Goldy

Those hoping beyond hope that the Washington State Legislature would attempt to soften yet another $6 billion-or-so budget shortfall by boldly proposing new revenue sources, might be disheartened to learn that the House Democratic Caucus kicked off its latest round of belt-tightening last Friday by eliminating the House Finance Committee… the panel that considers all revenue proposals. That was the word from Rep. Sharon Tomiko Santos, who I cornered at last night’s 37th LD Dems holiday party.

I guess with the passage of Tim Eyman’s I-1053, and the governor’s subsequent no-new-tax pledge, there wasn’t going to be much for the committee to do, and so its responsibilities were folded into that of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, which now becomes all the more powerful in the wake of this leaner/meaner House reorganization.

But before the anti-tax crowd rejoices too loudly at this symbolic victory, they should remember that while the occasional tax increase did make it through the Finance Committee and onto the floor, by far the larger chunk of the panel’s legacy this past decade was its crafting of the billions of dollars of special interest tax exemptions that ultimately helped plunge our state budget into its current fiscal crevasse.

So a good part of me can’t help but mutter “good riddance” at the committee’s demise.

Remember the crotch-bomber? Well, get ready for the ab-bomber:

It is very likely that a large (15-20 cm in diameter), irregularly-shaped, cm-thick pancake with beveled edges, taped to the abdomen, would be invisible to this technology, ironically, because of its large volume, since it is easily confused with normal anatomy. Thus, a third of a kilo of PETN, easily picked up in a competent pat down, would be missed by backscatter “high technology”. Forty grams of PETN, a purportedly dangerous amount, would fit in a 1.25 mm-thick pancake of the dimensions simulated here and be virtually invisible. Packed in a compact mode, say, a 1 cm×4 cm×5 cm brick, it would be detected.

Of course it’s no surprise that the TSA’s fancy new backscatter scanners could be so easily duped (apparently, they’re not very good at detecting strategically placed thin wires and razor blades either), but if you really want to get devious about it, the softest target in our air transportation system might just turn out to be TSA itself.

In fact, if I were a dedicated suicide bomber (and just to be clear to federal authorities, I’m not), I’d pack a rolling, carry-on suitcase with as much explosives as possible, pick the busiest time of the day, wheel it through the snaking security line until I was in the very middle of the crowd, and then… BOOM!

Depending on the sophistication of the device, such an attack would kill and injure dozens, possibly hundreds, and achieve the same catastrophic impact on the airline industry without having to devise a way to sneak a weapon through security. And since the target is created by the screening process itself, such attacks would be virtually unstoppable, as any attempt to expand the security perimeter would merely create more targets.

Meanwhile, the traveling public might be much less sanguine about waiting in line for TSA’s security theater if they feared the very act made them sitting ducks to the real terrorist threat.

Now I know some of you may find my public speculation on TSA security flaws to be irresponsible, perhaps even criminal, but I’m a big believer in the philosophy that drives the open source community on such matters: that publicizing security holes is the first step toward closing them. For example, had we imagined (as the Israelis did) that terrorists might commandeer airliners to be used as building-busting weapons, the 9/11 attack might have been entirely avoided.

For in the end, I don’t just oppose the TSA’s invasive new porno-scanners and “enhanced” pat-downs because I find them offensive, I oppose them because I feel they ultimately make us less safe by consuming resources on merely giving us a false sense of security.

RELATED:

TSA Tip #1: Eliminate Web Check-in
TSA Tip #2: Eliminate Duty Free

According to Bellevue City Council member Kevin Wallace, Bellevue is too good for at-grade light rail:

It should not surprise Seattle that Bellevue finds this unacceptable. The Surrey Downs and Enatai neighborhoods are similar to Seattle’s Maple Leaf and Montlake neighborhoods. Imagine the reaction in Seattle if Sound Transit proposed to run light rail at-grade up Roosevelt Way through Maple Leaf, or to condemn 47 homes in Montlake because running at-grade next to Montlake Boulevard would be less expensive than tunneling. Sound Transit protected these neighborhoods in Seattle and should do no less for Bellevue.

