– You mean there was drug use on Capitol Hill before Occupy Seattle got there?

– Good job, Rob McKenna.

– This is not just the case for my family. I know I speak for many other hard working black, brown, and even poor white families who have the same experiences in the poor neighborhoods to look down upon from your elitist 1% out of touch pedestal. To say that an entire community “literally has no habit of showing up on Monday” or “they have no habit of staying all day” I say that is a load of shit. (h/t to Howie on Facebook)

– The worst thing Iran could do would be to get nuclear weapons and then not use them.

– Be bold.

– August has figured out the Republican primary.

In baseball, teams that spend excessive amounts on payroll (you can say they all pay excessive amounts in payroll, but that’s a discussion for another day) pay a percentage over a set limit back to the league. It seems to me the state could, in these dire budget times, demand a certain percentage back. I’m not saying a lot. Maybe 5% of the money over 120% of the money they get back from the state. Enough so that counties feel it but not so much that it cripples them.

I should note, even though the trolls will ignore it, that I don’t like this proposal of mine. I simply dislike it less than the idea of further cuts to education and social services. I’d prefer tax increases, and preferably progressive ones. I’d prefer that the Roadkill Caucus and the Republicans act seriously instead of demonizing state workers. But since they won’t, we’ll have to think creatively.

And, yes, I’m aware that many of the deepest cuts to education and social services are happening in counties that would have to pay this luxury tax. That’s just the price you pay for your anti-tax rhetoric.

– Lee may have more to say on this piece on WestNET, but it really solidified in my mind the difference between the Trib’s terrible editorials and their solid reporting.

– I’m still not fond of Sully.

– The War on Christmas is still going on? Bring the elves home, I say.

– On Facebook, Occupy Seattle made note of this comment.

– Cowardly Rob McKenna.

– Well that settles it, I’m not keeping a beehive in my house.

– I’ve joined Twitter, thus officially draining it of any cool it had left. Feel free to not follow me, as you’ve been doing.

– Those big banks are a piece of work.

– I don’t find anything objectionable about the code of conduct for street canvassers, but just saying “no thanks” or “I’m already a member” when you see one usually works fine.

– It’s time to move to targeted direct action, and, no, that doesn’t mean supporting candidates for election.

– Shorter Seattle Times: The middle is always the right place.

– One’s first response is, whoa, okay, that’s really weird. One’s second response is, what a terrible negotiating strategy. One’s third response is, awesome, an international free agent, these guys are always exciting! And one’s fourth response is to wonder whether Kawasaki is actually any good.

I know, early days and all that, but this would be pretty rad.

Yesterday, the Sound Transit Executive Committee recommended a $2 million budget addition to study high-capacity mass transit from downtown to Ballard in 2012, instead of maybe three years from now, as was originally proposed.

This is fantastic news! Regardless of if the full Sound Transit board approves the $2 million Executive Committee recommendation on December 15, millions have already been pledged. Specifically, the City has budgeted an additional $2 million for studying and planning (including $900,000 from a federal transportation planning grant, a $300,000 SDOT match of the federal grant, and $800,000 from the approved 2012 budget).

I would be interested in how much this would work as a spur to development versus changing the way people move between Ballard and Downtown. The buses between Downtown and Ballard now seem to work pretty well (they work well for me when I take them, but I don’t commute that route so it’s not rush hour). And while there’s always room for improvement, Ballard doesn’t seem as in need of a spur for growth that much of the Link corridor will benefit from in the long term.

Goldy highlights this gem from Frank Luntz.

“I’m so scared of this anti-Wall Street effort. I’m frightened to death,” Luntz said. “They’re having an impact on what the American people think of capitalism.”

While I think the Occupy movement in general and Occupy Wall Street in particular changed the discussion and have had a positive impact, a much larger driver is that the economy has turned many people against capitalism (or at least the brand of capitalism in the United States). It’s the housing bubble and the myriad foreclosed houses it’s left since it burst. It’s the high unemployment rate, and what it does to people who can’t find work or to people who are afraid to ask for a raise or who aren’t able to take that vacation any more or who aren’t getting as many tips as they did a few years ago. It’s the high price of gas. It’s the degradation of government services.

No, if you want to make people think positive things about capitalism, build a capitalism that works for them. Make capitalism more democratic, and more fair. Make it a vehicle for building a strong middle class accessible to anyone who works hard.

It may be more cumulative than any one thing, but the reaction to Cain’s affair seems to be more harmful to Cain than his alleged sexual harassment. While I can’t say the affair, if true, reflects well on him, well adults are free to fuck up their private lives. As long as it’s consensual and not abusing power, it’s between himself and his family, and we can focus on policy.

And yet, the thing that’s got him in the most trouble is the consensual thing that doesn’t matter to his policy. Seems like we could straighten out our priorities a bit. Also, while I’m dreaming about straightening out our priorities, maybe don’t take the next Herman Cain quite so seriously.

I’m glad that the Wenatchee bailout isn’t going through. Although unlike the Republicans who oppose it, I’m not against the state bailing municipalities out on principle. But since I don’t think the state would return the favor for Seattle, well, no bail outs is probably preferable to bail outs that only flow East.

