there’s more security and an added danger this year, I can’t imagine anywhere else I’d rather be that day than watching the end of the race.
by Carl Ballard — ,
I’m just going to say it right now. This press release is the greatest thing in at least the English language, and probably other languages too. All words are obsolete once you read it.
It’s Benton 1, U.S. transportation secretary 0 in Columbia River Crossing debate at Capitol
I like so much about that title, that it’s tough to know what’s the best: Is it that he gave himself a score and then bragged about the score he gave himself as if it’s objective? Is it that even by his own reckoning, he only won the meeting by 1 point? Is it the fact that the title implies that this is the beginning, rather than the middle of a process that has been going on for years? Is it that the Federal government is offering to give his district money, and he’s complaining about it? Is it that he describes an ostensibly closed door meeting as a debate? Is it that Secretary LaHood probably didn’t even know that there was a game afoot?
Those are all good choices to be sure, but I think the best is that he never defines the scale that 1 to 0 is on or how one earns a point. So here is some speculation:
Oh my God, we’re not even into the meat of the press release yet. Courage. Here we go.
Sen. Don Benton says there’s no question that the people of Clark County came out ahead this morning when he and members of the Senate Majority Coalition Caucus went toe-to-toe with U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood over the Columbia River Crossing project.
That’s a rather fancy way of saying I sat across a table with a guy who offered me a bunch of money to help build a bridge, but I wanted to build a different bridge, and probably more money. Also, no question? If you asked everyone in Clark County there would be 100% agreement on this opinion?
“I’ve been working hard to keep our coalition members informed about the many significant flaws in the CRC project, so we were ready with questions when Governor Inslee brought Secretary LaHood in to lobby our coalition this morning. As a result, it wasn’t even a fair fight. I’d say we schooled the transportation secretary in a way he couldn’t possibly have expected,” said Benton, R-Vancouver, noting LaHood’s visit is part of a CRC propaganda blitz at the Capitol today.
I should say here I don’t really have an opinion on the Columbia River Crossing. Still, imagine if a Seattle legislator acted this way to the Secretary of Transportation over, say, Highway 99. The outrage from the people who are perpetually outraged that Seattle exists would be amazing. I mean the meeting was of the Majority Caucus and not the GOP ostensibly in part because Seattle’s legislators are too arrogant.
“I guess the governor thought he could strong-arm the Senate Majority Coalition into rolling over by bringing the D.C. folks in to give us the same ‘this bridge or no bridge’ lecture he’s been delivering. Instead, the transportation secretary had his hat handed to him, and I have to believe I will find even more support now for my efforts to force a redesign of the CRC project.”
I guess they were hoping that saying, “we have a fuckton of money, here take it” would at least keep the Majority Coalition from whining like a bunch of little babies. That was obviously incorrect.
Benton said he and other coalition members let LaHood have it on the whole range of CRC concerns: how the bridge height would cost Clark County thousands of permanent jobs, how replacing the Interstate 5 bridge without addressing the corridor as a whole would fail to reduce commute times from Clark County to Portland by more than one minute, the financial liability that would go with including an extension of light rail from Portland, and more.
I have no idea, again, if those are valid concerns. But anyone who is opposing getting light rail in the same sentence he worries about commutes into Portland is an idiot. Light rail will obviously help Vancouver commuters.
Project supporters want the Legislature to authorize a $450 million allocation, which would serve as Washington’s share of the $3.5 billion CRC project; with less than three weeks to go in the 2013 legislative session, Benton said, the writing on the wall is becoming clearer.
There is literally no cliche that this press release won’t include.
“I was very proud of how our coalition joined me in standing up for the people of Clark County,” said Benton, who is the coalition’s deputy leader. “The governor and the CRC supporters are obviously getting more desperate by the day; they see how time is running out to get the Legislature to go along with this boondoggle.”
They’d like to spend money in your neck of the woods. You can disagree with if and how, but come the fuck on.
“The best thing the governor can do now, after seeing that his federal emissary couldn’t sell this boondoggle to our coalition, is to agree to a redesign of the project.”
Because a meeting went poorly (in that people who wanted to act like asses acted like asses) we have to start over. Obviously.
Anyway, I wasn’t the only person to notice that this is an embarrassment. Jim Camden of the Spokesman-Review has a great take on it (I think the S-R has a limited number of clicks, but I’ve never hit it). Really, sometimes you need to just write in disbelief like I’ve been doing for several paragraphs now, but sometimes the journalistic prose is the way to go.
When LaHood and Inslee stopped by the Senate Republican Caucus room to urge them to pass a transportation budget in it with money for the bridge, and thus allow the state to get its hands on lots of federal money, he was, to put it mildly, rebuffed by opponents like Sen. Don Benton of Vancouver. All while someone was videotaping the exchange.
Later that day Inslee and LaHood held a press conference in the governor’s conference room to make a public appeal for the Legislature to vote for money for the bridge. As soon as they left, Benton emerged from the back of the room to hold a counter press conference to say that it shouldn’t. The senator’s office later circulated a press release exclaiming he had “schooled” LaHood on the bridge and declared the score “Benton 1, transportation secretary 0”. the caucus sent out a link to a YouTube clip of their discussion in the caucus room.
This appalled Senate Democrats, who thought a cabinet secretary should be treated with a greater modicum of respect, and shouldn’t be taping conversations without his permission. Senate Republicans promptly took the video clip off YouTube, and Majority Leader Rodney Tom of Medina later teol [sic] the Seattle Times it had been inadvertently posted, although how it could be edited with an intro, sent to YouTube, a link created and connected to a tweet isn’t immediately clear.
And that’s what winning 1-0 looks like.
by Carl Ballard — ,
On Boston:
– Obama’s speech at the press briefing room.
And non-Boston:
– I get that business owners are upset about the sick leave and it’s reasonable to expect that they’ll raise their prices to pay for more costs. But do they think dickishness is going to help?
– Rand Paul’s speech at Howard University.
– A while ago I had a link that the Spokane Street Viaduct would come in under budget. Here’s what Seattle will be using the rest of the money on.
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!