Of course, Wallace doesn’t bother to mention the at-grade alignment down in here in South Seattle, because those neighborhoods are filled with black people and immigrants, so, I guess, in his mind, that’s not an apples to apples comparison.

Uh-huh.

Wallace’s classless classism aside, the thing that really needs realignment here is the anti-rail crowd’s perspective on who light rail really serves. They see it as a blight and an inconvenience… a means of conveying people past their neighborhoods, hopefully unseen. But I’m pretty darn sure that the vast majority of folks near rail stations down here in South Seattle see light rail as a tremendous neighborhood amenity… an inexpensive and convenient means of getting to and from the downtown, the airport and all stops in between, without worrying about the vagaries of traffic and the expense of driving.

I don’t have much hope of changing Wallace’s perspective, as his patrons are so heavily invested, emotionally and otherwise, in their anti-rail jihad. But if he’d like to come down to South Seattle and look for himself, I’d be happy to give him a tour.

1 Corinthians 10:20
But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

Discuss.

It’s official (and remember, you heard it here first): BIAW (Bastard Idiot Association of Washington) executive vice president Tom McCabe is out.

Here is the release,which comes amid rumors and background statements by sources close to BIAW that McCabe was negotiating a $1.25 million buy-out.

A $1.25 million buy-out. Sweet. Perhaps if the Seattle Times editorial board is so concerned about rising workers compensation rates, they might want to look at how the BIAW manages to use the retro program to siphon so much money out of workers comp that they can even consider paying McCabe a $1.25 million buy-out.

Anyway, goodbye and good riddance.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, the only Socialist in the US Senate, is in the process of filibustering the tax cut bill the old fashioned way… by, you know, actually filibustering. In other words, he’s been speaking uninterrupted for more than three hours now.

Bravo, Sen. Sanders!

As he took the floor, Sen. Sanders’ staff tweeted:

“You can call what i am doing today whatever you want, you it [sic] call it a filibuster, you can call it a very long speech…”

I call it patriotism.

UPDATE:
Sen. Sanders has actually been talking since 10:25 AM Eastern Time, so it’s actually been about six hours already.

UPDATE, UPDATE:
Figured out how to embed the live stream. Watch.

UPDATE, UPDATE, UPDATE:
I’ve just emailed Sen. Maria Cantwell:

Sen. Cantwell,

I am writing to encourage you to please join Sen. Sanders in his heroic performance on the Senate floor today. It looks like he could use a break

You might want to do the same. It also might be nice to send Sen. Sanders a word of thanks.

UPDATE, UPDATE, UPDATE, UPDATE:
Eight and a half hours later, it’s over. And Sanders remained engaging throughout.

Now that I’ve explained to Republican legislators that Levy Equalization equals Socialism, I thought it best to remind Democratic legislators that cuts in levy equalization do not necessarily equate to cuts in state funding for K-12 education.

News reports on the subject often talk about the millions of dollars local school districts get from levy equalization, but that’s not always how the Local Effort Assistance (LEA) program works. No, rather than providing additional funds to eligible districts, LEA often functions more like a property tax credit, lowering homeowners’ property tax bills by the LEA allocation.

For example, take the Tacoma School District, which for 2008 had a voter-approved local levy of $70.9 million dollars. Due to Tacoma’s slightly below-state-average adjusted assessed property value per student, the district received an LEA allocation of about $2.9 million. But because a district’s levy authority is reduced by the amount of the LEA allocation, Tacoma schools did not receive an additional $2.9 million dollars; rather, Tacoma property owners collectively paid $2.9 million less than they otherwise would have in property taxes.

Even had LEA been eliminated in 2008, the Tacoma School District would still have received the same, $70.9 million; Tacoma taxpayers simply would have paid a little more. And there are dozens of other districts where the levy authority “rollback” consumed all or most of the LEA allocation. That’s how levy equalization works.

