Search Results for: Reichert

Bellevue attorney Randy Gordon has dropped his bid for the Democratic nomination to challenge first-term Rep. Dave Reichert in WA’s 8th Congressional District. This leaves Darcy Burner as the only declared challenger.

While Gordon struggled to raise money, by all accounts Burner has exceeded targets set for her by the DCCC, Emily’s List and other potential big donors, and surely, her fundraising advantage must have played into Gordon’s decision to withdraw. In prior conversations, Gordon had assured me that should he drop out, he would actively support the eventual nominee, and thus I expect he will eventually endorse Burner.

In a letter to supporters Gordon said that he would “consider other elective positions.” I was unable to get ahold of Gordon for comment, but when I asked Progressive Majority’s Dean Nielsen for his take on the prospect, he was quick to respond:

“Randy’s a great guy, a great candidate and should really consider running for the state house.”

Run for the state house? Hmm. I believe Gordon lives in the 41st Legislative District, home of my favorite Republican, state Rep. Fred Jarrett. Jarrett is pro-choice, pro-environment and a just plain reasonable, thoughtful guy — I like to think of him as a Democrat with an “R” next to his name. Indeed, House Speaker Frank Chopp has been trying to get him to switch parties for years, but Jarrett refuses to leave a GOP that left his fellow suburban moderates long ago. No doubt Gordon would garner enthusiastic support from Chopp and Labor, both eager to put another progressive in the Democratic caucus… and it certainly would be fun watching the righties being forced to grit their teeth and spend scarce resources defending a moderate R.

Yeah, it’s kinda too bad to see one of the good Republicans targeted, but as was recently explained to me by somebody wiser in the ways of electoral politics, it’s always the moderates who are first to go in any legislative body. Why? Well, the reason they are moderate is that they usually represent districts where the other side holds an electoral advantage… a scenario certainly true of Jarrett and the 41st LD, which has grown increasingly blue over the past decade.

Personally, I like Jarrett. But I also like Gordon, and think he’d be an excellent campaigner and a great addition to the Democratic caucus. The 41st is a Democratic district, and it’s time we have a Democrat in Jarrett’s seat.

So, if Jarrett wants to avoid the toughest reelection fight of his career, it’s time to give in to reality and switch parties… and with the new legislative session about to begin, now is the time to do it.

My what a difference a year makes. It wasn’t so long ago that the national GOP had targeted Sen. Maria Cantwell as the most vulnerable Democratic incumbent in 2006, while WA state Republicans were drooling over what they saw as the inevitable backlash over the 2004 gubernatorial election contest. Now, less than a year before the election, things don’t look so hot for them.

Last week I reported that both Rasmussen and GOP pollster Strategic Vision show Cantwell at the magic 50% or better against anointed challenger Mike McGavick… and now the new SurveyUSA poll is the latest to show Cantwell’s approval ratings tracking up, 55% to 34%, her net approval rising 9 points since last month’s survey. Far from being vulnerable, Cantwell now ranks right in the middle of the 100 senator pack, and most impressively, she now enjoys positive net approval across nearly every demographic group in the state.

What explains her sudden popularity? Well, she’s finally getting a little press around here, but my guess is that voters are beginning to pay a little more attention now that the 2005 election is over and McGavick is making a little more news. Absent an opponent, approval ratings can be a little nebulous, but voters, particularly Democrats and independents, are beginning to view Cantwell in the context of a head-to-head with McGavick. Indeed, Cantwell’s biggest jump was with voters who identify themselves as liberals. There may still be some resentment in this group over a handful of Cantwell’s votes, but they’re realists; no self-respecting liberal is going to hand this seat over to an insurance industry lackey like McGavick.

There was a time when state R’s expected the national party to pour lavish sums into this race, but it’s beginning to look like that money would be better spent defending Representatives Dave Reichert and Cathy McMorris. (And who knows… maybe even “Doc” Hastings.)

Jonathan Singer has an interesting piece on MyDD, presenting a model for Democrats taking back the House of Representatives in 2006. And what is that model? The overwhelming Republican sweep in WA state back in 1994.

Going into the 1994 midterm elections, Washington state Democrats appeared poised to continue their dominance. In both 1988 and 1992, the Evergreen state had thrown its electoral votes behind the Democratic candidate, and the state had not elected a Republican Governor since 1980. Looking more closely at the 1992 election, the Democrats won eight of the state’s nine House seats, winning the overall House vote by a 56 percent to 41 percent margin, and House Speaker Tom Foley, a Spokane Democrat, was at the peak of his power.

But come November 6, 1994, the Democrats’ fortunes reversed. Republicans won the statewide House vote by a 51 percent to 49 percent margin, defeating the Democrats in seven of the state’s nine districts for a net pick up of six seats, and GOP Senator Slade Gorton was handily reelected with 56 percent of the vote. What happened on election day, and the months leading up to it, should serve as a stark warning to Republicans who believe they are set maintain control of the House in 2006 and should further provide lessons to Democrat hoping to win back the lower chamber.

