HorsesAss.Org

If the state Transportation Commission approves new tolls for the 520 floating bridge or any other roadway, in flagrant violation of I-1053’s supermajority requirement on raising taxes and fees, and initiative profiteer Tim Eyman doesn’t sue to uphold the letter and spirit of his recently passed measure… well, I will.

Because honestly, this might just be our best shot ever at forcing the state Supreme Court to finally rule on the constitutionality of this clearly unconstitutional provision.

It’s not like others haven’t attempted to challenge the constitutionality of previous two-thirds measures, but the popularly elected members of the Supreme Court have so far managed to avoid invalidating a popularly approved initiative by ruling that the issue simply wasn’t ripe, or that the plaintiffs did not have the standing to bring suit. And since the absence of a tax for fee increase at best raises a hypothetical harm, how does one sue over something lawmakers haven’t done? At least, that has been our Court’s cowardly approach thus far.

And since multiple legislatures and governors have never had the balls to affirmatively violate the two-thirds provision, we’ve never had the opportunity to put its constitutionality to the test.

But if the appointed members of the Transportation Commission were to simply ignore Eyman’s objections, and impose tolls on the 520 bridge and/or other structures without legislative approval, there’s your test case, for once I’m forced to pay this toll, well, I obviously enjoy standing as a “harmed” party, and the issue instantly becomes ripe.

Of course, the Supremes might still try to wiggle out of the underlying constitutional issue by somehow ruling that the Commission’s toll-setting authority falls outside the restrictions imposed by I-1053—get a bunch of clever lawyers in a room together, and anything can happen—but, well, you take the opportunities that come your way. And Eyman’s arrogant bluster over this issue is an opportunity his opponents would be stupid to ignore.

Reagan Dunn gets a Schrammie, and I couldn’t have said it better myself.

If there’s any lesson to learn from Washington state’s bucking of the Big Red Tide, it’s that a strong ground game may not be sexy, but it still can win, even in the face of overwhelming odds. And so while few journalists pay much attention to what goes on at the local party level, it’s a helluva lot more important than you might think.

That’s why next month’s election of a new King County Democratic Party chair is ultimately so important. And while I don’t generally like to get involved in intra-party politics, I would be remiss if I didn’t at least say a few words in support of one of the candidates, Steve Zemke.

I’ve long described myself as an “accidental activist” having stumbled onto the local political scene with my satirical initiative to proclaim Tim Eyman a horse’s ass, and it wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say that I knew absolutely nothing about how local politics worked, and had absolutely no connections to the players involved. But Steve did, and so I was very fortunate to have him take me under his wing almost from the start, and serve as a kinda tutor, if not a mentor, during my first couple years of activism.

It was Steve who explained to me how initiatives worked (and how they didn’t), and who first took me down to Olympia to lobby and finagle and implore elected officials and their staff. It was with Steve who I somehow found myself in a conference room in the Fall of 2003, sitting across the table from Frank Chopp and Jim McIntyre… totally oblivious to how remarkable it was for him to have managed to secure us an hour to talk tax restructuring with the Speaker of the House and the Chair of the Finance Committee. And remember… this was before I started blogging… when I was just some crackpot with a joke initiative.

Steve simply knows how things work, knows how to get things done, and sometimes seems to know absolutely everybody in Washington state Democratic political circles. And on the local level, where the ground game is so damn important, I can’t help but feel that that’s the kind of chair we need leading the county party: somebody who will focus on building infrastructure.

Nothing against Steve’s opponent Karl de Jong; he’s a great guy with great values. But Steve, well, he’s kind of a savant when it comes to organizing and running campaigns. So if I were a Democratic PCO, he’d have my vote.

That said, I couldn’t end this post without saying a big thank you to current chair Suzie Sheary, who is retiring after holding the post, well, forever (“forever” being defined as, since I started paying attention to county politics). She was perhaps the first local Democratic official to recognize the role local bloggers like me could play in promoting a progressive message, and I’ve long counted her as a political ally and friend. You’ll be missed, Suzie.

My daughter and I are flying to Philadelphia on Sunday, and I can promise you that we’re most certainly not allowing ourselves to be herded through Sea-Tac’s new X-ray scanners along with the sheeple.

