I’m slipping. The Seattle P-I wrote an editorial critical of an Eyman initiative, and I never mentioned it: “Initiative wrong remedy.”
The Legislature will pass performance audits legislation in the current session, and it has nothing to do with bullying by our friend Timmy. State Auditor Brian Sonntag has been pushing for such legislation for years, and leaders of both parties have committed to passing it.
Sonntag’s office says it’s there, and not in the proposed initiative, that the better prospects lie.
To do what the initiative proposes, Sonntag says, would require his department to “grow to at least four times its current size over the course of the next 10 to 12 years” and it would cost $90 million more every two years. And it would be “ill-advised,” Sonntag’s office says, for the state to conduct performance audits at the local level.
Those tempted to sign the audits initiative would do well to heed the auditor’s advice.
And Eyman would do well to find himself another initiative.
So if the answer is not in the initiative, then perhaps the next initiative should be to eliminate the state auditors office and see if it cannot be privatized and ran with greater efficiancy….
Oh my gosh. You overlooked this?!?! Just like I overlooked the Republicans’ outrage over voting felons when Rossi was up by 42! You know, between George “Term Limits” Nethercutt and Dino “Hey! Now that I’m behind this must have been a faulty election” and Tim “I’m not a professional politician — oh wait, I did pay myself, nevermind” Eyman I think the GOP in this state must be in line for some kind of award for hypocrisy. They certainly deserve it.
Eyman is definitely on a “negatory sleigh ride” lately. The only chance he has of passing another initiative is capitalizing on all the public disgust with the state government in general that this election mess has started. Nothing gets people riled up like them feeling like an election result was unfair. A re vote would cancel out most of that disgust.
Gregoire calling for the hand recount started this momentum towards increased distrust of state government. She decided to go ahead and risk another Eyman turd in order to try to grab some power. Once she took that step, we were launched down this path and the only way to get off is to re vote. Thanks, Christine!
Man Chuck… could you get any more knee-jerk? Sonntag is one of the most respected statewide elected officials in WA.
And oh… the legislation he prefers happens to be Pam Roach’s bill… and it does allow Sonntag to hire outside companies to perform the audits.
Oh, it is Cheryl, the girl that doesnt know the meaning of the words she uses…good morning…..
Comment by Cheryl the Proud Progressive— 1/15/05 @ 12:04 am
Get off your proud prgressive high horse, and compare the number of Rossi votes to the slot machine initiative. Rossi support DOES NOT equal Eyman support, neither does all the other BS you cite.
The only real financially sound job that government does is military defense…that is defense of our borders. If you want an exelent example of government involvment look at the airlines, right or wrong government has made the airplane the least attractive way to travel (even though it is the safest and could be the most attractive). And it was said that we will not allow terrorism to dictate our lives….
Eyman should try an initiative to eliminate the state sales tax. At least the 6.5% portion that is charged by the state itself, which would eliminate about 3/4 of the sales tax on average. Washington has the most regressive tax system in the country. The poorest 20% pay almost 18% of their income in state and local taxes, while the wealthiest 1% pay just over 3% of their income in state and local taxes. Besides, the wealthiest 20% of the population in this state now votes Democrat, and it is grossly unfair that they should get off lightly when it comes to paying taxes.
One might say that such a drastic change would be more palatable if the sales tax were replaced with something else in the initiative. However, this would probably violate the single subject rule, and make the entire initiative void. Not to mention that repeal of the sales tax would be less popular if replacement with a new or increased tax were also included.
Besides, such an initiative would be a great way to capitalize on voter anger, if Gregoire’s election stands. Gregoire and the Democrat leadership, of course, will urge the voters to reject the initiative. This will expose Democrats as hypocrites, due to the highly regressive nature of the sales tax, and the Democrats’ professed concerns for the poor.
Gregoire will claim that passage of the initiative will strike a death blow to state government. This will only encourage all the people frustrated by a lack of a re-vote to vote for the initiative.
Dems push bill to cut income of political foe
By Ralph Thomas
Seattle Times Olympia bureau
E-mail this article
Print this article
Search archive
Most read articles
Most e-mailed articles
RSS feeds
OLYMPIA — Democratic lawmakers are pushing legislation that would take a multimillion-dollar bite out of one of their party’s biggest political enemies — the Building Industry Association of Washington.
