HorsesAss.Org

Consider this in a report by Brad Shannon of The Politics Blogs at The Olympian:

The names of House Speaker Frank Chopp or members of the House and Senate leadership teams clearly are not among the recipients. Lawmakers who did get secondary copies via the “cc” list include Rep. Mike Sells, Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, Sen. Joe McDermott, and Rep. Tami Green.

My source says all are sponsors or supporters of the labor legislation and could not have been “threatened” by the email in any fashion. The source also said the email was the result of a conversation between labor representatives who met Monday to talk about strategy for getting the so-called privacy act passed. The contents of the message were intended for attendees at that meeting, but Johnson appears to have copied others — the mistake that the labor council said it had made in its news release issued this week about the incident.

Just for the record, the primary list of recipients appears to consist of labor people — including representatives of the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 21, Washington Federation of State Employees, Teamsters Joint Council No. 28, laborers union, and others. The secondary list also has labor people.

Wow, someone hit “send.” Pass the smelling salts. I’ve never sent an intemperate email in my entire life.

So what we’re left with is that the “Big Three,” namely Gov. Chris Gregoire, House Speaker Frank Chopp and Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown decided to get out of a tough vote on a worker’s rights issue by calling the cops on the labor council. I’m sorry, that’s the only way to read this thing, other than concluding that all three of them need to be committed.

I gotta tell you, the mind boggles. These so called leaders are so much more fucked up than I even imagined. They called the fucking cops on the state labor council.

Tell me again, dear leaders, how progressives should support a tax increase. Because you’re going to have to make a pretty damn compelling argument, and if you drag my kids’ schools into the discussion, I’m going to have no choice but to assume you are bargaining in bad faith.

Because “bad faith” pretty much describes this Democratic state government, despite some movement forward on a few issues.

In justifying the state Democratic leadership’s decision to throw the WSLC under a bus as a convenient excuse for killing the controversial Workers Privacy Act, Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown issued a statement saying we have to “draw the line” between the offending email and the “normal process.”

Huh.  Which I suppose begs the question:  what exactly is the normal process?

Back in 2004, House Democrats sent a fundraising letter to business groups that had recently given more money to R’s than to D’s, exhorting them to balance their generosity… 

“As a result of our research, we would like to ask that you consider balancing out your contribution history by writing a donation of $10,000 to the Harry Truman Fund,” concludes the letter obtained by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. “We would very much appreciate your generosity and support as we gear up for the 2004 legislative session and impending campaign season.

“Our Leadership team wants to maintain our open door policy with you.”

So, is that the normal process, encouraging the inference that money equals access?  House Speaker Frank Chopp seemed to think so, vigorously defending both the ethics and legality of his fundraising efforts.

“Since when is it a crime to talk about having an open door and bringing people together? … The only limit on me meeting with people is my time,” said House Speaker Frank Chopp, D-Seattle. “That’s hardly threatening language. … That’s pretty soft language.

“And that’s pretty common language.”

No doubt.  So if that’s the normal process, when did it become a crime for constituency groups to talk about withholding future financial support from politicians who refuse to support their agenda?  I thought that’s the whole point:  we work for and give money to only those candidates who generally vote our way.  

Of course, Frank knows as well as anybody that this is the way the system works, and for all the effort to make labor look like the unethical bad guys here, it is the business lobby that has recently honed influence peddling into one of Olympia’s most profitable professions.  So profitable in fact, that one of the lobbyists who brokered Boeing’s $4 billion 7E7 tax break, conducts workshops teaching other businesses how to “Turn Your State Government Relations Department from a Money Pit into a Cash Cow.”

The seminar, presented during a portion of the annual three-day meeting of the State Government Affairs Council, taught dozens of corporate government-relations executives how to “Turn Your State Government Relations Department from a Money Pit into a Cash Cow.” Michael Press, national director of Ernst & Young’s Business Incentives Practice, and Robin Stone, former vice president of state and local government relations for The Boeing Company, delivered the Microsoft PowerPoint-supported presentation March 26 in Savannah, Ga.

The presentation includes a long list of “negotiable incentives” along with such such helpful tips as “control publicity,” “avoid legislation if possible,” and “be mindful of the election cycle,” while encouraging businesses to make a “but for” the incentives threat.  (You know, “but for a multi-billion dollar tax break, we’re moving all our jobs out of state.”)

Turning your state government relations department into a cash cow is perfectly legal, and just plain smart business, and from the lack of moralizing on the part of our politicians and opinion leaders, I can only assume that it is perfectly ethical as well.  So what’s so wrong, by comparison, about labor using the resources at its disposal to influence the legislation it wants? Why shouldn’t unions be able to say what we all understand to be true:  “If you don’t support us, we won’t support you?”  

Ethical or not, isn’t that the “normal process?”

