HorsesAss.Org

The Department of justice released a report on the SPD. So far it seems like the elected officials are saying the right things, but there’s a lot of hard work to make sure that things improve. So, while it might be tough for the police, from the rank and file up, to accept this it’s also a great opportunity to improve the department.

And opportunities like this don’t come along very often, so I hope the police will embrace it. It can be tough to hear you need to change. And for many, the first inclination may be to recoil, to make excuses, to figure out why it isn’t so bad. But I hope we can move beyond that, because it is so bad. Because,

• When SPD officers use force, they do so in an unconstitutional manner nearly 20 percent of the time;
• SPD officers too quickly resort to the use of impact weapons, such as batons and flashlights. When SPD officers use batons, 57 percent of the time it is either unnecessary or excessive;
• SPD officers escalate situations, and use unnecessary or excessive force, when arresting individuals for minor offenses. This trend is pronounced in encounters with persons with mental illnesses or those under the influence of alcohol or drugs. This is problematic because SPD estimates that 70 percent of use of force encounters involve these populations.

And we have a chance to fix it. We have the chance to take a serious look and make policing better in the city. The cops on the street can either fight it or they can embrace it, but these opportunities don’t come up very much.

…you can probably skip this post. On the other hand, I think there might be one or two HA readers who will find this intriguing.

At a special meeting later this morning, the Washington State Redistricting Commission will unveil the next iterations of their proposed redrawing of Legislative District boundaries. As displayed here (PDF), the Commissioners have split into two bipartisan pairs, each responsible for drawing a particular portion of the state. Commissioners Tom Huff (R) and Dean Foster (D) have been working on the Olympic Peninsula, the Pacific coast, and the southern section of the wet side of the state. Their colleagues Tim Ceis (D) and Slade Gorton (R) have been tasked with working on the Eastside, the islands, and the northern west-of-the-Cascades area. They are not currently dealing with either the Seattle environs or the large area east of the mountains.

I don’t know whether they’ve been skipping over both the most and least urban parts of the state because they’ve already agreed on the LD lines in those areas, or because they’re at an impasse there, or (most likely IMHO) because drawing the lines in and around Seattle and the dry side depends on the outcome of their deliberations in the segments they’re working on. Whatever the reason, the Commissioners had better get their asses in gear — they’re supposed to present an agreed-upon plan to the Legislature by January 1, 2012, just half a month from now.

While this next presentation will be the third iteration of LD borders, we still have seen no Congressional District maps since each of the four Commissioners presented their own proposals on September 13, fully three months ago! Their silence on the topic frustrates many observers no end.

While we wait (and wait, and wait, …) for the Commissioners to break their long silence, I’d like to take a step back in the process, to discuss the reapportionment that presented the Commission with the opportunity to construct a brand-new Congressional District instead of merely rejiggering the existing ones in their redistricting task, as they’re doing with the state’s 49 (no more, no less) Legislative Districts.

As you’re no doubt aware, the number of Congressional Districts in each state is determined based on the results of the decennial Census, mandated by the Founders in Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution and revised under the 14th Amendment (you know, the one that got rid of that pesky three-fifths of a man thing). How the reapportionment is actually carried out is based on laws written by Congress, and those laws have changed numerous times over the decades. I’ll mention three issues to be considered:

• The Census counts persons, not citizens. Undocumented individuals, if they’re willing to participate, count as residents of their state.
• The apportionment population is not the same as the resident population. The latter does not count federal employees (including the military) living overseas on April 1. For apportionment (but not redistricting) purposes, such individuals are counted with their state of residence as listed on their employment records. This approach can make a difference in apportionment of Congressional Districts … in 2000, Utah might have gotten an additional seat if the Census counted Mormon missionaries for apportionment; that seat went instead to North Carolina, and Utah took its case (Utah v. Evans) all the way to the Supreme Court, where UT lost.
• Sensibly, apportionment is carried out through the use of a ranking algorithm. What isn’t set in stone is the methodology. It’s been done in a variety of ways over the years. Different procedures often give different results, but it must be said that there is no “correct” way to do it. Whatever method has Congress’s blessing at the time is the method to be used.