About time. And the BIAW is complaining about the workers comp rate being so high. Of course it is, millions are going into the BIAW attack machine instead of for benefits or lowering costs.
Richard – you are getting silly. Seattle and King Co have some tax savy. Would not work. We voted agaist the other tax crap from Eyman and his ilk.
Bad revenge fantasy. Not in the cards. Not possible in any statewie election. The gorilla speaks.
Comment by Erik— 1/15/05 @ 1:23 am
Another good reason to vote the democrats out of the legislature next chance we get. Mean spirited revenge that ends up hurting the BIAW insurance pool members. Not really who the democrats ought to be targeting. And if you look into it, you will find that workers comp rates are a huge rip off for most businesses in this state. And still will be after the democrats are through with us.
The money the public employee unions spend supporting democrats all originates as taxpayer money. BIAW money originates as private money. Why am I not surprised the democrats are not too concerned about the political spending by their public employee unions?
And if you look into it, you will find that workers comp rates are a huge rip off for most businesses in this state
Yes, because the BIAW is charging a lobbying premium in the amount of millions each year.
eliminate the state sales tax. At least the 6.5% portion that is charged by the state itself,
I would support cutting this by one half to two thirds if a modest individual income tax is introduced coupled with Brian Sonntag’s state government performance initiative.
High sales taxes suck, yes.
Chuck plays financial analyst: “The only real financially sound job that government does is military defense…that is defense of our borders.”
Oh, that’s rich. Back it up. Or put your money where your mouth is and move to some third-world country where there are no government services aside from the military.
Comment by Erik— 1/15/05 @ 1:51 am
Erik, only builders in the BIAW pool pay to BIAW. I pay the state, as do most small businesses. And the BIAW people get a discount/rebate because its a pool outside the state program. Plus the BIAW has all that extra money left over. Which is why the state-run workers comp is a rip off.
Here’s the article about it:
http://www.seattleweekly.com/f.....s_biaw.php
Erik, only builders in the BIAW pool pay to BIAW
Yes, I agee.
Plus the BIAW has all that extra money left over
Yes, and they should return more of it. The essentially have a state sanctioned monopoly to skim $ off the top.
Never said that the only service for government was military, government should of coarse make sure that the civilian job of education, police, as well as help of the poor is handled fairly. We need the government to make cretain the private as well as the military section treats us well……
Oh, that’s rich. Back it up. Or put your money where your mouth is and move to some third-world country where there are no government services aside from the military.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Switserland?
zip–
Great point about Public Employees.
We are obviously overpaying State workers by the amount of the dues that go into Political Action Committees. The only huge difference is BIAW and other Associations take risk and “earn” these refunds for members.
GOLDY–You previously made the state that you understand exactly how Retro works. I asked you 4 fundamental questions…and you failed to answer any of them.
Where does the Retro Refund come from Goldy? How is the Retro Refund pie determined Goldy?
You are full of crap on this one Goldy..and you know it.
You’ve have all night to research it dude. But why would you have to research if you “know how it works”.
I’m calling BS on you Goldy!!!
zip, if we had state wide health care, couldn’t L&I be eliminated? Wouldn’t state wide health care save business a lot of money in a myriad of ways? Gee why can’t the Regressives and the Progressives find solutions to our problems?
Where does the Retro Refund come from Goldy? How is the Retro Refund pie determined Goldy??
Here’s a pretty comprehensive article on the BIAW funding:
http://www.seattleweekly.com/f.....s_biaw.php
Performance Audits?
Eyman is goof. For the most part his initiatives are bad for the state.
On the other hand it is disingenuous to believe that the state will pro-actively authorize these performance audits.
Mr. Sontag (who is truly respected) wanted to audit SoundTransit/RTA but was blocked from doing so by none other than Gary Locke. The reason? “Sound Transit / RTA have programs in place that account for self auditing.” Or some such tripe.
You all look at Sound Transit and tell me the state is doing even a relatively decent job at cost accounting.
My suggestion? Give Sontag the power to audit any state department, organization or project. Will this EVER happen? Absolutely not and you all know why.
I wanted to post this under that ‘They eat their own’ topic that was here, but since the attention span here seems a bit on the short side, that topic seems to have died an early death.