Of course, there are many, mostly rural districts, that benefit enormously from levy equalization, particularly those with much lower than average assessed property value per student, and that strategically pass the minimal local levy necessary to qualify for the LEA program. For example, in 2008, the Mount Adams school district, with only about 1000 students, and average assessed values almost seven times below the state average, raised only $111,000 from its local levy, but received an additional $594,000 in LEA funds from the state.

That’s about $594 in extra state funds per student. Most Seattle school principals would kill for that kinda money.

Which brings us to my larger complaint with LEA: it is a convoluted hack that serves both as a bandaid on our inadequate level of state funding for K-12 education, and as a disincentive within the communities that rely on LEA most, to support the revenue solutions necessary to adequately fund K-12 education statewide. For the real problem is not that “property poor” districts have a hard time raising adequate local levies, but that they should be forced to rely on local levies at all to provide a basic level of education that is, after all, our state’s “paramount duty.”

So while it may be a little cold to suggest as I did on Slog, that “it’s time to give rural Republicans the government they demand” (and let’s face it, especially when one factors in levy authority rollbacks, LEA is a program that largely benefits rural, Republican leaning districts), it is smart politics for those who truly care about long term education funding to use levy equalization as a bargaining chip to, at the very least, force Republicans to honestly debate the issue. If they want this rural welfare—and it is welfare—they should be forced to fight for it.

But more importantly, if they want adequate state funding of basic education, Republicans should be forced to fight for adequate state funding of basic education for all our children.

Republicans hate gay people.

Not all Republicans, of course, but collectively, as a party, they hate gay people.

Just thought it needed to be said.

You wouldn’t know it from reading the Seattle Times’ reprinting of an Associated Press article on matter, but two local congressman—Rep. Jay Inslee (WA-01) and Rep. Jim McDermott (WA-7)—have been out in front of the House Dems’ rejection of President Obama’s tax deal appeasement with Republicans. In fact, it was Inslee who actually seconded the motion to refuse to bring the bill to the floor for a vote.

It’s almost as if the Times is invested in not representing local Dems as national leaders.

The Seattle Times editorial board is “deeply disappointed” with Gov. Gregoire.

For years, state employees have paid just 12 percent of their health-insurance premiums, including coverage of spouses and children. For years, the 12-percent share has been the target of critics, including this newspaper. We have continually pointed out it is less than half of what private employees typically pay. As the state has become shorter of funds, raising that 12 percent employee contribution has become imperative.

Last summer, the state undertook to negotiate an increase in the ongoing contract, which could be extended through June 30, 2012. Gregoire asked the union to agree to a 26 percent cost share. Last week, she settled for 15 percent. In other words, she tried for an increase of 14 percentage points and won 3. This piddling increase, amounting to $27 a month, will be effective Jan. 1, 2012 — 13 months from now.

(Sigh.)

Where to start? I guess, with the math, where I suppose one could categorize this deal as a “piddling” 3 percent increase, or, one could divide 3 by 12 and understand that what this really represents to state workers is a 25 percent increase in health insurance costs… and that’s on top of the annual premium increases due to inflation.

And, assuming the Times’ own numbers are accurate (not a safe assumption considering their penchant for misleading readers), if 3 percent of monthly premiums equals $27, and workers will now be paying 15 percent, that means the average monthly premium will rise to over $135 by time the new agreement is in effect. So what truly disappoints the Times, apparently, is that state workers’ average share of health insurance premiums didn’t more than double to over $234 a month… an increase of over $1,500 annually.

$1,500 dollars a year. That’s what the Times wants state workers to give back in exchange for, well, nothing.

But the real issue here is not the math, misleading or not. No, the real issue is the Times vehement insistence on misrepresenting our current budget woes as a crisis of spiraling spending, rather than plummeting revenues.

Note to Times: state workers did not cause this budget crisis… a Wall Street induced recession, and an inadequate tax structure did. And the fact that you choose to seize this crisis as just another opportunity to hate on organized labor, does you no credit, and ultimately, does the state no good.