Singer notes that the GOP picked up seats in four Democratic-leaning districts in WA in 1994, and 16 Democratic-leaning districts nationally. He concludes that Democrats should not shy away from targeting Republican-leaning districts in 2006, particularly in Ohio, which somewhat mirrors WA in 1994.

Personally, I remain hopeful that Democrats will target the three Republican-leaning districts in WA state. Everybody knows that freshman incumbent Rep. Dave Reichert is vulnerable; the 8th District continues to lean Democratic in statewide and Presidential races, and should be within reach of a strong challenger (and I’m not yet convinced that either of the declared candidates, Darcy Burner and Randy Gordon, are up to the task.) But given the right circumstances, the right challenger — and enough money — Democrats could have a shot in Eastern WA too.

Representatives Cathy McMorris and Doc Hastings have voted with the Republican leadership 98% of the time — often against the interests of their Eastern WA constituents — and each has their unique vulnerabilities. While McMorris has done little to distinguish herself during her freshman year, Hastings is finally making a name for himself as the do-nothing chair of the House Ethics Committee at time his own party appears to be collapsing under the weight of its own corruption.

Both deserve strong challengers who can make the 2006 election a referendum on George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Tom Delay, Bill Frist and the rest of the Republican leadership. If Eastern WA voters are in the mood to throw the bums out next November, Democrats need to be prepared to offer them a viable alternative. There’s a chance McMorris may draw a strong challenger in Peter Goldmark, but Hastings seat has thus far drawn little interest from Democrats.

As Singer points out, the lesson both parties should learn from WA in 1994, is that Republican domination is not safe in any part of the country right now. Democrats have a shot at retaking the House… but only if we mount strong challenges in Republican leaning districts.

I’ve been struck down by that nasty cold that’s going around, and so last night the dog and I crawled into bed early and flipped on the TV, just in time to catch images of the White House being torn apart by a massive tornado.

There wasn’t much useful to learn from “Category 7: the End of the World”, other than the obvious fact that it was a really crappy movie. But since Hollywood is in the business of wish fulfillment, I did find two of the screenwriter’s plot devices rather interesting: a) in the event of a major catastrophe, what we need is not only a woman FEMA director, but a really hot one… and b) it was a happy ending, because although the White House was totally destroyed, sucking evil staffers high into the funnel cloud, the Capitol Building was left totally unscathed.

I appreciate the anti-Bush sentiment, but I’m guessing that Congress won’t fare so well during the political storm that strikes next November.

Of course, “2006 is a long way off” and “a lot can happen in a year” and “off year elections are not reliable harbingers of the future” and all those other precious pearls of political wisdom… but if things don’t get much better for the Bush administration between now and then, they can’t help but get a helluva lot worse.

Here in Washington state, the anti-Bush backlash already played a role in the 2005 election, with one of the most effective direct mail pieces in the high-profile King County executive race featuring the relatively undefined Republican challenger, David Irons, standing on a street corner sporting a crooked smile and a Bush-Cheney placard. Expect to see similar images in races around the nation next year.

No question, this was a terrible election for WA Republicans, up and down the ballot, losing not only the coveted KC executive race, but also crucial seats on several county councils. And of course, the biggest issue in the 2005 election was the GOP-endorsed Initiative 912, which failed by over seven points… an astonishing margin for an anti-tax initiative. Even the GOP cheerleaders on the right wing blogs were reduced to feebly touting Republican victories in non-partisan races.

A reliable harbinger for 2006? Maybe not. But the Democrats’ newfound confidence certainly bodes well.

Out East in the 5th Congressional District, Republican first-termer Rep. Cathy McMorris could face a tough challenge from Okanogan County rancher and former state agriculture director Peter Goldmark. Pundits have this labeled a safe Republican seat, but this is the district former Speaker Tom Foley held for many years, and Spokane, its population center, is only slightly tinged red. According to Progressive Punch, McMorris ranks as one of the most conservative members of the House… having voted with the discredited leadership nearly 97.5 percent of the time. McMorris isn’t just out of step with the nation, she’s out of step with her own constituency.

Under the right circumstances, with the right candidate, this is a winnable seat for Democrats… but even just making it competitive would be a huge strategic victory. If Republicans are forced to spend resources defending “safe” seats like McMorris’s WA-5, imagine the problems they’ll face in WA-8, where fellow first-termer Dave Reichert is already struggling to keep his grasp on a largely suburban district that has been steadily trending blue for years.

Yeah, I know, I know… the GOP holds a huge numerical advantage in the Senate, and Congressional redistricting has made it nearly impossible for huge swings in the House. Thus it will take a nearly perfect political storm for Democrats to seize control.