So how much of “conscience driven independent” is Rep. Dave Reichert?

“Twice, Representative Reichert could have voted to support major improvements to E Sammamish Lake Parkway, Route 162 in Orting and upgrades to the transit network in Eatonville – and put Washingtonians to work.  And twice, Reichert just said ‘no’ to what’s best for King and Pierce Counties,” said Andy Stone, Western Regional Press Secretary for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Fortunately, the economic stimulus bill passed without his support, so Reichert’s home district will get these federal dollars anyway.  But no thanks to him.

[flash]http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:220534[/flash]

What does it say about the state of our current news media when the most anticipated and insightful news coverage and analysis of the week is coming from a fake news show? Really… watch the whole thing.

The subject matter aside, what I find most instructive here is the way Jon Stewart’s total lack of pretense and decorum results in one of the most brutally honest interviews you will ever have the privilege of watching on TV.  Unfettered by the journalistic shackles of objectivity and fairness (and even free to employ—gasp—foul language when appropriate), Stewart manages to level a devastating critique of the financial news industry, while demonstrating by example the sort of pander-free directness that is too often missing from traditional coverage.

At one point Stewart rails against “the gap between what CNBC advertises itself as, and what it is,” telling Jim Cramer, “Look, we’re both snake oil salesmen to a certain extent, but we do label the show as snake oil here…” a critique that mirrors some of my own complaints about our local news media.  After years of newsroom cutbacks, the all important space between stenography and opinion has shrunk to the point where news-papers are fast becoming neither, and yet when you hear many of the legacy journalists talk about their own sacred role in our democracy versus that of the barbarian bloggers at the gate, you’d think that nothing has changed but the business model.

But it is not just the Internet or the economy that is driving down both subscription and ad revenues; it is the product itself. Publishers like to console themselves by pointing to their rising online readership, but, well, you get what you pay for… which may help explain why so many readers today prefer to get their news for free.

Back in college, my roommates and I once bought a used, black naugahyde couch, despite the bizarrely sleazy pitch from the aging salesman, who amongst other things, offensively described the couch as a “pussy magnet.”

I guess this is what he was talking about.

As part of an effort by the National Science Foundation to enhance numeracy and improve math education, the U.S. House today passed a resolution designating March 14 (a.k.a. 3-14) Pi Day. The resolution passed on a 391-10 vote:

“I’m kind of geeked up about it,” Rep. Brian Baird (D-Wash.) told POLITICO. “It’s crazy, but I’m a whole lot more excited about that than congratulating the winner of last year’s Rose Bowl.

“I’m not making this up. I have been fascinated by pi since I was a kid. It blows my mind. It’s lovely. The fact that it’s sort of this infinite number. I just think it’s this magical thing. … There’s a real beauty to mathematics.”

That’s the problem with Baird: he’s so…irrational.

EFFWA wants you!

The following is a list of CONFIRMED Tea Party Tax Revolts planned within the state of Washington. Please note that we ONLY list events happening on April 15th.

————-
City: Olympia
When: April 15, noon
Where: Olympia, Capitol Steps
Contact: Evergreen Freedom Foundation
PO Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507
P: 360.956.3482 | F: 360.352.1874
www.effwa.org
Other Info: Push Back!
Facebook Group: N/A

I first watched the movie Alien in a center city Philadelphia theater, where, um, audience participation was more of an accepted part of the film-going culture than in my bland, white suburb, and during that horrific dinner table scene where the alien bursts through the chest of a writhing John Hurt, a fellow theatergoer relieved the tension by yelling at the screen:  “Well, if you didn’t like the spaghetti, you could’ve just said so!”

That’s kinda my reaction to yesterday’s manufactured scandal over the now dead Workers Privacy Act.  If they didn’t like the bill, they could’ve just said so, but state Democratic leaders certainly didn’t have to make such a big scene about it.

Passage of the Workers Privacy Act was one of labor’s top priorities during the current session, so when Gov. Chris Gregoire, Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown and House Speaker Frank Chopp issued a joint statement early yesterday morning announcing that they were shelving the bill due to “serious legal and ethical questions,” and forwarding a labor email over to the state patrol for further investigation, I feared I’d be covering a scandal of Blagojevichian proportions.

But after finally reading a leaked copy of the email, which turned out to be a communication between labor stakeholders summarizing a strategy conference call… well… not so much.

Union leaders would send a message to the State Democratic party and to the Truman and Roosevelt funds from the House and Senate that “not another dime from labor” until the Governor signs the Worker Privacy Act.

Um… that’s it?  Angry constituents talking amongst themselves about withholding future contributions? That’s cause for a police investigation? Our state’s three top Dems douched the Washington State Labor Council for this? Are they out of their fucking minds?

