HorsesAss.Org

Seriously, this has been online for a week:

Lynne Varner:[You might want to put a space here — Carl]Bruce: This.[Instead of a period here, you might want to put another space — Carl, again]story has reignited a local debate over the politics of the Pledge of Allegiance.

I agree with Lynne’s side here but what the fuck?

Also, I’m glad they’ve given up the pretense that this is a regular feature “Civil disagreements, with Lynne Varner and Bruce Ramsey of the Seattle Times editorial board, is an occasional feature of the Ed Cetera blog.” More honest, good job.

The budget proposals are very, very ugly:

The governor identified $4 billion in optional cuts, in which she choose $2 billion in preferred cuts. The following proposals are likely to end up in her November budget proposal:

• Eliminate the Basic Health Plan, ending subsidized health care to 35,000 low-income individuals.
• Cut off medical services to 21,000 people enrolled in the state’s Disability Lifeline and ADATSA (Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Treatment Support Act) programs.
• Trim 15 percent from the support the state provides to colleges and universities.Reduce levy equalization, which helps property poor districts, by 50 percent.
• Cut the length of supervision for all offenders, based on severity of offense. Sex offenders will be supervised for 24 months, and all other offenders, for 12 months.

“This is what our choices look like even after we let go of thousands of state workers and cut money to our public schools, our colleges and universities, our prisons, and shredded our safety net for the old, sick, and poor,” Gregoire said.

This is a budget that hurts everyone, but it really hits the most vulnerable of our citizens. Crime and violence will be higher than it should be for all of us. These cuts can be quantified by increases in bankrupcies, untreated morbidity, and dead bodies. The actuaries will tell us just how many bright high school graduates have had a college degree stripped from them—with lifetime consequences and lost dreams.

But this budget does not have to be. The Governor is, undoubtedly, hoping the legislature will grow a pair and work on the revenue end of things:

Gregoire says she will now turn her attention to finding ways to offset some of the cuts with new money. That could include fees, closing tax exemptions or a general tax increase.

We are now living through an era of historically low taxes. It’s well past the time to close many of the tax exemptions that have outlived their usefulness to us, the flesh and blood people of Washington state. And its time to raise bring in more tax revenue.

Seriously…I don’t want to live in a Washington surrounded by decaying infrastructure, high crime, medical bankruptcies, or physical suffering for those who chose pain, even death, over bankruptcy. Let’s confine that Mad Max-like dystopia shit to the movies, huh?

One of the things I most like about the Occupy movement is the fact that things get done. You’re standing around, and suddenly people need to move some supplies and the people around will help. Soup gets handed out(most days, generally). Pizzas get passed around. People from the legal group will work with people willing to get arrested or who are being arrested. In the announcements at the end of the General Assembly, someone will ask for help and usually get it even if there’s some begging. The work groups figure out what needs to be done and then either do it, or take it to the General Assembly. It’s not always a perfect process, and I’m not sure how long it can last after the excitement of the movement dulls. But for now it seems to work.

So when at the end of a recent General Assembly, someone asked for help cleaning the park, I shot my hand up, and was glad to do it. I didn’t mention that I was a blogger, so I’d say everything was off the record, and I won’t get into specifics (and I won’t say it was problem free). But I have to say, I loved sweeping up.

I loved seeing the park clean. I loved people thanking me for helping. I walked home after and noticed how much dirtier the streets were than at and around Westlake. More than going there regularly, more than participating in a General Assembly, more than giving a little money, this really felt like taking ownership of a part of Occupy Seattle. It’s certainly not as much as the people who stay at the park or who work more than me, but it was really a great feeling, especially as someone who has generally stayed more at arms length as a blogger than I might otherwise.

And so I’d encourage people, if you can, to put in an hour doing something. Go to General Assembly and wait for the announcements; someone will find something for you to do. Ask the people handing out food if they need help. Find a work group that you’d be interested in. Of course the more the better, but don’t be afraid to spend just a bit of time.

– A first hand account from Occupy Oakland (h/t)

– Not sure I care much one way or the other what Meghan McCain thinks of the Occupy movement.

– The city budget is going to have more pain, I’m afraid.

– Unprincipled, Illiterate, Hypocritical Douchebags

– Upcoming events for transit types

– Finally an explanation of Lord Monckton.

From Oakland, where police shot tear gas and rubber pellets at Occupy Oakland protestors.

UDPATE: Some aerial footage of the tear gas being shot into the crowd.

This started off as a comment over at Howie’s place, but I’ve reworked it for here.