AFTER THE DEFEAT
The Terry McAuliffe Syndrome
Democrats will never win elections without better people and better ideas.
BY DAN GERSTEIN
Saturday, January 15, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST
When John Kerry ripped defeat from the jaws of victory last November, losing to a wounded president with a failed record, a few of us Democratic outliers took some solace in thinking that his campaign’s dismal performance might actually force the party to own up to its mortal electoral weaknesses. Turns out we grossly underestimated the national Democrats’ capacity for self-delusion and self-defeat.
Yes, it’s only been two months, and it’s not realistic to expect the party to remake itself even before Inauguration Day. But consider the head-scratching choices that Democrats have made so far since hitting close to political rock bottom. (That being defined loosely as losing in 81% of the nation’s counties with a war hero running against a draft-avoider who has bungled both Iraq and our national finances).
We chose as our House and Senate leaders (and thus the public face of the party) Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid–two honorable, decent people who nevertheless have done little to inspire confidence that they could successfully fight a parking ticket, let alone the war against terrorism. We chose (by abdicating responsibility to two extreme-ish members of Congress) to mount a formal, indignation-filled challenge to the results in Ohio–despite the fact that George Bush won by 100,000 votes, as compared to the 537 he (ostensibly) won by in Florida.
And now we hear there’s a move afoot to choose Terry McAuliffe–another decent, honorable man who nevertheless presided over two consecutive election cycles in which the number of elected Democrats at almost every level shrank, and who will never be mistaken for a base-expanding communicator–for another term as chairman of the Democratic National Committee. The “Keep Mac” pack’s rationale? He’ll save us from Howard Dean, who most believe would have led the party to an even bigger catastrophe last fall had he gotten the nomination. Call me a curmudgeon, but that seems like an odd way to project strength at a moment an historic political realignment is taking place–at least the old guy won’t humiliate us!
Taken together, these developments indicate that, beyond our rural-state problem and Hispanic problem and our values problem and our security problem, we Democrats have a far more fundamental leadership problem. To put it crudely, right now we don’t seem to know how to pick winners–or fire losers.
Stop and think about it. The national party had back-to-back election seasons in 2002 and 2004 that were successively despairing and disastrous–the kind of record that if it were experienced by a pro sports team would have prompted the owner to clean house. And what are we doing? Mostly wringing our hands about changing the floor wax.
Now, is Terry McAuliffe or any other single leader wholly responsible for our failures? Certainly not. In fact, Mr. McAuliffe did a lot of important work to modernize the party infrastructure and strengthen our long-term financial stability. But the fact is, politics provides clear, irrefutable ways to measure performance, and by most any standard our recent performance stinks. That begs a few questions. Such as, what does it take to hold someone accountable for losing? And more importantly, when do we stop beating our heads against the wall and try something–and someone–different?
To many, saying that out loud (and going the next step to name names) may sound exceedingly impolitic and harsh–I know this because people were shocked when I had the gall to point out publicly that maybe we should not entrust our next big campaign to a strategist who is now 0-for-8 in the Presidential Super Bowl.
But I am guessing these are many of the same folks who urged Mr. Kerry not to respond to the deeply damaging calumnies that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth were slinging at his war record. God forbid we dignified those tactics by standing up for ourselves and actually fighting back (instead of robotically telling people we’ll fight for them).
The point is, to state the obvious (something our party often seems to have trouble grasping), that politics is a contact sport–particularly when you are competing against folks as cunning and ruthless as Karl Rove and company. So if we hope to win, we Democrats have to get over our predilection to preserve people’s self-esteem at all costs, stop engaging in the politics of self-destruction, and start making some hardheaded calculations about what it takes to become a majority party again.
Of course, upgrading the salesmen won’t dramatically change the results if we don’t also upgrade the product we’re marketing. Right now the clear majority of voters–including large swaths of the country–don’t trust us to keep them safe or share their values, and we have a long way to go to rethink our messages and policies and ultimately rehabilitate our credibility. But we have to remember that politics is the art of persuasion, and in this era of diminishing party identification, elections more and more are tough tests of individual leadership. This last presidential campaign proved that in spades. And our test now as Democrats is whether we can select and empower strong, savvy and compelling men and women to not only chart our course but change it.
