It has long been suspected that Gov. Christine Gregoire would decline running for third term in 2012. Several media sources are now reporting that Gregoire will make her retirement “official” at a 10:00 AM press conference today.
Gregoire’s statement clears the way for an announcement from Rep. Jay Inslee (D-WA-01) that he will be running for the office. Expect an announcement soon.
Unless something really odd happens because of the top-two primary system, Fall of 2012 should bring us a choice between Inslee and State Attorney General, Rob McKenna (R).
That’s a bit of a relief, albeit not entirely unexpected. Gregoire would get it from both sides: the left would want to punish her for the budget cuts, the right would blame her for the budget shortfall.
I think she did the best with a difficult situation, despite a few complaints I had. but it’s time to bring in a new pitcher, this one’s given it all she had.
Good riddance.
Maybe Gregoire can go join the DEA, or be Obama’s drug czar or something. There she can have a good laugh about how she helped the feds screw over the medical marijuana patients in the state.
I’m not brokenhearted. She mostly played it safe and didn’t use any political capital to advance even moderate democratic ideals. Had she stepped up a bit more, perhaps the legislators would have too and pressed for a more even sort of revenue package that wouldn’t have gotten overturned by a initiative.
Whaddya know.
The warnings that 35% increases in the biennial budget were not sustainable turned out to be true.
Who woulda thunk it?
She was the right person for the job back in 2004, but the ground changed under her very quickly. It’s too bad the Dem’s couldn’t have run someone else in ’08. It’s good that they will be doing so now.
Bob @ 4,
Of course, every state learned that same lesson as the Bush Recession commenced.
@ 6 Darryl:
When in modern history has a 35% increase in spending every two years been sustainable?
It wasn’t a ‘lesson’ to be learned.
Simple common sense dictates it shouldn’t have been done in the first place.
Darryl @ 6…
Make that the Bush Depression.
@7
OK, say you decided to save a little money by not changing the oil in your car, how long will that be sustainable? How big of an increase in spending will be needed when your engine seizes up?
Because that’s what we did as a state. We put off maintaining things and building new stuff that we needed and it bit us in the ass in the end. Putting off maintaining stuff and building the new things we need (like smart kids) is exactly what the state and federal Republican’s are calling for us to do now. It’s a bad deal and will cost us more in the end.
We need to raise taxes and spend more money to fix all the broken & worn out shit in Washington and America. And guess what, when you employ the working class folks doing it at living wages they’ll go and spend money on stuff the investing class has invested money in.
@9
We expanded government substantially in Gregoire’s first budget, the biennial one that increased outlays 35%. We didn’t buy an oil filter and five quarts, dude. We put 20″ wheels on the H2 in the garage and bought an Acura to stick out front in the driveway for good measure.
There’s a difference. A big one.
Stupidity should be painful.
…you should know dude. Your comment is REALLY stupid.
@7 Those increases mostly reflected catching up from yet another Republican recession.
What is truly unsustainable is our state tax system that soaks those of limited means so the affluent can skate.
Gregoire’s persistent refusal to lead on state tax reform is her greatest failure as governor, and the resultant damage to public services is her enduring legacy to future Washingtonians.
She wanted to be the “education governor” but what she left behind her tenure is poorer schools and less access to higher education. That’s not a record to be proud of.
@10
Um… Nope! Mostly doing road work, replacing a few ferries that were built before WWII, built a new prison and the like. We did get a new state parks HQ that would qualify for your “putting 20″ wheels on the H2” comment. We needed the new HQ, we didn’t need to spend the kind of money we spent on it. Those kind of examples are the exception, not the rule.
Plus, you never address the other part, that being the Republicans don’t want to spend money doing the necessary work, so it costs us more in the long run.
@12 Those increases occurred because of substantial increases in state revenues. The home valuation increases that you now Blame Bush for causing were a source of Gregoire’s largesse, as she contended that the increases would continue, despite warnings to the contrary. The monetary collections fueled the spending, which Dems happily continued until the tap ran dry.
Now they scream for higher taxes so they can spend without restraint yet again.
Why wasn’t Gregoire screaming for them while she was running for re-election? Revenues by then were falling and we were already in a hole.
Blame Bush gonna work for you in 2012? Running on your record isn’t going to work.