You wanna prosecute a supporter for an idle threat, how about me:  not another dime from Goldy until Gov. Gregoire signs an income tax. In fact, I’ll take it one step further:  if the governor does sign an income tax, I promise to donate five dollars to every legislator who votes yes on the bill. There… now that’s crossing a line.  I await my visit from the state patrol.

Sure, it may have been imprudent to use such blunt language in writing, and it was certainly stupid to have included a handful of legislators on the email list, but there is nothing unethical or illegal about threatening to withhold future contributions from a Democratic leadership that seems intent on screwing its most loyal supporters. Money follows votes—that’s how our system works—and if legislators don’t like it they could give up the inherent advantage of incumbency and move to a system of publicly financed elections.

Indeed, it’s only when votes follow money that we’ve really crossed a legal and ethical line, and as this incident once again proves, our Democratic leadership has absolutely no problem kicking their gift horse in the mouth… you know… at least when the horse belongs to labor or environmentalists or any other non-business constituency group.

No doubt the business lobby’s fake think tanks and talk radio hosts and other surrogates in our media establishment will get all high and mighty about the corrupt culture of Olympia and all that, and yet it is business that has honed extortion into their most potent and familiar political tool:  “Cut these unemployment benefits, or we’ll leave town!”  “Kill this bill, or we’ll leave town!”  “Cut our taxes, or we’ll leave town!”

But a handful of unions threaten to turn off the tap if the Dems keep treating them like shit, and that’s unethical? That warrants calling the cops? It beggars the imagination.

No, we all know what happened here:  the Democratic leadership hated this bill and were just itching for an excuse to kill it. The only question remaining is why they had to do it in such an outrageously ham-fisted manner?

Frank could have just refused to let the bill come to the floor for a vote; he’s good at that.  Or the bill could have been allowed to die in one committee or another.  Or the governor could have vetoed the bill, had it somehow managed to pass both houses. If they didn’t like the spaghetti, they could’ve just said so.

And if they really were concerned about the language or intent of the email, they could have expressed their displeasure privately, then killed the bill all the same, just as they had always intended to do.  It was a stupid thing to put in writing, and the WSLC arguably deserved a tongue lashing in response.

But instead, they took this relatively innocuous line in an email that wasn’t even directed to legislators, and used that as grounds for publicly attacking unions, and instigating a police investigation?  Why?

Are they that fearful of even the remotest appearance of impropriety that they’re willing to throw their most loyal supporters under the bus at the slightest provocation?  Is this whole incident a calculated effort to prove to the media and business establishment that the party really is independent of labor?  Or, have the state Dems really come to take labor money so for granted, that they’ve forgotten it isn’t their own, thus, in their own minds, making any suggestion of withholding future contributions the ethical equivalent of a reverse bribe… essentially a threat to steal money from Democratic coffers unless the bill is signed?

I dunno.  But what I do know is that unless an apology for this bizarre overreaction is forthcoming, the unions in question might be better served by holding true to their threat.  Not a dime for the house and senate Democratic committees… at least not while they remain under control of leaders who clearly don’t value labor’s support.

Maybe what people should do is email their Legislators and demand that they immediately pass a budget that guts K-12 and higher education and contains no new taxes, or they will never get one more dime from us.

Then they “ethically” can’t do it! (Insert Nelson Muntz “ha ha” here.)

But watch out, you might find a state trooper knocking on your door!

Washington House Democrats report that last night their chamber passed HB 1393, their version of a homeowner’s warranty protection bill. It passed 52-45.

Send me flowers. Or else.

The trial against medical marijuana patient Bruce Olson in Kitsap County has gotten underway this week. The Cannabis Defense Coalition (a group that I work with) has been posting daily roundups from the courtroom. Olson and his wife Pam were arrested after members of the WestNET drug task force raided their home in 2007 and found 48 marijuana plants. Both Bruce and Pam are authorized by a physician to be medical marijuana patients.

Some interesting items from those dispatches:

– The prosecutors have been threatening defense witnesses with prosecution in order to keep them from testifying, including Bruce’s wife Pam, who was already tried and convicted last year of the very same crime (manufacturing marijuana with the intent to deliver).

– Earlier today (Wednesday), the jury pool was sent home because the prosecutor convinced the judge that the potential jurors were “tainted” after seeing a protester outside the courtroom holding a “Stop Arresting Medical Marijuana Patients” sign. This delayed the trial for a day.

I also heard that some local reporters have been on hand, so hopefully we’ll get some more complete news coverage from this gigantic mess. As always, if you’re free to attend and show your support for Bruce, you can find the court schedule at the bottom of this post.

It’s a mostly local edition of the podcast, beginning with a discussion of Seattle public schools funding, school budgets, school closures, class sizes, and other educational topics. Talk then turns to the highly contentious Seattle mayoral race where an anticipated field of strong challengers has now faded to hopes for just one. Will a third term be a slam-dunk for Mayor Nichols? After a brief stop at Ron Sims’ office, the panel heads to Olympia. Can new bonds save the state budget? And, anyway, would the voters approve?