Or at least, I’m not. My daughter’s thirteen now, so I suppose it’s up to her to choose her own humiliation: the unconstitutional invasion of privacy and unknown health risks of the TSA’s porno-scanners, or the intentionally intrusive new crotch-grabbing indignity of allowing a glorified rent-a-cop to pat her down… or as my daughter aptly describes it, “feel her up.”

And just to be clear, I honestly do believe the TSA’s new pat down procedures to be intentionally intrusive, in that the motivation, at least in part, is clearly to discourage travelers from opting out of the scanners by making the alternative as unpalatable as possible. And if a growing wave of opt-outs do succeed in clogging up security lines throughout the nation, dollars to donuts the TSA will only attempt to up the humiliation ante. Or worse.

That’s why I believe that the only effective means of combatting this latest escalation of the TSA’s security theater of the absurd is to humiliate the TSA agents in return, by making pat downs as uncomfortable and embarrassing for them as they are for us. For while regulations require travelers to comply with lawful requests from TSA agents, there’s nothing that says we can’t have a little fun in the process.

For example, it’s certainly possible you might be extremely ticklish — who’s to say you’re not? — so imagine a TSA agent being forced to conduct an intrusive pat down while you’re writhing and giggling and shrieking with uncontrollable laughter. Or perhaps you bruise easily, or are just extremely sensitive; who’s to blame you for screaming in pain at the slightest white-gloved touch, while loudly pleading with the TSA agent to “for the love of Christ, stop hurting me!”…? Or maybe the attentions of a same-sex agent just, I dunno, turn you on, causing you to moan with pleasure at the pat down as you breathlessly encourage the agent to draw their hands further up your inner thighs, before exploding in a When-Harry-Met-Sally-like fake orgasm.

Or how about wearing an adult diaper through security? And filling it. No law against that.

And then imagine having a compatriot capture the entire scene on video, and posting it to YouTube. Think that might go viral?

I’ve discussed all of these options with my daughter, and while she thinks they’re damn funny, she’s forbade me from doing any of them in her presence, and I suppose as a good father, I’ll have to honor that. But the point is, if we really want to send a message to the TSA, it’s time to fight theater with theater.

Otherwise, if we continue to allow the indignity to remain one sided, we can only expect it to get worse.

It’s sheeple like Joni Balter who make the gradual erosion of our constitutional rights possible.

If we’re looking for some good ways to trim the budget, maybe we can cut out re-enacting episodes of the A-Team:

Marijuana activists are criticizing — and at least partly laughing off — a counter-terrorism exercise carried out Wednesday in California that featured marijuana growers setting off bombs and seizing a dam.

Organized by the federal Bureau of Reclamation, the exercise involved 20 government agencies and some 250 personnel, according to a report from the Redding Record-Searchlight. In the scenario, marijuana growers blew up a bus and car and seized control of northern California’s Shasta Dam in a bid to free an imprisoned colleague.

How did Hannibal, B.A. and the boys handle this one?

The team drives up to the compound in the terrorists’ truck, with the Frank Stallone guy as their hostage. Then there’s a funny montage, where Ramon is talking about some attack they’re going to launch while the team launches basically the same attack on his guards! Hannibal and B.A. pick up some needed supplies, and Hannibal tells the rest of the team all the trouble is behind them: “from here on out, it’s open road.” Not two seconds later B.A. walks around a corner and finds the giant beard guy, ready for another 38 minutes of fighting! The look on B.A.’s face is priceless. “Not again!” he says.

Luckily not everything is going wrong; Hannibal, Murdock and Face storm the terrorists’ interminable planning meeting and run off with Marcus and the briefcase full of money (though B.A. and the beard guy do crash through a window at one point). Ramon again promises the team “will not get away this time,” and to show he’s serious he lets his soldiers actually chase after them instead of calling another planning meeting. The dudes all run toward the front gate, only the team is being sneaky and escaping by rappelling off a treacherous cliff. Is anyone worried about escaping via an imposing rock cliff? Nah. “Piece of cake,” as Face, B.A. and Murdock all deadpan. The mountaineering actually goes pretty well, or at least until Ramon and company show up and shoot the rappelling ropes before Hannibal can lower himself down. So he just jumps. The jazz, man. But then they shoot the inflatable raft the team was going to use for their getaway. So the team is trapped! No, Ramon, who has REPEATEDLY SAID THEY WON’T GET AWAY lets them get away because it’s time to go blow up a dam.