I’m a big believer in the idea that no one thinks “outside of the box.” We all have boxes that we think inside of. When it comes to elections you pick the candidate who’s box best fits the box we’re currently living in. In 2004 that was Gregoire. By 2006 so much had changed that the box of skills that Gregoire brought to the job no longer fit the job that needed doing. The “failure” was to have the same two choices for governor in 2008 as we had in 2004, despite the changed environment that they had to work in.
Actually, what they’re trying to do is do work that needs doing anyway and to put working class people to work. See there’s two groups of people in America: there’s the working class and the investing class. In order for the working class to make money they need work. In order for the investing class to make money they need big companies and governments to place orders for things like concrete and rebar and they need the working class to spend money. How can the investing class make money if the working class doesn’t have any money to spend?
@ Ignorant Bob:
Umm, the run-up in housing prices that was fueled by the illegal and unethical banking and loan groups that were supported by Phil Gramm and the republicans….you mean THAT run-up in housing prices that then collapsed?
You mean the federal law written by the savings and loan industry lobbysits and Phil Gramm and promoted by the republican party?
Oh, and after the recession hit in late in 2001/2002 the state cut way back and then was making up for the cut-backs in 2003-4 and beyond…nice try. Look up actual facts this time and your out of context crap will fade away as …out of context crap.
Way to ignore the facts and concentrate on the one piece of “data” that is out of context…that is typical of a fool who knows not what they are talking about.
@16
Because the world view and skill set that she brought to the job in 2008 were the one’s that were needed in 2004 despite all of the changes that happened between 2004 and 2008.
In the end it’s a binary choice, you get the D or the R and the D was still the better choice of the two.
It’s easy to say that the Gary Locke’s and Chris Gregoire’s of the world aren’t good leaders but if they wanted to lead – where would they find followers?
Not in the Democratic caucus who keep their jobs by tacking right just enough not to appear completely insane like the Republicans.
@ 20
Interesting reply. I won’t argue with it.
@ 19
You can blame whatever combination of factors or whomever you wish for the run-up in RE prices and the resultant tax revenue. It’s irrelevant to the point I made, which is that the rate of year-over-year increases in them, and the disproportionate effect they had on revenue collections, was unsustainable, that it was pointed out as an unsustainable situation in no uncertain terms, and that the warning was ignored and the acceleration in spending commenced.
You understand the point, don’t you? Making a long-term bet on perpetual double-digit increases in state revenue collections is not smart. It is not supported by history. It is no smarter when revenues are going up than when they are going down.
Finally, @ 19, your list of reasons is short a few items. You know, the ones that make Dems look like their shit stinks as well and that there is plenty of blame to go around for what happened.
You can catch Jay Inslee at NWroots (see ad to the left). He is going to kick off the event with the opening keynote address.
McKenna: Worse Than Rossi
A front-page story in today’s Republican Times sets forth Prefers-GOP-Party gubernatorial candidate Rob McKenna’s vision for Washington:
1) Spending three-fourths of the state budget on education;
2) Tax cuts for small business.
It’s the same old tired Republican line: McKenna claims his proposed tax cuts will increase state revenues, and he won’t say where he’ll cut the state budget to pay for his education spending.
But one thing is clear: Spending three-fourths of the state budget on education means eliminating public services for the poor. It means eliminating the state’s role in providing a social safety net. And it means dismantling consumer and environmental protection.
McKenna is a Governor Walker in the making. His vision for Washington is essentially the same as Walker’s vision for Wisconsin: A state where businesses and the rich pay no taxes, government programs are pared back to only those that serve business interests, public workers are stripped of pay and labor rights, and Social Darwinism — the GOP’s governing ideology — rules with a vengeance.
Why would a majority of voters, who stand to lose heavily under such a governing vision, vote for it? The answer is simple: Because Republicans promise it will produce the jobs that people who were rendered unemployed by past GOP economic policies are so desperate for.
Trust me, if McKenne wins that promise will be broken, and those jobs won’t materialize. In the past, they never have, when gullible voters have tried this foolish eperiment before. They won’t this time, either.
When it is accompanied by responsible revenue raising. Maybe WWII-Fifties is example?