But Republicans are blind if they don’t see the storm clouds on the horizon.

[Cross-posted at Daily Kos]

I try not to get too caught up in the polls, especially the cheap-ass, robo-call variety that KING-5 commissions from Survey USA. Any race close enough to be worth the effort of polling is almost certainly too far within the poll’s margin of error to let either side rest comfortably at night. And with a large majority of voters now casting ballots by mail, even an accurate two or three day snapshot of voter opinion is only marginally useful in predicting the outcome of a three-week election.

That said, I’d rather be up than down, and with a recent round of polling results being bandied about in the comment threads, I thought I’d take a moment to share a few comments of my own.

Some of you may have noticed an apparently stunning turnaround in the race between Ron Sims and David Irons for King County Executive. On 10/17 Irons led Sims 46% to 43%. Two weeks later Sims leads Irons 48% to 41%. Of course much of this movement is likely explained by the rather zaftig +/- 4.1% sampling error rate. But the pollsters do point out one statistically significant shift:

Most of the movement is among women voters. Women support Sims by 21 points today, compared to 3 points on 10/17/05.

Why would women suddenly flock to Sims? Hmm, I dunno… perhaps it’s because he never beat his mother?

Of course, assuming these numbers actually represent a real swing in broad public opinion, there are a lot factors that might have contributed to the shift. Still, one can’t help but wonder how much of an influence Mrs. Irons’ story might have had on women… most of whom love their mothers, and many of whom are mothers themselves. Physical abuse and verbal harassment of women at home and in the workplace is much more common than we might like to admit, and so many women found a mother’s description of her own son’s abusive behavior both believable and disturbing. Knowing little about the Republican candidate other than his parents’ character testimony, it is not surprising if voters reject the undefined Irons’ “anyone but Sims” campaign.

The truth is, negative campaigning works, a fact that Karl Rove has made a career of proving. Had Christine Gregoire spent a million dollars during the final weeks of the gubernatorial campaign defining her opponent, there never would have been an election contest. Had the eminently fair-minded Dave Ross abandoned the moral high ground and gone negative on Dave Reichert’s ass, we’d likely have one more Democrat in Congress. I respect Ron Sims for refusing to sling mud… but not so much that I was going to sit back and watch him lose an election while voters remained blissfully unaware of Irons’ explosive temper and his well documented history of showing it. (Not to mention his pathological lying and embarrassingly inflated resume.)

Would I rather talk about issues? Sure… Sims kicks Irons’ ass there too. But I’m comfortable that my mudslinging was truthful mudslinging, and that I didn’t do anything to Irons he wouldn’t have done to Sims… had Irons actually had any mud to sling. (Remember, this is the guy who sprung a closed FBI investigation on Brian Derdowski the night before the absentee ballots dropped. What goes around comes around.)

All that said, I have no idea if my efforts have had any impact on public opinion, and I’m certainly not relaxing now that the KING-5 poll shows Sims with a 7 point lead. This race could still go either way, and anybody who throws away their vote on a third party candidate that is neither qualified for office nor has a snowball’s chance of winning, risks putting King County’s $3.4 billion government in the hands of a lying, resume inflating, mother beating, tantrum tossing, tool throwing, unqualified Bush Republican. Third terms are extremely difficult to win for any executive office, and Sims would be struggling regardless of the opposition. Irons biggest backers, the gambling and building industries, want you to believe that you have the luxury of casting a protest vote. You don’t.

Irons is all but guaranteed a floor of about 35% of the vote; this represents the Will Baker Wing of the Republican Party… those who will vote for any candidate with an “R” next to his name, regardless of qualification or pulse. Then there are those single issue voters who will reject Sims on Sound Transit or the CAO or the nixed SWA deal… or who have totally bought into the GOP bullshit that KC Elections is corrupt and incompetent. (It is not.) This puts Irons’ floor firmly in the low to mid 40’s.

The Democrats have their own robotic voters, but they are much less reliable than those in the GOP, eroding the D’s natural numerical advantage. The result is that Sims too has a floor in the low to mid 40’s, leaving the election in the hands of undecideds and would-be Greens. While I can certainly envision Sims winning with greater than 50% of the vote, Irons squeaking by on a 45% to 44% margin is just as likely.

So while I find the latest polls somewhat encouraging, I feel far from reassured. And neither should you. If you don’t want Irons to be King County executive… vote for Sims.

KING-5 also commissioned polls on Initiatives 900, 901 and 912, which make one thing perfectly clear: I-901, which bans smoking in public places, is going to pass. Of course, we all knew that.