Goldy was joined by Drinking Liberally co-host Chris Mitchell, Peace Tree Farm’s N in Seattle,
Effin’ Unsound’s & Horsesass’ Carl Ballard, and Hominid View’s & Horsesass’ …um, me.

The show is 48:00, and is available here as an MP3:

[audio:http://www.podcastingliberally.com/podcasts/podcasting_liberally_mar_10_2009.mp3]

[Recorded live at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. Special thanks to Confab creators Gavin and Richard for hosting the site.]

As Jon previously reported, a huge controversy was kicked up today over an email apparently threatening/promising financial consequences in regards to passage of the Workers Privacy Act, prompting the Gov. Chris Gregoire, House Speaker Frank Chopp and Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, to pull the legislation altogether, refer the email to the state patrol and issue a joint statement.

News reports had suggested the email came from the Washington State Labor Council, which the WSLC now confirms by releasing the following statement:

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 2009
Statement from WSLC President Rick Bender 

The following statement regarding today’s developments surrounding the Worker Privacy Act is from Rick Bender, President of the Washington State Labor Council:

“We regret the incident.  It was a result of frustration with the legislature’s failure to protect workers’ rights in the workplace.  Our job is to always protect workers’ rights.

“We do not believe that any law has been violated and we have no additional comments until we know where this will go.

“Thank you very much.”

I’m still trying to get a copy of the offending email.

Seattle is a green city, and not just because it rains a lot. Maybe it’s our extraordinary landscape, maybe it’s our history, maybe it’s a combination of these and other factors, but Seattle and its surrounding communities have long been politically green, and profoundly so. Except, it appears, when it comes to the thorny issue of urban density.

Counterintuitive as it may seem, the densest urban communities are also the greenest, making the most efficient use of both landscape and energy, a fact brought home by a recent study that compares the relative CO2 emissions between cities and their surrounding suburbs. Not surprisingly, our nation’s densest city is also by far our most energy efficient, with a CO2 emission differential of nearly 7 tons annually between the average city resident and that of the typical suburbanite.

In almost every metropolitan area, we found the central city residents emitted less carbon than the suburban counterparts. In New York and San Francisco, the average urban family emits more than two tons less carbon annually because it drives less. 

[…] But cars represent only one-third of the gap in carbon emissions between New Yorkers and their suburbanites. The gap in electricity usage between New York City and its suburbs is also about two tons. The gap in emissions from home heating is almost three tons. All told, we estimate a seven-ton difference in carbon emissions between the residents of Manhattan’s urban aeries and the good burghers of Westchester County. Living surrounded by concrete is actually pretty green. Living surrounded by trees is not.

The policy prescription that follows from this is that environmentalists should be championing the growth of more and taller skyscrapers. Every new crane in New York City means less low-density development. The environmental ideal should be an apartment in downtown San Francisco, not a ranch in Marin County.

Of course, New York is the extreme, and due to our lower densities, temperate climate, and anemic, bus-centric transit system, the CO2 emission differential between Seattleites and our suburban counterparts is substantially less, amounting to about 2.5 tons annually per capita.  But that’s a significant savings nonetheless, and one that will only increase as we let go of our single family home ideal, and eventually build up a denser, more energy efficient Seattle.

The shift to electric light rail will also make a huge difference, both by moving trips from cars to transit, and by shifting transit to cleaner electric power.  In fact, one of the more interesting details in the study is that Seattle, while generally in the middle of the pack on other metrics, ranks amongst the top five cities in terms of the current CO2 differential from public transit, with city dwellers annually emitting 2,600 pounds more CO2 per capita than their suburban counterparts.  Of course this is more than offset by the CO2 savings from reduced driving, but our relatively meager overall differential on combined transportation related emissions demonstrates how much room there is for improvement both within and without the city center.

While public transportation certainly uses much less energy, per rider, than driving, large carbon reductions are possible without any switch to buses or rails. Higher-density suburban areas, which are still entirely car-dependent, still involve a lot less travel than the really sprawling places. This fact offers some hope for greens eager to reduce carbon emissions, since it is a lot easier to imagine Americans driving shorter distances than giving up their cars.

Of course, apartment life is not for everybody, and I certainly empathize with residents concerned that rezoning to higher densities will change the character of their neighborhoods, but Seattleites should stop kidding themselves that this resistance to change comes without an environmental cost.  The Denny Party originally dubbed their new settlement New York Alki, “alki” being the Chinook word for “eventually” or “by and by.”  If supposedly green Seattle really cares about maintaining the landscape and natural splendor that is so important to our quality of life, it is time we let go of our 1950’s mentality, and embraced a little more of the Denny’s 1850 vision.