In this we cannot be satisfied right now with “means people”–those like Mr. McAuliffe who know how to raise money, compile databases, and get out the vote, all of which are necessary, but not sufficient, not when we need to pull millions of skeptics to our side. We desperately need “ends people”–those who are committed more to building winning coalitions than to feeling morally superior and placating pariahs like Michael Moore, and who have the vision to think ahead of the curve and the guts to run straight over people when necessary to get more votes than the other guy.
A good place to start is in the DNC race. Of all the candidates in the mix, the only one I know of who can imagine a different kind of politics that transcends obsolete clichés of left and right, harness the power of new ideas to win over new voters, and be tough as hell when it’s called for is New Democratic Network chairman Simon Rosenberg. He can do all those things in large part because he’s already shown he knows how to win, having been an integral part of the take-no-prisoners Clinton war room in 1992. I’m not crazy about the fact that he has often worked closely with Mr. McAuliffe and the rest of the current Democratic leadership. But that may ultimately prove to be an asset in helping to bridge the differences in the party and build the broader coalition we need to win again.
Maybe then we can really start thinking outside the Beltway box. For example, in this era of war and global insecurity, why are we not finding a new Ike to like, and recruiting well-respected, Democratic-leaning military leaders like former Joint Chiefs Chairmen William Crowe and John Shalikashvili to be public spokesmen for the party, or even better to run for office. No disrespect to Leader Pelosi, but I suspect a four-star hawk–especially one who can’t be cast as a serial flip-flopper–will play better in Boulder than a Haight-Ashbury dove.
The bottom line? We need more bottom-line thinking before we decamp to New Hampshire once again. Adapt or Die, I say.
Mr. Gerstein, an independent consultant in New York, was communications director for Sen. Joe Lieberman and a senior strategist for the senator’s presidential campaign.
Chuck….you mention Switzerland as a posibility for a great country to live in with few government services, other than the military. You might like living there, particularly if you have health problems. Switzerland’s health care system is highly regulated by the government, but delivers a higher standard of care than that received by Americans (as a whole), and at much lower cost. It does include the use of insurance companies, but for the most part, they are non-profit.
Thanks for posting the Gerstein article, ProudASS. He’s right on target.
David…Mr. Gerstein is certainly articulate, but on target? I’m no so sure. This could be a great topic for discussion when the clock isn’t tyranizing me, but one should keep in mind that Mr. Gerstein was senior strategist for Senator Lieberman’s presidential campaign, which went exactly as far as I’d hoped it would go; i.e., nowhere.
He’s on target when he says that the Democrats need to stop their pattern of elevating milquetoast conciliators and policy wonks, and start offering us charismatic, hardheaded leaders. Is Lieberman one? Not that I’ve seen. Is Simon Rosenberg? I have no idea. But I do agree with Gerstein’s premise.
Chuck….you mention Switzerland as a posibility for a great country to live in with few government services, other than the military. You might like living there, particularly if you have health problems. Switzerland’s health care system is highly regulated by the government, but delivers a higher standard of care than that received by Americans (as a whole), and at much lower cost.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actually that would be the down side, government healthcare is generally too expensive as well as substandard, which is why Canadians will come to the US for major treatments. You see many times they may not live long enough to get into surgery for heart bypasses and such since the appointments are months and sometimes even a year or two away.
Sonntag is one of the most respected statewide elected officials in WA.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
He can be as respected as you want, and I am not disrespecting him in any way, my point is if the auditor isnt going to audit then the office should be eliminated and farmed out to the private sector. Every major company has regular audits and government should as well.
Chuck…you are letting a few trees block your view of the forest. Google “Switzerland Health Care” and you will find studies verifying that their health care is, as I said, heavily regulated, and also better and cheaper than that available to Americans. Open up a little. Just defending an opinion because it is the one you’ve always had, or one that fits with a particular ideology regardless of evidence which suggests the ideology doesn’t fit, won’t make the world a better place.
Comment by bby— 1/15/05 @ 1:31 am
So why should Washington continue to rely on a regressive sales tax to support government programs? I don’t think the Democrats want to do anything about it, since a clear majority of voters in the upper 20% of income in this state support the Democrats — not only with their votes, but with generous financial contributions as well. Wealthy people in Washington pay far less of their income in state and local taxes, than in any other state in the country.