We’ve also always known that I-900, Tim Eyman’s superfluous performance audits initiative is a bit of a toss-up. It’s a rather complicated subject likely to confuse voters, and so there’s the natural instinct to vote no. But it is vaguely anti-government, and voters like that, so I still think it’s likely to manage a couple point victory. Still, it won’t come anywhere close to passing with a kind of mandate that could be understood to say anything about the mood of the electorate.

But it’s the numbers on I-912, the anti-transportation initiative, that has spurred the most interest. Survey USA shows I-912 failing, 44% to 50%, but as encouraging as this may be, I’d take these results with a large boulder of salt. Eyman’s own anti-tax initiatives have routinely polled 10 points lower than the final vote — I suppose some supporters are embarrassed to reveal themselves as selfish bastards — so I-912’s defeat is anything but a sure thing. But clearly, the initiative has not generated the overwhelming support some had predicted.

A look at the crosstabs are in fact fascinating, with I-912 supposedly drawing only 43% in Eastern WA… statistically comparable to the 42% support in Metro Seattle. I find both these numbers hard to believe, but in different directions.

I’ve always felt this was going to be a close vote, and if voters really understood the gas tax and what it pays for, I-912 would go down to defeat. But win or lose, if Republicans were looking for some voter backlash to slap in the face of Gov. Christine Gregoire and the Democrat controlled Legislature, this poll suggests I-912 won’t be it.

So there you have it… I find the recent round of polling interesting, encouraging… but ultimately, meaningless. With the exception of I-901, these races are all too close to call. So don’t throw away your vote.

Darcy Burner has a new diary in the recommended list on Daily Kos: “Winning the House could stop the Iraq War and prevent more.” I urge you to read it and recommend it, not only because it’s great national exposure for a potential Democratic nominee, but because she makes some excellent points about why we need to take back Congress, and what we can all do to achieve this.

For those who don’t know, Darcy is seeking the Democratic nomination in WA’s 8th Congressional District, the seat currently held by Rep. Dave Reichert. I have had the opportunity to talk at length with both Darcy and the other declared candidate, Randy Gordon, and while they present very different personalities, I would be proud to have either represent me in Congress.

The 8th District has been trending Democrat for years. We can win this seat in 2006.

On Wednesday, Seattle P-I columnist Joel Connelly criticized the efforts of Republicans in Congress to turn Puget Sound into an oil super-port, by repealing the Magnuson Amendment’s 28-year ban on supertankers. The subterfuge came in the Orwellian named Gasoline for America’s Security Act of 2005, a cynical effort by the oil industry to exploit the post-Katrina surge in gas prices to shrug off decades of environmental regulations.

Today Connelly writes that the provision has been axed, after bipartisan pressure from WA state’s congressional delegation.

Before the provision’s eleventh hour deletion, Jimmy at the Tri-City based blog McCranium reminded us that Eastern Washington has a stake in protecting the environment too, suggesting that it was an opportunity for Rep. Doc Hastings, who sits on the House Rules Committee, to “show some real leadership.”

But alas, Hastings was silent as usual, leaving it to Western Washington’s lone Republican, freshman Rep. Dave Reichert, to join Reps. Jay Inslee and Norm Dicks in pressuring the Republican leadership. And no doubt House Speaker Dennis Hastert also found Sen. Maria Cantwell’s threat of a Senate filibuster quite persuasive.

Lifting the restrictions, Cantwell wrote, “would expose Puget Sound waters to an unacceptably increased risk of future oil spills.”

Cantwell reminded Hastert that federal law allows Washington to import only enough crude oil to serve state needs. In reality, the state refines slightly more than it needs and exports most of the surplus to Oregon and California.

“It would be a most outrageous result were the House to pass legislation that puts the Puget Sound at risk, for the benefit of oil companies who seek only to export the additional supply needed to lower domestic fuel costs,” Cantwell wrote “Such a result would take the notion of post-hurricane profiteering to a whole new level of shamefulness.”

And in case Hastert missed the point, she added: “I want to stress to you, Mr. Speaker, that because this issue is extremely important to me and to millions of constituents that live around the Puget Sound, I will use all tools in my power to stop this provision from becoming law.”

As Connelly writes, “it still pays to raise hell,” and fortunately, WA’s congressional delegation still has a few hell raisers.

Well, whaddaya know? It turns out WA state’s very own Republican congressional delegation is deep in the pocket of indicted former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay to the tune of $30,930:

Rep. Dave Reichert: $20,000
Rep. Doc Hastings: $5,930
Rep. Cathy McMorris: $5,000

What did all this ARMPAC money buy? Well, earlier this year, all three voted to weaken House Ethics Rules in an effort to protect DeLay, and combined, have voted with their disgraced leader 96 percent of the time. And oh yeah… when faced with allegations of wrongdoing by his political patron, Hastings, the hapless chair of the toothless House Ethics Committee has done what he does best… absolutely nothing.