The team is back at the van, so the mission’s over, right? Face sums up just how good the team is: “We lost our wheels, B.A. did fifteen rounds with Godzilla, Hannibal did a twenty story high dive, we had our raft blown out from under us, and we still managed to save the girl, her boyfriend and… retrieve the money.” “Now all you’ve gotta do is stop them from blowing up the dam,” says Marcus. Dam? Murdock: “I wanna cry.”

The terrorists show up at the dam, and they actually shoot the elderly security guy – that’s what, 40 million bullets on this show and he’s like the third guy who actually got hit? On the other hand, the guard saw a bunch of armed guys dressed in black bodysuits and ski masks and waved them through without a second thought, so maybe he shouldn’t be on the job anyway. Their red van is apparently a clown van, because about 40 guys pile out once they’re inside the dam area. Two of them have an explosive device. Ah, the security guard was Hannibal in disguise! “I’m beginning to love this bulletproof vest!” he says. He lets the team know the terrorists are inside the dam. Murdock and Face are already inside, so they subdue a few of the thieves and disarm a few others. Then Hannibal and B.A. come in to get the guys working on the explosives. Everybody’s accounted for, but Almost Brigitte says, in a halting, I-can-barely-remember-these-lines voice, “You forgot about this. It’s set and you can’t stop it. You’ve got less than 90 seconds. You’re too late.” Hannibal and B.A. race off with the bomb… and run right into the giant beard guy! But even he doesn’t want to fight when he realizes what they’re carrying and runs off. I was going to make a “Goldfinger” joke about Hannibal and B.A. disabling the thing with 007 seconds to spare, but they actually heaved the bomb into the nearby water with 007 seconds to spare! The bomb explodes and I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have taken out the whole dam – maybe chipped some of the paint in the boiler room, but then I’m being picky again. Thumbs up from B.A. and Hannibal.

It’s a good thing the terrorists in the A-Team episode weren’t pot growers or that dam would’ve been a goner.

I spent most of the morning speaking to a couple civics classes at Seattle’s Center School, and knowing nothing else about the school except my interaction with these students, I’d happily send my daughter there.

Perhaps the rest of the students are delinquents, and all the other teachers suck, I dunno, but these two classes at least were great. So don’t let anybody tell you it’s impossible to innovate within the public schools.

I’m speaking to a couple high school civics classes this morning, so expect light posting through much of the day. In the meanwhile, talk amongst yourselves.

The Washington State Supreme Court this morning will hear oral arguments in two cases that could have far reaching impact both within the state and beyond. In Goldmark v. McKenna, the court will consider Public Lands Commissioner Peter Goldmark’s suit to force Attorney General Rob McKenna to represent him in an appeal of a lower court decision, and in Seattle v. McKenna, the court will consider Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes’ petition to force McKenna to withdraw from the lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of health care reform.

Both cases center on McKenna’s claim to broad, discretionary, extra-statutory powers, and both could serve to dramatically redefine the scope and power of the office. And of course, both cases have been reported here on HA in much greater detail than anywhere else in the press.

So my advice to journalists attempting to cover these complicated legal issues is to take advantage of the work I’ve already done, both here and here on the Goldmark case. Really. I’ve done a lot of the leg work for you, and many of the cases I’ve cited are those that will be cited in court. As for Seattle v. McKenna, I’ve covered that less extensively, but there are useful posts on the issues here and here.

Honestly, I know some folks in the media like to dismiss me as a foul-mouthed, partisan muckraker, but I’ve a helluva track record reporting on legal issues, dating back to my dead-on coverage and analysis of the 2004 gubernatorial election contest. So if you want to understand the legal issues in these cases, you’ll read my posts.

Yesterday, Democratic incumbent state Sen. Randy Gordon was trailing Republican Steve Litzow by 214 votes in LD-41. After today’s tally, that margin is down to 142. Hmm.

On the one hand, there aren’t a lot of ballots left, so you still gotta consider a Gordon victory a long shot. On the other hand, the remaining sample is so small, there’s room for a lot more statistical variation, so it’s far from impossible. But either way, it sure does look like we’re headed into a hand recount.

Speaking of which, still no update from Pierce County, where LD-25 is destined for a hand recount too.

UPDATE:
With zero ballots reported left to count, right-wing, anti-girl-scout nutbag Hans Zeiger leads Rep. Dawn Morrell by 39 votes in LD-25. In-fucking-credible. If this survives the recount, well, welcome to the future of the Washington State Republican Party.