Washington’s resident population in the 2010 Census is 6,724,540. Adding in the 28,829 Washingtonians overseas, the state’s apportionment population is 6,753,369. Washington has the 12th highest count of overseas residents, one place better than its overall population rank. Texas, #2 overall, has the highest number of overseas persons, while California ranks third (behind Florida). Alaska, way down at #47 in population, ranks 26th in overseas employees.

Since 1940, the method of equal proportions has been used for reapportionment. After each state receives the required minimum of one seat, the other 385 seats are assigned to states in descending order of priority value (PV), where PV for potential seats 2, 3, 4, … is calculated as:
where n is the state’s potential seat number. In other words, the PV for a state’s second seat is its apportionment population divided by the square root of two. For its third seat, divide by the square root of (3*2=)six, then continue with the square roots of (4*3=)12, (5*4=)20, 30, 42, and so forth. By the time we get to the 55th seat, the divisor is the square root of 2970 (that’s 55*54). After all these values are calculated, rank-order them in descending order and assign the seats until 385 of them have been filled.

Not surprisingly, the 51st seat goes to the largest state, California. Texas gets #52, followed by another CA seat, then NY, FL, CA again, TX again, and so on. Washington’s first added seat (its second overall) is #78 and its next is #122. The state’s ninth seat, equalling its 2000 number of Representatives, comes in at #391.

It gets really interesting as we come to the final few seats. The assignments for the last ten seats (#426-#435), along with the next ten near-misses, are displayed below:

The new WA-10 seat comes in at #432, comfortably above the cut-off. Minnesota’s eighth seat wins the final position in the House (too bad, as it’s likely that Michelle Bachmann’s district would have been axed). MN just barely avoided subtracting a seat from its 2000 allocation. At #434, California narrowly averted losing a seat in the House; if the Golden State had done so, it would have been its first-ever lost seat. Washington, by the way, has never lost a seat either. It may be poetic justice that North Carolina is the first runner-up this time around, after winning the final spot in 2000. The Tarheel State missed adding another seat by that thin margin.

It turns out that using resident population instead of apportionment population wouldn’t have altered the composition of the next Congress. The rank-order of the last five seats would be different, with Washington at #433 and TX-36 taking the final spot.

It’s likely that none of the above is of much interest to the Redistricting Commission. They probably don’t particularly care how it came to pass that they’re tasked to draw ten CDs instead of nine. It falls to reapportionment geeks like me to look at this sort of information. There’s a pile of additional information here that I find fascinating — trends in the distribution of House seats over time, states that actually lost population between Censuses (hint: several states in the plains in the 1930s … can you say “Dust Bowl”?), states that have never lost seats, states on long seat-losing streaks (Pennsylvania has lost at least one seat in every Census since 1930), and much more.

If you’re interested enough in redistricting, tune in to the Redistricting Commission’s web feed at 10:30am. It won’t be great theater, but the final result of all that line-drawing and all that negotiation will affect your political life for a decade. And whether you know it or not, that’s important.

[UPDATE, 1:30pm]

An item I meant to include in the original post — Washington wasn’t even close to reaching 10 seats in the 2000 Census. Its ninth seat came in as #407, and the next potential WA seat (#455) missed the cut by 20 positions.

The third iteration of draft LD maps, in PDF format, is now available at the WSRC site.

A couple more (way-cool, IMHO) links from the Census website:

• Apportionment methods and factors considered, from 1790 to the present
• How various apportionment methods can produce differing allocations, with examples

Video “explanation” of the apportionment process, from the Census Bureau:

– Scary stuff happening in Europe.

– Oh look a book that will kill children.

– The guy running against Cantwell? Quite. A. Charmer.

– I used to think a union started like this: You round up all the hotheads, get them in one room, and storm the castle. Which would be great if it were true because then it would only take a couple of weeks out of people’s lives instead of years.

– Christopher Hitchens has passed. While he could certainly be infuriating, he sure could string words together.

– Rick Perry’s next ad.

Yeeeeeeeeeee haaaaaaawwwwww! It’s Crazy Train time. We have ourselves another episode of Candidate Roller Derby tonight in Iowa.

Yesterday everyone said The Newt was leading. Today Romney has a slight lead—they are tied statistically at Romney 23%, Gingrich 20%.