So what say, folk… how about returning your ill gotten gains?

UPDATE:
Well, at least one Republican congressman cares about the appearance of impropriety:

Rep. Jeb Bradley, R-N.H., says he will return $15,000 in campaign funds from former House majority leader Tom DeLay’s political action committee… Bradley said that though the political action committee that gave him money is not under investigation he is returning it to remove any question about the nature of the contribution.

Hmm. I wonder if Reichert, Hastings or McMorris will step forward and join Rep. Bradley in doing the right thing?

Democracy for America is hosting an online vote to determine which congressional candidate will receive their first national endorsement of 2006. The candidate with the most votes at the end of balloting will receive a DFA-List endorsement and a national e-mail from DFA’s Chair Jim Dean.

Two Democrats have declared their candidacies to challenge Rep. Dave Reichert’s 8th District seat in 2006… and while I am loath to take sides this early in the campaign, I urge you to go to the DFA website today and cast a vote for Darcy Burner.

The first round of voting closes Saturday at 2:00 pm Pacific Time. Only the top ten move on to the next round, and Darcy is currently ranked eleventh. Since Randy Gordon is not in competitive in the DFA poll, it seems useless to make this exercise a competition between the two of them, and thus deny both the opportunity for some national support.

That said, I like both Randy and Darcy. We were classmates at Camp Wellstone, and I could enthusiastically get behind either one of them… though I’m not yet convinced that either is the right candidate to take on Reichert. So I’ll wait a few more months before I endorse a candidate.

As if writing a blog weren’t intellectually masturbatory enough, now I’m going to pretend that people are actually interested in my endorsements. But to make it more interesting, I’m also going to give you my predictions.

President: John Kerry

The Bush administration is without a doubt the most astonishingly incompetent in US history. And I have a BA in History from an Ivy League university, so you can trust me on this. Seriously… Bush makes James Buchanan look like Franklin Roosevelt, and Andrew Johnson resemble Uncle Teddy. He’s turned huge surpluses into huger deficits, and universal good will towards America into universal enmity… in fact, the greatest accomplishment of the Bush presidency was stealing it.

Personally, I’d be happy enough with an “anyone but Bush” endorsement; the fact that John Kerry is such a worthy candidate is icing on the cake. Kerry is thoughtful, curious, intelligent, and honest… everything Bush is not. Is he the most exciting candidate? No. But he may be exactly what we need at this dangerous moment in our history.

Prediction: Given a free and fair election, Kerry 51%, Bush 48%. So it’s a toss-up.

US Senator: Patty Murray

Both Patty Murray and George Nethercutt have something in common: they originally lucked their way into high office. The difference is, the physically diminutive Murray has grown into one of the most effective US senators (in the nation) whereas the politically diminutive Nethercutt has been satisfied to coast these past ten years on his undeserved reputation as a giant killer.

Prediction: the four-foot-and-change Murray whoops the giant killer’s ass, 57% to 43%.

Governor: Christine Gregoire

My regular readers know that I was big Ron Sims supporter. But I’m also a political pragmatist (really… I am) and the choice between Christine Gregoire and Dino Rossi is a no-brainer.

Gregoire is one of those middle-of-the-road, somewhat boring politicians that Washington voters seem to favor. She’s clearly pro-business while maintaining strong sympathies for many traditional liberal causes. She’s smart, dedicated, and has years of experience as executive of the state’s second highest office.

Rossi, on the other hand, is a complete and total fraud. He’s running on his experience in business, when really he was just real estate agent… a salesman. By that measure, anybody who has ever been employed in the private sector might call themselves a corporate executive. He’s also staking his campaign on the contradictory claims that he is both an Olympia outsider, and managed to single-handedly close a multi-billion dollar hole in the state budget. (Neither is true.)

The biggest lie however is his attempt to paint himself as the kind of harmless, middle-of-the-road, somewhat boring politician that Gregoire really is. Rossi is just as passionately right-wing as the previous nominee, John Carlson… only with oddly appealing soft-spoken mannerisms, reminiscent of a gay man proudly displaying the Victorian house he just restored. Or perhaps it’s the mannerism of a real estate agent selling a Victorian proudly restored by a gay man.

Whatever. The point is, unless your idea of good government is corporate tax cuts and and the type of massive deregulation that brought us Enron, vote for Gregoire.

Prediction: Closer than I would have liked… Gregoire 52%, Rossi 48%.

Attorney General: Deborah Senn

Please, please for the love of Mike, vote for Deborah Senn. Sure, she’s not the most likable candidate ever to claw her way onto a November ballot… but personally, likability is not the top qualification I look for when hiring an attorney. Plus, she’s a tireless defender of consumers, which is exactly what we want in an Attorney General.

Corporate Washington can afford their own attorneys, and we don’t need to hire them one at taxpayer expense in the form a politically driven, mediocre, empty suit like Rob McKenna.