Maybe it was reading this after a more successful General Assembly. Maybe the fact that I’ve never been to a GA where it rained. Maybe, I’m just an optimistic person. But I don’t think the General Assembly is “Robert’s Rules if Robert had, say, just ingested a pound of ecstasy.”

First off, I’ve been to plenty of Democratic Party and local government things with Robert’s rules of order or modified versions of them and occasionally, they just don’t flow smoothly. People will work very hard to get 50%+1 or 2/3+1, and then there will often be a large group with hurt feelings on the losing side. So, there is an advantage with letting everyone be heard and with trying to find consensus. It’s trying to do something that Robert’s rules don’t do, and it’s so far been fairly successful in a way that the GA probably wouldn’t have been if, for some reason, they’d adopted Robert’s.

Another upside is that it makes the proposals better. The proposal that passed on Monday night was more clear than the one Dominic saw lose earlier. It answered (some) concerns, and it was more forward looking.

The down side is that it took several days and a lot of time to make a decision. Hearing from everyone can be tough. It can be taxing on the vocal chords with the People’s Mic, and as Winter comes, it’ll be more rainy and colder than before, and time at the GA, no matter where it is, will be more valuable. So, while it isn’t a process I endorse for everything, I think it has been good for Occupy Seattle.

Please join us 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. at 8:00 pm. Stop by earlier for a quiet dinner.

Can’t make it into Seattle? The Tri-Cities chapter of Drinking liberally meets every Tuesday night as well. The Bellingham Chapter also meets tonight. And tomorrow the Burien chapter meets.

With 227 chapters of Living Liberally, chances are good there is one near you.

Rep. Jay Inslee (WA-1) want to be your next Governor. In this interview, he talks jobs, jobs, jobs, and a bit of medical marijuana. The interview is followed by a round-table discussion with Chris Vance, Joel Connelly, Cathy Allen, and Joni Balter:

Watch October 21, 2011 on PBS. See more from KCTS 9 Connects.

UPDATE: I spoke to some folks at Fuse today and they’ve now updated their guide and removed the reference to the study in question. I have to commend them for responding to this the way organizations should.

Original post follows…..

Last night on Twitter, I saw that Fuse Washington was promoting their Progressive Voters Guide. Concerning the liquor initiative, I-1183, they wrote [emphasis mine]:

Big grocery chains and liquor distributors are back with another dangerous initiative to deregulate liquor sales in our communities. Based on an initiative that voters solidly rejected last year, I-1183 would authorize as many as five times as many retailers to sell hard liquor. As a result, our communities would see a 48 percent increase in liquor consumption and an even larger increase in problem drinking.

That’s quite a statistic, and one that I had trouble believing, so I asked them for the source. It turns out that it comes from an independent task force set up by the CDC called the “Community Guide”. And thankfully, I didn’t have to do a lot of work to demonstrate the many problems with this study, because Erik Smith at the Washington State Wire already took care of that:

The task force released a three-page report earlier this year that recommended against privatization. It wasn’t a study. It was a “finding” based on a review of 21 studies.

The finding was “based on strong evidence that privatization results in increased per-capita alcohol consumption,” the report said.

And it contained a striking statistic. In those studies, alcohol sales jumped by a whopping median figure of 48 percent after privatization.

The thing is, most of those studies had nothing to do with hard liquor. Fifteen dealt with the privatization of wine sales in the U.S. and Canada, a big push in the ‘70s and ‘80s. Two of them had to do with beer sales in Scandinavia. Only four dealt with hard liquor. And the results were all over the map, ranging from an 8 percent decrease to a 305 percent increase – never mind the type of alcohol.

The way that 48 percent figure was calculated was by lumping everything together, as if all forms of alcohol are the same, in all countries, in all time periods.

The better way to try to understand the likely consequences of moving from a state-run model for selling hard liquor to a private model is to look at other states that have done just that. As Smith writes:

There’s an easier way of looking at the question – by looking at actual government statistics. For instance, you can compare alcohol consumption in Washington with that of California, where sales are wide-open and there are eight times the number of liquor outlets per capita.

According to the National Institutes of Health, in 2007 the average Washington resident consumed 2.35 gallons of alcohol and the average Californian 2.34. No real difference at all.

There’s also the experience of Iowa and West Virginia, the two most recent states to privatize hard liquor, in 1988 and 1990. Liquor consumption remained flat after booze showed up in supermarkets. Lately it has been on the increase, just as it has been across the country. But privatization didn’t drive the states to drink.

I don’t even have that strong of an opinion on this measure. I’m voting for it, but there are definitely some good reasons not to. But it really annoys me to see an organization like Fuse – that arose in big part to counter bullshit propaganda from the right – deciding that it’s ok for them to throw out their own transparent bullshit as well.