The Washington State Transportation Commission is proposing a variable rate toll on the 520 floating bridge, ranging from $1.10 to $3.50 each way, depending on the time of day… an average rate that, adjusted for inflation, is pretty much in line with the 35 cent toll drivers originally paid when the bridge first opened in 1963.

But initiative profiteer Tim Eyman apparently intends to fight the tolling plan:

Eyman testified Tuesday that the commission lost the power to set toll rates when his I-1053 passed this month. The initiative says all legislative action raising taxes must be approved by two-thirds of the Legislature, and any new or increased fees require majority legislative approval.

Tolling is expected to cover $1.1 billion of the $4.6 billion price tag of the 520 bridge replacement, and with at least a third of the Senate prepared to automatically vote against anything Seattle might want, you can pretty much kiss this and any other revenue proposal goodbye.

So how does Timmy propose financing this and other crucial highway projects? Um… he doesn’t. Which pretty much makes SUV-driving Tim Eyman our state’s most effective anti-roads/anti-car activist.

So move over all you car-hating hippies at the Stranger and Publicola, girdle your pocket-protectors Seattle Transit Blog geeks, and prepare to be eclipsed Cary Moon. Mayor McGinn can and huff and puff all he wants against the Big Bore Tunnel, but if you want something not done, you need to learn a lesson from the guy who knows how not to do things right. And that guy is none other than Tim Eyman: Anti-Roads Hero.

Just like the Seattle Times, I too have budgeting advice for state House Speaker Frank Chopp:

With revenue forecasts showing no sign of recovery, a Republican majority in the US House virtually assuring the cutting off of federal money, and I-1053’s ridiculous requirements back in place, our state budget is now what economists technically refer to as “totally fucked.” So hell yeah, Frank, give the Republicans what they asked for: dismantle the welfare state and finally let Republican voters in rural Washington pay for their own roads, their own healthcare and their own goddamn schools.

Read the whole thing over on Slog.

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. beginning at about 8:00 pm. Stop by even earlier and enjoy some dinner.

Not in Seattle? There is a good chance you live near one of the 250 other chapters of Drinking Liberally.

Standing in the security line at Sea-Tac around the time Obama was elected in 2008, I thought that it would be a good indication of how much actual “hope and change” we’d be getting if the Obama Administration made some common sense changes to TSA procedures upon assuming office. It’s fairly well known that things like removing shoes and taking liquid items away doesn’t make much sense in any risk mitigation sense, and a new regime that billed itself as being more wedded to sound science than its predecessor would theoretically consider such changes to be no-brainers. Instead, we’ve continued to slide backwards in this respect, to the point of complete absurdity.

Our supposed national inclination towards personal liberty is nothing more than a mirage. What makes me even more convinced of this is that over 80% of the American public supports these body scans, while only 44% (Nate Silver estimates it’s far less than that) of Americans have even flown on an airplane in the past year. That means that there’s a significant number of Americans who never even face the miniscule risk of terrorism on an airplane who still insist that people’s naked images should be viewed by a government employee (or be sexually molested by one) before one can board a plane.

As Silver also points out in this post, people who travel most often are the most dissatisfied with airport security, and that was long before the porno-scanners were put into use. This seems perfectly normal to us, but it shouldn’t be. The people who should be most satisfied with a system of protecting air travelers are those most at risk from the security threats to air travelers. In a country where personal liberty is valued at some level, the people who aren’t at risk should be the least likely to go along with draconian security measures. Instead, they appear to be the most likely.

The brewing backlash against this insanity is good news, but the fact that it devolved to this point before people got this angry says a lot about how much we actually value freedom and how willing we’ve been to have blind faith in our government’s ability to “protect” us.

Two weeks after election day there are still two legislative races that remain too close to call, though the Republican has got the edge in both of them: the 41st LD Senate contest between incumbent Democrat Randy Gordon and faux-moderate Steve Litzow, and the the 25th LD House race between incumbent Democrat Dawn Morrell and proto-fascist hate-talker Hans Zeiger.

After today’s results, Litzow leads by 214 and Zeiger leads by only 36… both within the automatic recount margin. But I’d be pleasantly surprised if either Dem pulls this out.

Oh, and by the way, had the ballot deadline been received by election day instead of postmarked by election day, we still wouldn’t know the final result any sooner.