Oh, and if you’re one of those party Democrats still pissed off at Deborah for one thing or another, give a little thought to the future. Senn’s lifelong dream was to be an AG; this is the last office she’ll ever hold. But if McKenna wins, he’ll use the office as a stepping stone to the Governor’s Mansion or the US Senate. Don’t give a young, nasty Republican like McKenna a toehold on statewide legitimacy… you’ll regret it.

Prediction: Barring HUGE turnout and extremely long coattails… McKenna 51%, Senn 49%.

Secretary of State: Laura Ruderman

I say toss out Sam Reed just because of the shameless way he pandered to voters in championing I-872, the top-two primary. This is an incredibly stupid primary system — even more stupid than the blanket primary it would replace.

I don’t know much about Laura Ruderman, except by all accounts she was an effective legislator with moderate positions from a moderate district. That’s enough for me.

Prediction: the R’s retain their inexplicable lock on this office… Reed 54%, Ruderman 46%.

Commissioner of Public Lands: Mike Cooper

Let’s see, who do you think is best qualified to be the steward of our public lands and natural resources? The guy overwhelmingly backed by the forest products, mining and building industries? Or the guy overwhelmingly backed by environmentalists?

Mike Cooper is a no-brainer. He’s an average guy — a fire fighter — with an above average intellect, and a record of passionately fighting to protect our forests and streams. As a member of the Legislature he consistently receives the highest scores from the League of Conservation Voters.

Incumbent Doug Sutherland is, quite simply, the kind of guy who can’t see the forest for the board-feet of lumber.

Prediction: money and name recognition trumps common sense… Sutherland 52%, Cooper 48%.

8th Congressional District: Dave Ross

I’ve got to admit that I’ve found Dave Reichert’s law-and-order TV ads so persuasive that I’m definitely considering voting for him for Sheriff. But my nod for Congress goes to Democrat Dave Ross.

Ross is truly an independent thinker — and a bit curmudgeonly — not necessarily my kind of Democrat, but probably just the right kind of Democrat for the 8th district. Reichert on the other hand, seems little more than a cardboard cut-out, parroting the conservative GOP agenda. Voters have a clear choice between somebody who is going to simply vote the Republican Party line, or somebody who is going to make their own decisions.

Prediction: Reichert in a squeaker.

State House & Senate: Vote Democrat

Tax reform is my passion, and we’re not going to get any unless the Democrats control both state houses (and even then it will be a struggle.)

Prediction: D’s maintain control of the House… clueless on the Senate.

[Coming up soon Initiative and Referenda endorsements]

One of the reasons political consultants favor negative attack ads, is that they generally work. It’s a lot easier driving up your opponent’s negatives than it is driving up your own candidate’s positives. And requires a lot less smarts and creativity too.

Another reason is that it is so damn lucrative.

Take, for example, last month’s unprecedented $1.5 million smear campaign attacking Democratic attorney general candidate Deborah Senn… (almost) secretly financed by the US Chamber of Commerce. According to PDC reports, longtime GOP consultant Bruce Boram’s firm, Catalyst Consulting, was paid at least $20,000 for his efforts managing the campaign.

And what were his efforts? He didn’t actually write the ads, or book the airtime. No, he made a few phone calls, contracted out the real work, and pocketed an Eyman-like $10,000-a-month fee.

Wow. $10,000 a month to throw mud at Senn. That must be a full-time job, right? You know, like the $3,641 a month Boram also earns as Executive Director of United for Washington. Or the $4000 a month Boram was earning as chief political consultant and spokesman for GOP 8th district congressional candidate Dave Reichert.

(Speaking of Reichert, while he did fire Boram after the controversy broke, he’s still employing Boram coconspirator and United for Washington Associate Director Valerie Huntsberry. You still have some housecleaning to do, Dave.)

Nasty work, but nice pay if you can get it. Hell, for $20,000, even I would be tempted to run a smear campaign against Senn… and I voted for her.

Loose ethics and even looser money leads to dirty politics.

I made the rounds of a few of the candidates parties last night. I’m not really sure why, as I really don’t know anybody at these affairs. To be honest, while I somehow manage to get my hands on some good insider information, little of it comes directly from political insiders.

Most of my time was spent split between the Sims and Senn parties. I much preferred Senn’s, not as much because they had something to celebrate, but because they had Fat Tire Ale on tap. I found the conversation a little more interesting there too… which may or may not have had something to do with the Fat Tire Ale as well.

Anyway… in case you’re interested in my post election observations, here they are.

Voter Turnout

Many of our state’s most influential opinion makers have had a stick up their collective butts over the loss of our open primary (yes, I’m looking at you, Seattle Times editorial board.) We heard dire warnings about how voter anger at being asked to (gasp) declare a party in order to vote in a party primary, would lead to a precipitous plunge in voter turnout. In fact, I’d say some editorialists seemed to be promoting voter apathy as a form of patriotic political protest.