Roads were fine. Lots of people took the West Seattle Water Taxi (thanks Dow) or figured out an alternative method of getting to work. It looks like people, gasp, managed just fine. Although, it looks like the Walk the Viaduct event was a lot of fun.

– Today in false dichotomies: Urban America versus America.

– Congrats to Shaun for 9 8 years’ writing at Upper Left.

– Progressive Voter’s Guide. Pro-Choice Voter’s Guide.

– Sound Transit’s service revisions.

– Fauntleroy is safer and not noticeably slower after a road diet.

– Unless you’re living in a cardboard box, you have nothing to complain about.

In many cases, it’s these guys:

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) last week highlighted what he called a “shocking” internal Pentagon report that concluded defense companies defrauded the military by $1.1 trillion.

“The ugly truth is that virtually all of the major defense contractors in this country for years have been engaged in systemic fraudulent behavior, while receiving hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money,” Sanders said in a statement. “With the country running a nearly $15 trillion national debt, my goal is to provide as much transparency as possible about what is happening with taxpayer money.”

More than $250 million “went to 54 contractors convicted of hard-core criminal fraud in the same period,” Sanders said, summarizing tables included with the DoD report. “Of that total, $33 million was paid to companies after they were convicted of crimes.”

Last week’s contest was won by Poster Child, who found the location along Highway 18 in Maple Valley.

This week’s location is related to something in the news from October, good luck!

Genesis 2:2
By the seventh day God had finished his work, and so he rested.

Discuss.

At Slog, Dominic Holden fires back at the opposition from medical marijuana patients to New Approach Washington’s Initiative 502. He writes [emphasis his]:

But it’s dishonest to declare this this measure will subject people to more blood testing or result in a change of policing protocol. If voters pass I-502, officers would be held to the same standards as they are today: They would still require probable cause to stop a car, evidence of driver impairment, and any tests would have to be conducted by a medical professional (typically at a medical clinic or an ER). Those are the standards now, they wouldn’t change, and we hardly ever see those consequences for medical marijuana patients now because they aren’t impaired and cops don’t have probable cause to stop their vehicles. If cops didn’t have probable cause or evidence of impairment, but took action anyway, a defense attorney could move to have the whole thing tossed out—just like today.

It’s true that officers will continue to be held to the same set of rules as they are today, but it’s also true (and I’ve heard this echoed by several defense attorneys) that their motivation to push for a blood draw could certainly change. As of today, it’s very difficult to prove impairment in court. With no limit written into the law, any reputable defense attorney can have that charge thrown out. But with a 5ng/ml limit written into the law, that won’t be so easy. The concern is that this change will empower more police officers to push for blood draws in situations where they never did before. Will it be a significant difference? Maybe, maybe not. But the history of DUI enforcement for alcohol should make anyone wary of the possibilities.

Second, the point he’s trying to make in this paragraph isn’t true at all:

Some medical marijuana patients note that the cut-off is automatic—anyone who exceeds 5n/mg is automatically guilty of DUI. But I-502 actually does something very useful for marijuana users accused of DUI. It separates active metabolites, which indicate inebriation, from THC-COOH, the inactive metabolite that remains in the system for days or weeks. In other words, it tests to see whether people are currently stoned, not simply whether they’ve used marijuana in the past month.

No, it doesn’t test to see whether or not people are stoned. It tests to see whether or not people have more than 5ng/ml of active metabolites in their system. That certainly can indicate that a person is stoned, but sometimes it doesn’t. As I’ve pointed out before, people who use marijuana medicinally (and in particular, those who consume it within food) often have that much active THC in their system at all times. And because their body has that much, they no longer experience the “high” that brings about the impairment in the first place. This is a real concern for medical marijuana patients and I don’t find their concern here to be irrational in any way.

As for the overall initiative, I still find myself incredibly pained by this whole thing. And depending on how it all plays out in the legislature, it’s likely I’ll vote for it. But I’m still very unhappy that the ACLU and New Approach Washington decided to include the DUI provision. I don’t think it was necessary to pass something. It’s not based on sound science. And now it’s led to an organized effort to kill it from within the ranks of the drug law reform community. I worry that they may have misread the politics behind the failure of Prop 19 in California and will end up having people who normally should support legalization turn against it in large numbers – which doomed the Prop 19 campaign as much as any other factor. No one knows how this will play out, but I do find it ironic that the ACLU was willing to shit on the rights of an unpopular segment of the population in order to have a better chance of securing a popular vote.