A front-page story in today’s Republican Times sets forth Prefers-GOP-Party gubernatorial candidate Rob McKenna’s vision for Washington:
1) Spending three-fourths of the state budget on education;
2) Tax cuts for small business.
It’s the same old tired Republican line: McKenna claims his proposed tax cuts will increase state revenues, and he won’t say where he’ll cut the state budget to pay for his education spending.
But one thing is clear: Spending three-fourths of the state budget on education means eliminating public services for the poor. It means eliminating the state’s role in providing a social safety net. And it means dismantling consumer and environmental protection.
McKenna is a Governor Walker in the making. His vision for Washington is essentially the same as Walker’s vision for Wisconsin: A state where businesses and the rich pay no taxes, government programs are pared back to only those that serve business interests, public workers are stripped of pay and labor rights, and Social Darwinism — the GOP’s governing ideology — rules with a vengeance.
Why would a majority of voters, who stand to lose heavily under such a governing vision, vote for it? The answer is simple: Because Republicans promise it will produce the jobs that people who were rendered unemployed by past GOP economic policies are so desperate for.
Trust me, if McKenne wins that promise will be broken, and those jobs won’t materialize. In the past, they never have, when gullible voters have tried this foolish eperiment before. They won’t this time, either.
McKenna will try to sell himself to voters as a moderate. He isn’t; he’s a hard-right radical, even more extreme than Rossi, a Scott Walker in the making.
In the months ahead, we Democrats must do everything in our power to educate the public that McKenna is a dangerous threat to the poor, working people, and ordinary citizens of our state.
@21
I think Locke did a really good job and that Greg… would have done just fine if the world hadn’t changed too much underneath her.
27 – The Dems won back the legislature because they made inroads into the suburbs. The suburbs wanted their posh new schools but balked at significant tax changes. Classic ticket splitters – they sent Dems to the legislatures but voted for Eyman intiatives.
Locke and Gregoire saw this clearly: don’t rock the boat and you can avoid being one termers.
Negotiating with themselves to break bread with the likes of a Dino Rossi is not a mark of great leadership from either Locke/Gregoire or the Dem caucus – more like settling for being caretakers while the edifice crumbles beneath their feet in my view.
@ 7
“When in modern history has a 35% increase in spending every two years been sustainable?”
And your evidence that anyone expected it to be “sustainable” is…?
If you take two successive budgets that were put together when the economy was growing, and try to extrapolate from there, you’re more than likely to simply end up with your head up your ass.
At least Inslee looks like a normal person. Bobby boy, eh, not so much.
Rossi’s a crook, but at least he seemed like a nice guy (regardless of wether it was true or not). McKenna’s always struck me as vindictive and mean.
Which is why he’s mining gold in foreclosures.
It’s like saying Walker in WI seemed like a nice idealistic fellow who just happens to believe in freedom and liberty through smaller government and lower taxes.
When of course in reality he believes in suppressing votes, privatizing public assets for pennies on the dollar and depriving public workers of as much bargaining leverage as he can possibly get away with so he can cut taxes to well heeled contributors.
All of which Dino Rossi would have done in spades were we so unlucky to have bought his sleazy sales pitch.
Well I have been standing back for over a year…but the news flash that Rossi is a crook woke me from a long sleep.
As for McKenna…not a crook just another poser.
Should he be elected and the D.C. caused economic crash continue its downward spiral, say good by to living wages and the safety net and health care for the less than uber rich.
And, should the economy recover with McKenna as Gov, look for NOTHING to be restored and all of the gains to go to the uber rich and big business.
This Governor has been nothing less than the best we could hope for in the toughest of times. Sure she did not achieve what we had hoped for, but no one could have. Some would have wilted or sold out or taken off two years ago, just when stability was what we needed most to guide us through tough times. Gary Lock would have been out of here for sure and left us in a shambles just when the most skill was needed to find a survivable path out of this D.C. and corporate greed caused economic mess.
What I have observed over six and a half years and the preceding eight, is an honorable public servant who served with distinction and was tested first by over a year of litigation and hate over a close victory and then, just as her solid leadership was bringing us improvements in health care, hope for restoration of Puget Sound and investment in our future, the economic crash robbed us and our Governor of the chance to see these things through.