And how ’bout that Ron Paul at 18%!?! Most of the other nutberger candidates have had their fling with the pole position…Ron Paul should get his shot, too. And to top the whole thing off like a layer of creamy chocolate frosting, we should get Rick Santorum next week.

Unless The Donald comes back from the dead to do a 27 December debate, this one is the last of the year, and the last before the Iowa caucus. It’s gong to be fun.

I’ll leave some updates if anything fun happens.

The debate is sponsored by FAUX news, so you can be sure this will be the bestest, craziest debate ever…in the history of debates. You can find a link to the stream at FAUX News.

6:04: I’ve saved a bag of Cheetos for this debate. Mmmm, Cheetos. Before the debate is through, my fingers will resemble John Boehner’s.

6:05: The Newt argues his electability by giving the audience a history lesson.

6:07: Megyn Kelly tries suckering Ron Paul into making a commitment to support the ultimate Republican nominee. Will he fall for it? No! And he gets a pass!

6:09: Rick Santorum takes the first shot at Newt’s “personal issues”.

6:12: Come on, Michele…just say it. “I will win the independents by hypnotizing them.”

6:13: Rick Perry is asked about his debating skills and launches into a “things I did while not debating” speech.

6:14: Jon Huntsman, “we’re getting screwed as Americans!” Umm…Santorum? Any comment?

6:16: Note to Rick Perry: The Supercommittee was created by and for Congress, not Obama.

6:18: Mitt just admitted that “there are Democrats who love America.” He’s toast now.

6:19: “Leadership is important,” says Newt, the ousted former House leader.

6:21: The moderators are taking questions by Twitter. Fine print: No more than 140 characters and minimize polysyllabic words.

6:25: The intermission pundits are bored by the civility. They want some blood! Yeah…me, too.

6:27: Mitt defends his business failures by saying Obama doesn’t realize that not every business succeeds. I take it Mitt is okay with the Solyndrra thing then.

6:29: Newt worked with Habitat for Humanity. No doubt served as their official Speaker of the House.

6:31: Paul corners Newt who is forced to admit that there are many government-sponsored organizations that do good! Heresy!

6:33: Bachmann goes into histrionics over Newt’s Fannie/Freddy contracts. Newt says Bachmann doesn’t have her fact right. Bachmann goes to Politifact for fact checking! Remarkable.

6:36: My video feed locked up with the following image stuck on my screen. I think this is worthy of a Caption Contest. Leave ’em in the comment thread.

6:45: Okay…missed some stuff trying to get the video feed back and waiting through the fucking ads. We’re back now.

6:46: Did Rick Santorum just say he will repeal every single EPA regulation?!?

6:47: Mitt Romney Flip Flops! He criticizes Obama over Solyndrra, just 20 minutes after pointing out that some of his businesses failed, and that was okay.

6:48: “The courts have become grotesquely dictatorial.” and “Misreading the American people.” I thought they were supposed to read the Constitution rather than the people.

6:51: Bachmann: “We are now at the point that we think the final arbiter of the law is the courts.”

6:53: Even Ron Paul isn’t crazy enough to do a witch-hunt on the courts (subpoena judges, eliminate courts).

6:54: Mitt: “The only people that have less credibility than Judges is Congress.”

6:56: Santorum’s certifies his extremism by picking Thomas as his single favorite Justice.

7:05: Ron Paul suggests using diplomats a little more, bombs a little less. Totally sensible.

7:07: Santorum suggests that Iranian’s “principle ideology”, “mission” is martyrdom. What a fucking ignorant bigot.

7:09: Michele says Ron Paul has given the most dangerous answer she has ever heard.

7:15: Ron Paul schools some naive warmongers!

7:17: Newt suggests the UN is a terrorist training organization.

7:19: Rick Perry has the most muddled comment ever…something about “the most muddled foreign policy ever.”

7:22: Newt gets in a super anti-Obama speech. He has some factual errors in the answer, but maybe this is what we need for him to take the primary. GO NEWT!

7:26: I am totally lost by Neil Cavuto’s rambling question to Rick Perry. Rick Perry spews an incoherent, rambling answer back. Nice play, Mr. Perry!

7:40: Wallace ask Mitt if he is a flip-flopper.

7:41: Mitt admits he flip-flopped on gay rights and choice. Ohhh…and maybe guns.