I note that the Washington State Democrat platform in 2004 didn’t mention a single word about a state income tax. It does contain platitude language that “we want our taxes to be levied fairly”. However, there is no proposal on how to levy taxes fairly. And since the Democrats have been running the show in this state for the last 20 years, and our taxation system is by far the most unfair in the country, this omission speaks volumes.
The 2004 Washington State Republican platform also doesn’t say a single word about a state income tax — pro or con. Many Republicans have different views on the best and fairest method of imposing taxes. The GOP platfom simply says that “Economic opportunity should include: Reducing taxes and fees on businesses and individuals”.
So there is no knee-jerk opposition by the State GOP to the concept of a state income tax. Naturally, the idea of adding a state income tax for the purpose of increasing tax collections would be opposed, since Republicans generally think taxes are already high enough (or too high). On the other hand, replacing the sales tax with an income tax could have significant support — especially if the wealthy Democrat class has to pay its fair share (or more).
An initiative to totally abolish the 6.5% state portion of the sales tax would be an excellent idea. It could be made effective on January 1, 2006, instead of the normal certification date in early December 2005. This would allow Governor Gregoire to convene a special session right after the election for the purpose of coming up with a replacement tax.
Notice I said Governor Gregoire. If she isn’t Governor anymore in a few more months due to the election contest, there will probably not being enough support to get signatures on the initiative.
There are excellent replacement tax ideas, which Republicans have often advocated at the national level. For example, a flat income tax without any exemptions for high income people. (Our state constitution has been interpreted to prohibit a graduated income tax.) There could be exemptions or credits for low income people to make this even fairer. Sort of like Steve Forbes flat tax proposal at the national level. Or a value added tax at the state level — similar to what a lot of Republicans are talking about replacing the national income tax with.
It won’t matter a whit about how you tax folks until government learns to curtail spending…and that doesn’t mean outsourcing it to private sharks…just start using some common sense and stop rewarding political backing. Won’t happen so the tax situation is likely to remain a hot topic, no matter the form it takes.
The Dems don’t need to do anything other than remain true to themselves. Inclusiveness and tolerance. Fairness. Keep it simple stupid… ;)
How does any of this stuff have to do with Eyman?
Chuck – you have been brainwashed if you think the uninsured of which there are 40 million in America would not be better off with ANY system of basic care insurance. British system, Canadian system. Swiss system. Sweedish system, French system, Finnish system, Danish system —- this argument is that you are better with nothing, NOTHING, for families and kids is very cruel. Pure babble politics from the right and R’s in general.
Because of basic health care systems for all citizens, all of these countries have a longer live expectancy than the good old die yonger, USA.
So what is the beef – if not perfect to all critics, let’s all die younger? You are a right wing sheep. Think man, think.
Remember we spend the money, but there is no universal coverage. The biggest disgrace/failure of the Federal Govt.
Over the yers, Europeans find this the most puzzling part of our political landscape. They always say -“why do you Americans settle for so little” – Good question.
By the way, Seattle has an excellent system of free clinics. Supported by our taxes, love them. Good reason to live here.
I have heart problems, my best they sell Blue Cross is 1,124.00 per month. Outrageous.
Of course we can afford an expensive war and tax breaks for the very rich.
Richard – political reality. Income tax rejected by voters many times.
Some tax reform in increments might be possible – the FIRST, examine anew all the loopholes given to business for the past 20 years and end some of them. Many, many billions given away. First reform….. and no voter revolt.
Richard – Nevada is renowed for no – or low taxes.
ZIP – you keep mentioning the provisionals and mistakes.
Very weak stuff. It has not been explained if other counties had the same problems that use on site counting scanners. It has not been explained if the majority of these were fed into the counters by voters or poll workers.
And in any case it is a mistake of less than one voter per precinct…..one half a vote maybe.
In the first year of Federal guidelines requiring these ballots, and record turnouts…thousands of newly registered, and busy, busy polling places.
Why do you think they are so significant? Did the Gregoire campaign feed them from the hq….all recorded on secret video?..No, this is not going to mandate a recount, or re-vote….maybe a comment about tightening up the game….better education and instructions at the polls.