Well, despite predictions of record low turnout, voters cast ballots in higher than expected numbers, meeting or exceeding average turnout for similar elections. Oh sure, the ridiculous “Louisiana style” top-two initiative will still pass in November, under the premise that we’d rather have a primary system that sucks over a system that Gary Locke would approve. But if we’re going with a non-partisan runoff, I say let’s save some real bucks and chuck the primary entirely, moving instead to Instant Runoff Voting.

Another interesting point about our one-time experiment with a “partisan primary” (a term that most rational voters would consider redundant), is the fact that over 140,000 more Democratic ballots were cast statewide than Republican.

Oh you’re hearing all sorts of excuses from Republican officials about how this is because they didn’t have as many interesting races (you can thank Chris Vance’s GOPolitburo for that), but the truth is, all extenuating circumstances aside, Democrats have an electoral advantage in statewide races. I base this assertion on the simple fact that Dems tend to win statewide races.

In the 12 years I’ve been voting in Washington, with the exception of their inexplicable lock on the Secretary of State’s office, R’s have won, what… 2 statewide races? (Nitpicker alert: I’m asking, not stating.)

You can’t blame it all on right-wing wacko candidates like Ellen Craswell and John Carlson (hey… I personally like you John, but you’ve got to admit you’re a bit of right-wing wacko.) The fact is, this is a Democratic leaning state, and I just don’t think Dino Rossi’s implied campaign slogan “I’m not as scary as Ellen Craswell and John Carlson” is going to be enough to make a difference come November 2.

Let’s take a look at last nights results from the two highest profile statewide races, Governor and Attorney General. In both races, the Democratic winner out-polled the Republican winner, despite drawing a strong opponent. Hell… in the AG’s race, Democratic runner-up Mark Sidran nearly out-polled GOP nominee Rob McKenna.

With 98% of precincts reporting, total votes for each party in the two races breaks down as follows:

                            Democrat        GOP
     Attorney General       406,353         251,887
     Governor               432,997         287,368

Now I don’t expect the Democrats to win either office by a 20 point margin, but there’s no way the GOP can spin away the inherent Democratic advantage. Add in Gregoire’s and Senn’s advantage in statewide name recognition, and the GOP will need a hefty check from the US Chamber of Commerce to stay competitive.

Governor

Well, I can’t tell you how disappointed I am by the results. I had hoped that Ron Sims would be rewarded for the desperately needed political leadership he showed in embracing a bold tax reform proposal, but for many reasons, he just didn’t catch on with Democratic voters.

Tim Eyman is blabbing that this was a referendum on an income tax, but that is load of crap. I bet you if you polled voters in this state, a bare majority might have been aware that Ron Sims even had a tax reform plan, but few could tell you any details.

In the end, Sims finished 35 to 40 points behind Gregoire… exactly where he was before he started focusing on tax reform in May.

The simple fact is, Gregoire was the stronger candidate in this election. She had the party backing, she had the money, she had the statewide name recognition from her years as a popular Attorney General… she was the clear frontrunner from day one. And Sims was also likely a victim of his own tell-it-like-it-is brand of political leadership, where his strong defense of sometimes unpopular issues has polarized the electorate. After all, the fact that Tim Eyman and his ilk so revile Ron, shows just how effective a leader he really is.

I also think that many Democratic voters went with the safe candidate, knowing that closet wacko Dino Rossi will present a tougher challenge than open wackos Craswell and Carlson.

I am more of a believer in Ron Sims than I was before he entered this race, and I am confident he will remain an ardent support of tax reform.

Attorney General

The biggest question posed by Deborah Senn’s relatively comfortable victory over Mark Sidran, is whether the $1.5 million attack ad campaign sponsored by the US Chamber of Commerce helped or hurt her. In the ensuing controversy, Sidran was completely knocked out of the news, and I suspect Senn received a substantial sympathy vote.

On the other hand, special interests spend so much money on negative advertising because it works, and I’m sure the attack ads cost Senn more than a few votes.

Was it a wash? Who knows. Sidran did best in areas where he had the greatest name recognition, earning narrow victories or drawing even in King, Snohomish, Pierce and Thurston counties. But Senn trounced Sidran in much of the rest of the state.

The good news is that Washington voters didn’t give the smear campaign’s backers their money’s worth. The bad news is that there is a lot more attack ad money to come.

8th Congressional District

Name recognition.

What more do you need to say? Household name candidates Dave Reichert and Dave Ross convincingly won their respective primaries against some strong, but lesser known opponents.