7:43: Santorum: “Mitt Romney, personally, as Governor, issued gay marriage licenses!!!” You could just hear Santorum’s anal sphincter clamping shut as he said that.

7:47: Bachmann: “Newt offered to campaign for Republicans who support…partial birth abortion!”

7:49: Michele Bachmann doesn’t have her facts right. And she misspells her first name.

7:50: The Occupy FAUX movement has arrived!

7:51: Rick Perry corrected a fact of a moderator!

7:54: Ron Paul twists his face into a little pretzel and says, “I don’t like the demagoguery…the distortions.”

7:55: That’s it!

Not to make too big of deal about it, but the Iraq war ended today.

Thank God the world is finally safe from Saddam Hussein’s nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons of mass destruction!

I mean, except for the nearly 5,000 U.S. soldiers and contractors killed in the conflict. And the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who died as a result of the U.S. invasion.

It isn’t official news yet, but the big announcement is likely coming on Thursday:

One month to the day after the start of the effort to recall Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker from office, organizers have scheduled a Thursday press conference to provide a “special update” on how the effort is going.

And several liberal blogs and pro-recall Facebook pages said Wednesday that the Democratic Party of Wisconsin and United Wisconsin, the two groups spearheading the recall, already have collected more than enough signatures to force an election.

The effort to recall the Republican governor kicked off on Nov. 15, and organizers have until Jan. 17 to collect more than 540,000 valid signatures to force a spring recall election.

The blog New Dog Democrat reported Wednesday that more than 550,000 signatures have been collected and that organizers want to hit the 1 million mark before the deadline.

A million signatures?!? Just two weeks ago they were aiming for 750,000.

A million signatures would be, symbolically, a thermonuclear maelstrom. Even 540,000 valid signatures will be fucking huge!

Aside from likely derailing Walker’s harmful “stewardship”, and, you know…maximizing the possibility I can visit my family this summer, this is huge for Washington and other states.

The Walker episode sends a big shot across the bow of, what is almost certainly, a coordinated Republican Governor’s agenda.

For us here in Washington, what does this mean? It means Rob McKenna is put on notice. Walker made campaign promises that seemed quite moderate. Once elected, he turned to a radical Republican agenda. He cut education funding and betrayed public employees while giving out tax breaks to businesses, he did his damnedest to disenfranchise voters at the margins of society. And, in general, he steadfastly disregard the will of the people.

Would Rob McKenna really try pulling the ol’ switcheroo on Washingtonians the way Walker did to Wisconsinites? Well…if his decision to join the Republican AG lawsuit against the Health Care Reform law of 2009 is any indication…two years ago, I would have said, “absofuckinglutely!.” Now, with the events in Wisconsin, I think McKenna is forced to scale back on his agenda.

Should McKenna win next year, Washingtonians will owe Wisconsinites a huge debt of gratitude.

Update: They aren’t quite there, yet. The number of signatures gathered so far is 507,000, leaving a mere 33,000 more to gather. Practically, they will need something over 100,000 additional signatures to account for challenges and duplicates. Organizers have another month left to do that.

Well, the Legislature passed something crappy.

The Legislature adjourned shortly after the Senate approved the new budget plan by a 42-6 vote. Gregoire had called for $2 billion in changes and a fully revamped budget by Christmas, but lawmakers settled on a plan that provides a $480 million fix through a combination of cuts, transfers and delayed payments.

Our Democratic legislature is still too chickenshit to even consider putting revenue in front of the people, let alone just passing a package outright.

Budget negotiators said it was impossible to get full consensus on a plan during a session that would last a maximum of 30 days.

I have to say, the we only had a limited time nonsense is stupid, stupid, stupid. I’m not suggesting it should have been easy, especially given the Republicans and Roadkills. I understand saying we didn’t get as far as we need because a significant portion of the legislature hates math. But to pretend nobody had any time to prepare? Please. They should have known as soon as they passed the budget that this was possible. And they definitely should have known several months ago when the revenue forecast that precipitated this session came about.

Anyway, kudos to Marko Liias for drawing a line in the sand.

“Not one bill came to the floor nor where there any committee hearings on revenue,” Liias says, explaining that he wants to “tax the one percent” and close corporate loopholes. “I know the high-earners’ income tax (Initiative 1098) failed before, but that was before Occupy. That was before people were occupying the Capitol asking us for revenue.”