Also, it’s tough to justify this when the economy is on the rocks and the legislature is in cut, cut, cut mode. The Republicans have, with their insistence on no new revenue, made this a choice between bailing out bad investments in Wenatchee or schools and social services. Really, a no brainer.

The Columbian has a bold strategy to plug the horrible budget hole without the hassle of raising taxes or cutting programs that people depend on. Magic? No, silly. Reform. But without getting very specific or putting a price tag on it.

This special session was necessitated by a projected $2 billion revenue shortfall. Many lawmakers talk about dealing with this only by various combinations of spending cuts or revenue increases. Again, though, state Sen. Joe Zarelli of Ridgefield, the Republican leader on the Senate Ways and Means Committee, is advocating a third tactic that never seems to draw the attention it deserves: reform.

Oh. Reform. Of course. If we do things better then things will be better.

And Washingtonians have to wonder why reform never carries more clout in these agonizing budget discussions. After all, the concept of reform is largely (though far from totally) nonpartisan. Reform means simply changing the way government does its business, maximizing efficiencies. While conservatives advocate budget cuts and liberals insist on boosting revenue, both sides ought to agree that a bigger bang for the taxpayers’ buck would be a good thing.

It couldn’t be that there isn’t much money in the so-called reforms. That will require the rest of the article to mention some of the ones that will have the most “bang for the taxpayers’ buck” and really delve into them. How they effect the programs, how they effect the workers tasked with implementing them. That sort of thing. Or I guess quote one state senator.

Even with the limited attention given to reform, Zarelli points to steps already taken by legislators in that direction: “more choice for injured workers, a refocusing of the Basic Health Plan and disability lifeline, and clamping down on fraud and abuse involving food and cash assistance to low-income people,” all accomplished with bipartisan support.

You guys, all we have to do is cut the fraud and abuse budgets! Also, if we make Workers’ Comp and Basic Health less effective, it’s not a cut, it’s reform. Anyway, you know what would make this article the best ever? More vague suggestions from the same person without any attempt to see what they would do to state services and state workers let alone how much they might save or cost.

Surely, that cannot be the end of what can be done. In his article for The Herald, Zarelli advocated focusing on “long-term obligations that are huge cost drivers, such as state-worker pensions, health-care services, paying off the state’s debt and efforts to bring our K-12 education system into compliance with court rulings” plus at least having discussions about “services for non-citizens, state liability, non-Indian gaming, state workplace efficiencies such as competitive contracting and defined-contribution pensions, and how the state subsidizes low-income child care.”

Almost all of those things will cost money, or are cuts (except expanding gambling). This article promised something other than “combinations of spending cuts or revenue increases” and yet pay down debt is on the list? How do you expect to pay down debt without raising taxes or cutting spending?* Hopefully the next paragraph will answer some of those questions instead of being a whiny nonsense metaphor.

The reform menu keeps getting longer, doesn’t it? Why, then, are legislators so reluctant to place their orders?

It’s because most of those reforms are bad ideas, cuts by another name, or bland generalities. While some of them may be part of the solution, this article doesn’t make the case for any of them, and certainly doesn’t weigh the pros and cons. The legislature is trying to solve a $2 Billion budget gap, and the Columbian is proposing gimmickry and trickery while demanding we take them more seriously.

[Read more…]

– I remember Nick telling me that Hillary should drop out in 2008, so I’m glad to see he’s come to my side on primary elections being good for whoever wins them.

– Late night taxi stands

– The new iPhone hates women (h/t).

– Awesome job Washington Post.

– I can’t decide if I think #Q4Jon is awesome or horrible.

– Predatory birds spreading seeds via lizards.

I’m still processing the news of the protests in Olympia, but so far it’s been pretty inspiring. Things like this create the space to do, if not good, at least less bad. Still, there’s a 2/3-or-a-vote requirement to pass any tax increases. The Democrats still have a record of spinelessness, and the Republican agenda is still horrible. The budget hole is still awful.

So, I have a bit more hope for the special session than I did this morning. But I’m still skeptical that the actual gritty work of legislating will produce the kind of budget that Washington needs. We’ll see.

But we’ll also act. So those of us who can’t be down in Olympia can still call or email your legislator. You can write on a blog, or social media. You can call into talk shows and write letters to the editor.

– More like this, please.

– Calling 911 is enough. Not calling 911 is not enough. We have an actual phone line you can call into, directly, day or night, and report violent crimes. We pay people money to sit at desks and field these calls. We devote considerable infrastructure toward this end, to ensure that there is no question whether anyone ever “did enough.” We have defined “enough.” (h/t)

– 23rd & Oz!

– You know that at some point the Washington State Patrol hired some expert to design that Impaired Driving Unit logo on their van.

– Rugged Individualists.

We’re faced with a Godawful budget hole, and there are no good options. The best thing to do would be to just deficit spend, like mad until the economy goes right. But since that’s off the table, Gregoire will push a sales tax increase. It’s regressive and doesn’t raise enough, but it’s better than losing services.