The biggest surprise was how little traction Alex Alban’s paid media campaign bought him. For most of the night it looked like he might come in third behind perennial candidate and incredibly-awful-public-speaker Heidi Behrens-Bennedict.

One interesting side note: while retiring Congresswoman Jennifer Dunn long seemed invincible, her long incumbency may have covered up a quiet shift in the 8th District’s electorate. Ross out-polled Reichert by over 3500 votes, and the combined totals gave the Dems a 35,438 to 29,557 advantage.

The Democrats have a strong shot at winning this seat

Tax Levies

Hey Tim… show me that tax revolt!

Tax levies across the state won convincing majorities, although a few failed to meet the ridiculous 60% supermajority requirement. In Seattle, the extremely important Families & Education Levy passed with over 62% of the vote. In Tim Eyman’s home town of Mukilteo, a much needed EMS levy passed with 63% of the vote. (Hope you choke on that extra $0.35/$1000 tax increase, Tim.)

More analysis later…

This week an “anonymous”, “independent” committee stepped into the Democratic primary for attorney-general by launching a million dollar media campaign attacking front-runner Deborah Senn. I put those words in quotes because the committee is anything but independent, and despite elaborate efforts to maintain anonymity, these desperate and dishonest attack ads can clearly be traced back to the Washington State Republican Party.

In the spirit of the now infamous “Swift Boat” ads, the so-called “Voters Education Committee” (VEC) has attempted an end-run around state public disclosure laws by filing with the IRS as a 527 committee. To hide its identity, the VEC uses a rented mail-drop as a street address, and employs a domain name proxy service to hide its web site’s registered owners.

Even the name of the committee is deceptive, a transparent attempt to misdirect suspicion towards the similarly named “Voter Education Committee”, an organization founded under the auspices of Democratic political consultant Christian Sinderman, who now serves as an advisor to Senn’s primary opponent, Mark Sidran.

With an astounding total media buy of $1,170,000 during the final two weeks of the campaign, the VEC will outspend the four Democratic and GOP candidates combined. Not until long after the primary votes are counted will voters finally learn exactly who paid for this unprecedented smear campaign.

What we do know are the names of some of the GOP operatives behind the VEC: attorney John White, director Bruce Boram, and Valerie Huntsberry who filed the IRS paperwork.

John White is an attorney for the Washington State Republican Party, representing them numerous times before the Public Disclosure Commission. He is an expert on the intricacies of state and federal disclosure laws, and has cynically used his expertise to conceal the identity of the VEC’s financial backers.

Bruce Boram is Executive Director of United for Washington, a state-wide PAC representing business interests, whose board includes a Who’s Who of GOP insiders and conservative money-men (KCGOP Chair Patricia Herbold, BIAW Director Patrick Conner, uber-developer and self-serving initiative financier Kemper Freeman, etc.) Mr. Boram is a longtime GOP political consultant, currently serving as manager and spokesman for Dave Reichert’s campaign for the vacant 8th District congressional seat.

Valerie Huntsberry is Associate Director of United for Washington, and currently serves as Secretary of the King County Republican Party.

The VEC’s Republican bona fides are indisputable. But until we learn the identity of those funding this unprecedented attempt of one party to so lavishly influence the primary election of another, their strategy will be harder to discern.

Perhaps this is merely political payback from an insurance industry still bitter over Senn’s indefatigable defense of consumers during her term as insurance commissioner? Or perhaps the GOP views Senn’s primary victory as inevitable, and has started softening her up for the general election?

Or just maybe… the GOP would simply prefer to face Sidran?

Senn clearly has a huge advantage in statewide name recognition over all the other candidates, and by eliminating her, the GOP puts their candidate on a more equal footing. I don’t have access to any polls, but I’m guessing their internal numbers show McKenna or Vaska vs Sidran to be a helluva lot closer than either vs Senn.

And even if they are underestimating Sidran as a candidate — and I believe they are — the VEC’s backers still come out ahead. Sidran, with his strong support of Seattle’s controversial “civility laws,” the unpopular “car impound law” and the unconstitutional “poster ban”, is by far the more conservative of the two Democrats, and thus much more acceptable to business interests. So knocking out Senn is a win-win situation.

Look, I like Mark Sidran. He’s smart, he’s competent, he’s funny… he’s exactly the kind of moderate Republican I could see myself voting for in a general election. But in a Democratic primary an equally qualified Deborah Senn deserves the edge for her unchallenged advocacy of consumer rights, and her clear stance as, well… a Democrat.

Over one million dollars of “independent” expenditures in a primary tells you how important this race really is, and if I had any doubt about who to vote for, it’s been totally erased by the GOP-backed VEC’s disgraceful smear campaign. Deborah Senn is obviously feared by powerful business interests, and for that alone she deserves the job.

The VEC fat-cats clearly have more than enough money to defend their interests… I’m voting for an attorney-general who will defend mine.