For even if the Times were to achieve its anti-labor agenda beyond its wildest dreams, and roll back government wages and benefits by, say, a stunning 20 percent, it still wouldn’t even buy us a couple years of budget peace, because with or without this crappy economy, our antiquated tax structure simply cannot keep pace with economic growth, nor growth in demand for public services. And as long as so-called civic leaders like the Times insist on addressing only one side of the budget equation, Washington state will continue its slide toward Mississippi-like status.

After stringing it along for months as to whether it would extend its lease another year, the City told management at the Seattle Center’s Fun Forest to clear out by January 2… despite the fact that the Fun Forest was prepared to hand the cash-strapped Center a $250,000 check.

You can read more, including Fun Forest manager Beth McNelley’s on-target email rant, over on Slog.

I know I’ve spent a lot of time here on HA recently, scooping the poop spewing from the Seattle Times op/ed pages, so for a change of pace, I’ve posted my latest such piece over on Slog.

Yeah, that’s right, Bruce Ramsey thinks we need more money in politics. Read the whole thing.

I get an awful lot of emails from Amazon these days, advertising all the great deals they’re offering this holiday season, and I gotta admit, like usual, they’ve got a lot of great deals. But this year, I’m not taking advantage of a single one of them.

It’s not that I don’t like great deals. I do. I’m frugal by nature as well as by circumstance. And Amazon has always provided reliable service in the past.

But, well, in giving $100,000 to the No on I-1098 campaign, Jeff Bezos has proven himself to be an arrogant, self-serving prick, who apparently believes his fortune was built entirely upon his own sweat and genius, so quite frankly, I just don’t feel like giving him any of my money at the moment.

To be clear, I’m not one who generally endorses boycotts; attempting to deny someone their livelihood for daring to voice a contrary political opinion, that’s more of a Republican tactic. And honestly, it’s not like the rest of corporate America is run by angels, so the alternatives usually aren’t all that better.

But for the moment at least, fuck Bezos and his online empire.

A quick note to any Republican legislators who might be reading this blog, that as you head into the coming special session in an effort to trim another billion dollars or so from the remaining six months of the current state budget, it is important to remember that “levy equalization” equals Socialism.

There’s no two ways about it. The Local Effort Assistance program is redistribution of wealth, pure and simple, shifting the burden of financing public schools from homeowners in “property poor” districts to homeowners in districts with higher than average property valuations. And that’s Socialism.

Personally, I think assuring educational equity is a worthwhile goal, but then, as a big-city, liberal Democrat, I’m not afraid to embrace Socialistic concepts when and where appropriate, but… um… you are. So I can’t see how, as a matter of principle, Republican legislators like you can oppose slashing or eliminating LEA funding in the face of such a yawning revenue shortfall.

Everything that’s wrong with the public discussion over government funding and spending can be summed up in this Seatte Times editorial seeking charitable donations to help fund Medic One training. (Well, maybe not “everything,” but it sure is indicative of how totally fucked up our tax system is.)

MOST King County voters assume their vote every six years for the Medic One levy covers the full cost of emergency medical service. This levy, reasonably separate from the county’s beleaguered general fund, covers basic operating costs of a service that is the gold standard in the country.

As many county residents readily tell you, this is the best place to have a heart attack; survival rates are higher than any other place, with Rochester, Minn., close behind.

… DONATIONS will be accepted by phone, 206-744-9425 or by e-mail at info@mediconefoundation.org. Quality training and medical research is a worthwhile investment.

So if the service is so valuable and so well run, why should we be reduced to begging for money to help fund it? And by the way, the reason the general fund is so “beleaguered” is that so many essential services like Medic One have been pulled out of it, that there is little flexibility remaining in how to prioritize general fund services, and little popular support left in funding.

Furthermore, if they’re going to insist that tax increases remain off the table, isn’t it time for the budget hawks at the Times to stop writing about all the services they support, and start suggesting what services they think we should cut?