So, my question is what would you like to see in the special session? More taxes? If so what taxes? What specific cuts? Even though it’s budget related, they can pass whatever they want, so is there some other area you’d like to see them work on while the session is going on?

– Why not Washington?

– Thank God, my doctor was into Jesus!

– Jobs for America.

– No Congressional action? No problem!

– Technically, the trail user has the right-of-way, but is still expected to come to a stop.

– Ike’s speech if D-Day had been a failure is still moving.

– The end of every year means wading through the “Best Of” lists of numerous internet jack-offs, both trusted and despised.

Ken Schram is upset about McGinn’s apology for his police using pepper spray on peaceful protesters. Not for the police using pepper spray, but for the apology.

What is it that we expect of police?

To protect people and property throughout the community. Professionalism. Integrity. They don’t always meet those standards, of course. No group of people will 100% of the time. So I assume this will be a post about how we better handle that? Awesome! We rarely have the chance to discuss that at that level.

I ask that rhetorical question in light of Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn apologizing for cops who pepper-sprayed Occupy Seattle protestors last Tuesday because there were some who refused to obey their legitimate orders.

Really you think, “What is it that we expect of police?” is a rhetorical question? It’s not foundational? It’s not the basis for how media folks like Ken Schram ought to deal with the police?* Anyway, if you’re wondering what we can reasonably expect from Seattle police, well good news, there’s an SPD Manual (large .pdf). We can judge them against that, for starters.

So let’s play this out.

Would Mayor Mike have issued a mea-culpa if it had been a Ku Klux Klan demonstration and some elderly racist had taken a face full of pepper spray for ignoring police orders?

I would hope so. Everybody has a right to protest. And even despicable people don’t deserve to be pepper sprayed. It’s impossible to know, except presumably YOU COULD HAVE ASKED HIM. What with you being a TV and radio personality, and all.

I don’t think so.

You’re on TV, for Christ sake, you don’t really have to just guess. Call him up and throw the hypothetical at him. That’s what we expect of our news people.

Also, are there lots of demonstrations that McGinn disagrees with that are getting pepper sprayed? If so how about write about them? If not, then it sort of disproves your point, doesn’t it?** Finally, your analogy doesn’t hold up since the Klan have never, to my knowledge, made a commitment to nonviolence, as Occupy Seattle have. So, really, awesome metaphor all around.

What’s obvious here is that police need to be given a list of protesters that we absolutely won’t tolerate breaking the law, and a list of protesters that we give a wink and a nod to when they do something illegal because we agree with what they’re demonstrating against.

Or how about a specific set of standing orders. Like in the Manual linked to above that says (OC Spray is what’s commonly referred to as Pepper Spray, bold mine):

Personnel assigned OC spray, Patrol C.A.R.T or TASER less lethal force options are authorized to use these agents or devices during Unusual Occurrences (UOs), consistent with Department policy, unless otherwise directed by a Supervisor or the Incident Commander. Officers should weigh the capabilities and limitations of these force options in a crowd control setting. Less lethal force, specifically OC spray (Oleoresin Capsicum) or other riot control agents, shall not ordinarily be used to overcome passive resistance by nonviolent and/or peaceful protesters, absent additional compelling factors, or unless previously approved by the Incident Commander.

So it’s true that anyone, regardless of ideology, shouldn’t get pepper sprayed by the cops when they’re acting nonviolently. That seems like the logical thing.

If Mayor Mike would just inform police which illegal actions deserve his dispensation then SPD could save their pepper-spray for those whose protests genuinely offend his sensibilities and political points of view.

Nobody is saying don’t do anything. They’re saying don’t pepper spray people when it goes against procedures, and when you do, it’s right to apologize. People were willing to get arrested, and the police should have complied, but this is beyond that.

Also, Ken Schram often complains that the government is too big, wasteful, and out of control. Take for instance his most recent commentary that there must be waste out there somewhere in Washington State. Really, how someone like that says if you don’t obey police orders, you should be pepper sprayed is beyond me.

If Mayor Mike wants selective law enforcement, the least that should be expected of him is to do the selecting.

You still haven’t proved that he wants selective enforcement; you’ve only had a pointless hypothetical where you compared nonviolent protesters to people who engage in lynching. If McGinn supported selective enforcement, I think there would be camping at Westlake, the food tent wouldn’t have been removed, the city wouldn’t have ticketed people who honked in support, and the police wouldn’t have cleared the nonviolent protests at various places at all, pepper spray or no. Here, to cite one example, McGinn makes the point that he isn’t going to make specific exceptions for Occupy Seattle. “But when it comes to free speech, government does not get to do that. We are not allowed to favor one type of speech over another. That is anathema to the Constitution.”

With that, we’ll all be clear on exactly what we expect of police.

We should expect professionalism from them at all times. We give them a gun, we give them TASERS, we give them pepper spray, and we expect them to use it in a manner consistent with the rules. It doesn’t look like the officer who used pepper spray on peaceful protesters did that, but there will be an investigation. I support the due process rights of the officers who used pepper spray, and if there were orders, to use pepper spray, etc. I’d like to know that.

[Read more…]