I don’t much care what the haters have to say about this post, but I will say this: I am sad. I regret the injustice. These could have been the best of times and a clear legacy, one rich with achievement could have been this Governors mark. So many things beyond her control could have preserved the capacity for such a different legacy. Federal regulation of the banking industry, willingness of the voters to allow legislators to legislate or even to support the choices made when they did so are just a few examples.
Yeah, no surprise. She would’ve gotten crushed no matter who she ran against. Her shortcomings as a leader were always there, despite the years of constant excuses from progressives. As the difficulties in this state mounted, she went from being a mildly inept bureaucrat to a dangerously incompetent leader.
Heh, maybe Bobbie Mac could run on giving people a “square deal,” he wouldn’t be the first Republican to do so…
@16 Higher taxes? State tax revenues have dropped by billons of dollars. What “higher taxes” are you talking about? Washingtonians have given themselves huge tax cuts by buying online instead of in local stores and by not buying cars and other big-ticket items. The state is taking in far less revenue than before the Second Bush Depression. The spending cuts were necessitated by declining tax revenues, not because taxes weren’t raised.
@22 “You can blame whatever combination of factors or whomever you wish for the run-up in RE prices and the resultant tax revenue.”
No you can’t. The causes of this recession are well known. You can have any political opinion you want but you don’t get to make up your own facts. This recession was caused by massive fraud in the PRIVATE financial industry after Republican politicians freed mortgage brokers and bankers from government regulation and oversight.
34. Then she is a PRIME candidate for a top position in the Obama Whitehouse! Being a mildly inept bureaucrat to a dangerously incompetent leader.
She too can pull down a massive Pers 1 Pension (until the country goes bankrupt and it stops) and a fed pension for life.
Gotta love it.
@35 Bobbie Mac is a Suzie Hutchison in male clothing.
@39
He sure as hell ‘aint no Teddy Roosevelt.
Gregoire may be out, but Bachmann’s in! Let the silly season begin!
@41 Running and being electable are two different things.
@41
I’m just happy that she’ll be bring the crazy and helping Obama get re-elected.
Obama doesn’t have a ghost chance in hell in this economy.
It’s the same cycle all over again. Gas prices go way up and business expenses go way up. Businesses stop hiring because demand for their products go down. The demand goes down because people are paying too much for gas and don’t buy as much stuff. More and more people get laid off and default on bills and banks stop lending. It’s 2008 all over again
Thanks Obama, better get out on the golf course soon!
So long Governor Sea-Hag!
Now back into the depths of Puget Sound where you belong, and take your drunken Libtarded fiscal recklessness with ya.
That is all.
Gregoire never passed a single sustainable Budget.
The most recent Budget used 40% shell-games (deferrals & one-time fixes) to be legal.
How is that sustainable?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ix09m.html
Recent Budget news. May tax collections way down following some one-time amnesty collections that distort what is really happening.
http://blogs.sos.wa.gov/FromOu.....struggles/
Gregoire was bought & paid for by the State Employee Unions and she paid them off royally leaving the next schmuck a pile of shit.
How many more “one-timers” and “deferrals” can you throw in and pass the straight-face test?
@ 47
You haven’t answered my question. I asked you to provide evidence that anyone expected government spending to be “sustainable” for any of the budgets proposed by Gov. Gregoire. The crickets are still chirping.
You don’t buy a car every month, do you? Nevertheless, in a month in which you buy a car, your spending for that month isn’t “sustainable.” On the month in which you pay your six month premium for car insurance, your spending isn’t “sustainable.” No one has a spending pattern in which all spending always represents a “sustainable” level of spending. Expecting the government to behave differently is, well, just plain idiotic.
Now, one might argue that the government should set aside funds as part of each budget for anticipated expenses. There are two problems with this argument. The first is that it presumes all expenses can be fully anticipated. This is never true. One can estimate some expenses, but even those estimates tend to have errors. And, there remains the potential for unanticipated expenses.
The second is, even that notion of “sustainable” presumes a fixed level of income. Governments don’t operate under a fixed level of income–a fact which is particularly true given the Republican penchant for cutting taxes under any and all pretexts and recent Republican policies that have had disastrous effects on the economy.
In short, you are an idiot. Please, either stop voting, or acquire a brain capable of coherent thought.