And while I appreciate Josh Feit covering this aspect of the session that far too many reporters ignored, seriously, what the fuck is “Was Liias’ lone vote (among the Democrats) simply a bratty grandstand?” I mean really, “bratty grandstand” in an otherwise straight piece? I guess I can understand parsing out how serious he was and how much this is electoral stuff, bratty seems a totally unnecessary word.

– I can’t fathom how a middle class white guy thinks it’s OK to write this piece.

– While we cannot officially speak for every worker who shares our occupation, we can use this opportunity to reveal what it’s like to walk a day in our shoes for the 110,000 of us in America whose job it is to be a port truck driver. It may be tempting for media to ask questions about whether we support a shutdown, but there are no easy answers. Instead, we ask you, are you willing to listen and learn why a one-word response is impossible? (h/t)

– Film The Police

– I’m no fan of Michell Bachmann, but the Washington Post is a disgrace.

– That Made in America label

– Newt Gingrich is no Reagan, and he’s also no Howard Dean.

– That’s probably the best Rick Perry 3 things joke.

– Newt is a scary, scary guy.

It’s Tuesday, and ’round here that means Drinking Liberally. So please join us tonight for an evening of politics under the influence at the Seattle Chapter of Drinking liberally.

We meet at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00 pm, but some folks will show up earlier for dinner.

News from the Republican reality show:

Can’t make it to Seattle? There are also meetings tonight of the Tri-Cities, Bellingham, and Vancouver, WA chapters. On Thursday, Drinking Liberally Tacoma meets. And next Monday there are meetings of the Woodinville the Olympia, the Yakima, and the Shelton chapters.

With 232 chapters of Living Liberally, including twelve in Washington state and six more in Oregon, chances are excellent there’s one near you.

The Republican presidential candidates had another debate. For some reason (exhaustion perhaps, maybe common sense kicked in?) Darryl decided not to live blog that one. I listened to a bit and, you’ll never believe this but, Newt Gingrich is still really annoying. The bit that people who watched the whole thing thought was most newsworthy was how Mittens thought to casually bet $10,000.

Now, despite what that link says, the odd thing about the number is that it’s neither a reasonable amount like $1, $5, or $10 that people actually make on these sort of things, but nor is it so exorbitant that it necessarily calls out as a joke bet. If I said to you, “I’ll bet you a billion dollars” then you know no matter who wins the bet that we’re not actually paying up because neither of us has a billion dollars. But $10,000 is both way too much, and just enough that you aren’t quite sure what would happen if you lost.

And any way why make a personal bet? Why not say for charity? Presumably the whole bet thing was because someone in his campaign suggested it knowing this had come up before, and hoping to defuse it in the future. He could easily say something like, “I’ll bet $500 that that isn’t true. If I win, give it to children’s hospital in Boston, if you win, I’ll give it to any charity of your choosing in Texas.” Then the worst thing that happens is he has to give $500 to a charity in Texas, and that doesn’t seem awful.

Actually more than that, but what Goldy said.

But adding, like a broken record, that these legislators ought to take a good hard look at their districts if they want to balance the budget with cuts alone. If there is a lot of waste in state government, then some must flow into all districts. It must be gobbled up by their constituents. Their friends and neighbors, as much as anyone else, gobble up the social services and the education the state pays for, so they might as well start cutting in their own back yard.

If they can’t think of cuts proportionate to their districts’ share of state spending, then perhaps tax increases are necessary.

– What if Tim Tebow were a Muslim?

– Elizabeth Warren was in town, and it looks like she was great.

– So maybe in Breitbart’s mind, it’s okay to destroy someone’s life as long as you do so by saying a bunch of stuff about them that’s not true.

– Congrats Washington teachers.

– More economic shit as a result of Alabama’s immigration law.

– Is it Christmas? (h/t)

Last week’s contest was won my milwhcky. It was Drammen, Norway.

This week’s contest is related to a TV show or a movie, good luck!

Deuteronomy 28:49-51
Foreigners who speak a strange language will be sent to attack you without warning, just like an eagle swooping down. They won’t show any mercy, and they will have no respect for old people or pity for children. They will take your cattle, sheep, goats, grain, wine, and olive oil, then leave you to starve.

Discuss.