Set aside election evidence…no way….huffing and puffing doesn’t make it so. Facts, proof.
Hight Court is geared to same and excellent attorneys on the Dem. side….no detail or small point will be given to the R’s….Super Dogfight in the trials…and hearings….think of 90 big ego attorneys all on the same case….surreal….all looking for some fame and getting big bucks to show their stuff…..I may go to Wenatchee for a week. What a show.
Because of basic health care systems for all citizens, all of these countries have a longer live expectancy than the good old die yonger, USA.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Has it ever occured to you that we might have lower life expectancies because we can enjoy such luxuries as alcohol, tobbaco, recreational drugs, crack, hangliders, bungee jumping, parasailing, things like this that other countries rich only get to partake in? Oh lets not forget high performance cars.
I have heart problems, my best they sell Blue Cross is 1,124.00 per month. Outrageous.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Im going to bet that when your doctor determines you need a bypass operation for your heart, it is done within a few weeks and not scheduled for 16 months away as it can be and often is under socialised medicine…
Comment by bby— 1/15/05 @ 7:36 pm
You should try Regence Blue Shield, instead of Premera Blue Cross. For some reason, Premera charges almost twice for the same coverage as Regence. Not sure how Premera manages to maintain any customers that way …
Comment by bby— 1/15/05 @ 7:41 pm
Income tax might get approved by voters (or at least not forced into a referendum) if we got rid of some bug business tax breaks at the same time. When it was presented to voters before, I think it was as a new tax, instead of as a replacement for an existing tax.
Richard – thanks for the tip – will check out Blue Shield.
Chuck – out or 20 Euro style industrialzed nations USA now ranks lower one third in wage scales. Who can afford what? You are thinking it is the post WW II 1950 ies. And the rest of the world was in ruins.
Our people and our babies die young, no national health plan….very simple. Shameful….and the working R’s think they are being patriotic. Kerry had it right, he wanted every American to have the same health care plan the Senators have. Good idea.
Chuck, I have to say that I agree with bby, all your basic comments are from a time warp and not of the reality of this day and age. Catch up with the rest of the world Chuck
Kerry had it right, he wanted every American to have the same health care plan the Senators have. Good idea.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sonds like a great idea, where is the over $5000.00 per month that the senators plan costs going to come from?
Chuck, I have to say that I agree with bby, all your basic comments are from a time warp and not of the reality of this day and age. Catch up with the rest of the world>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
My comments ate timeless, the more you let government intrude in our lives the more freedom you lose. If goverment starts paying for your medical it will be only so long before govenment dictates you cannot drive a red car, or sports car because they get into more accidents….and of coarse the public shouldnt have to pay for such behavior. Same with smokers, drinking and so on…not to include the sheer cost factor, the average person is already paying like 45% in taxes.
Comment by bby— 1/16/05 @ 4:14 am
I think it was Howard Dean that wanted every American to have the same health plan as federal employees have. John Kerry proposed a band-aid solution that would have extended coverage to just a few million more people.
Here are some sobering statistics (complied by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency to boot). Life expectancy at birth: United States of America — 77.43 years. Puerto Rico (reported separately from USA) — 77.49 years. Cuba — 77.04 years. Taiwan — 77.06 years. United Kingdom — 78.27 years. Germany — 78.54 years. France — 79.44 years. Canada — 79.96 years. Japan — 81.04 years.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....wn17m.html
When you blindly take money away from your government, beware the consequences.
Once again Cricket, you are ahead of me. I was in the midst of writing a blog on that story when I saw your post.
I read an interesting article from an economist arguing that the government shouldn’t give federal disaster relief to people in disaster-prone areas (or should at least pay them to move elsewhere). The basic argument is that the federal government is encouraging building in disaster prone areas by artificially making them more attractive places to live (through the subsidies you get after your house blows away).
I wonder if you couldn’t apply a corallary to tax policies. If rural voters vote against their economic self-interests, let’s stop bailing them out. In the urban centers we can focus on passing progressive, fair tax policies that help people in places like cities and close-in suburbs. Don’t subsidize people living in rural counties. Not because they require more tax support than they give back (poor people in cities do that too), but they refuse to support the very policies that help them and actively work to destroy those policies everywhere (hurting the cities too).