– Newt is running.

– And well, OK, I guess I won’t take Newt Gingrich seriously.

– What the fuck, Judy Clibborn?

– Florida outlaws sex with humans (among other animals).

– The incentives for steroid use in Baseball have changed pretty dramatically in the last few years, but I’m not sure I buy this argument entirely.

Goldy notes the irony of suburban screw Seattle people who support sub area equity getting screwed by it (while getting a deserved jab at Rob McKenna).

Of course, that’s not how “sub-area equity” was originally billed. No, McKenna and other backers pushed it as a way to protect the rest of the Sound Transit taxing district from evil/greedy Seattle, which otherwise would have presumably sucked in all their tax dollars to build transit here. How’s that working out for you, Federal Way? Be sure to appropriately thank Mr. McKenna for his head-up-ass transit balkanization policy when he runs for governor in 2012.

Of course that’s true enough. But I was actually a bit surprised. Typically, cities do better than suburban and exurban areas in public transit funding. King County pays Seattle more for Metro than it gets back, for example. Schemes like 40-40-20 and sub area equity tend to hurt Seattle, but typically the more dense an area is, the better suited for public transit. The better suited for public transit, the more public transit there is.

If the cities were a drain on the rest of the state or county, schemes like sub area equity would make a bit of sense. But we only seem to get them on things like transit funding that benefit urban areas. Somehow, we never hear about the need for sub areas to pay for themselves on a whole host of state and county things that Seattle pays the bulk of.

If going back a few decades, the state had sub area equity for road building, we could afford to have that gold plated tunnel I keep hearing about. If we had sub area equity in education, Seattle and other King County school districts wouldn’t have to pass so many bonds. If we had sub area equity in social services, Seattle could move toward ending homelessness for real rather than just talk about it, sometimes. If King county had sub area equity for road building, I doubt very much that we’d have had to close the South Park bridge. If we had sub area equity for police, directing them to trouble spots like Belltown wouldn’t be so difficult a choice for McGinn. If we had sub area equity for sewers, well maybe when I say I’m going to the throne, it wouldn’t be a metaphor.

Of course, there are good reasons not to have sub area equity in those things. Rural King County needs those cops too; I’ve been very grateful for rural King County cops on a number of occasions. The entire state benefits from educating children in areas that don’t pay as much in taxes. I just wish we could see the benefits in the areas where Seattle and other urban areas don’t pay as much as they get back.

I think we can all agree with the maxim, always, always, start with a worn out cliche. But I don’t need to tell that to one of the most respected newspaper editors in Seattle history (true fact, kids, you can look it up). Well done Guzzo:

Colonel George Quixby tapped the buzzer at his desk, and in seconds the door to his office opened to let in his secretary, Jean Marshall. She was a sight for sore eyes — or for any eyes, for that matter, and the colonel smiled, as he always did when she entered. They had been a working team for more years than he could count, and he hoped it would go on for ever — as well it might thanks to the latest experiments at the U.S. Science and Space Center he commanded.

Sight for sore eyes, I’m glad they’ll still use that phrase in the future. More important, can Quixby not count very high? My cousin’s kid impressed us all at a Mother’s Day get together with his ability to count to 100, and he’s 4. The next paragraph says they’re 50 and 74, almost 75. So Quixby can’t count half as high as a 2011 4 year old.

Also, we’re a paragraph in and I’m pretty sure Quixby is Dixy, you know, in the future and a man. The only question now: is Guzzo Jean Marshall? OK, another question: how up its own ass can the first page get?

The advances in human living they’d seen in the previous century and the early 2200s might have read like a science-fiction novel to their American neighbors a century or two earlier.

You’re writing it, dummy.

Anyway then someone from Illinois calls to complain about the fact that the Space and Science Center has the same initials as the Nazi SS. Ignoring the center part, I suppose. He threatens to blow the center up (even though it’s in New Mexico) but don’t worry, they soon find out it wasn’t that the person doesn’t like Nazis, it’s that the Space and Science Center made his wife younger, and she left him. Telephones still exist in 2220, and they can be traced by some random secretary, so that’s awesome. Then Quixby reminisces about the fact that people can live longer and reads that they might be able to live forever. Quixby and Marshall talk about how good it will be to live forever. Jet packs were invented in 2185 because they had just invented hydrogen fuel, so no cars. But don’t worry, the trucking industry still survives, for now:

The colonel paused a moment to draw a deep breath, then continued. “Only the large cargo-carrying vehicles — for example trucks, cargo planes, and cargo ships — survived and, in fact, did very well with the roads and highways all to themselves. Maybe we’ll soon find a way to make them obsolete if our experiments here at the Science Center materialize. Downstairs in the lab our people report their longtime research will soon bear fruit. They are sure they can transmit any solid object molecule by molecule from one site to another — even across oceans. What was once pure science-fiction is now reality.

First off, original ideas for science fiction: Jet packs and transporters. Second, if you’re thinking maybe I took the part where Quixby is most condescending to his secretary, let me assure you that I skipped the part where he calls her (and remember she’s 50) a “good girl.” So, no, explaining that cargo ships carry cargo isn’t as bad as it gets. Third, do planes and ships use roads in the future? Fourth, the most exciting thing that happens in the whole chapter is someone calls in from another state and then someone in that other state talks to him.

Then Quixby takes a nap. End of chapter 1.

[Read more…]

– This post brought back strong memories of doing flash cards with my mother on the train to her parents’ house.

– This is 100% factual.

– Freedom!

– This looks like a hoot, but I’ll be at Drinking Liberally tomorrow.

– I wouldn’t say genius.

– I’m sure glad we voted for a Republican house, or we might never get a vote on this shit.

So, a little background here. Over at the old blog, one of our favorite people to goof on was Lou Guzzo. He wrote strange rants about how rock music was ruining things, how billboards were ruining things, and how Democrats not named Dixy Lee Ray were ruining things since FDR turned the party all socialist. Fun stuff. In addition to writing odd columns for his webpage (and before that writing in and editing the P-I!), he’s written several books. This science fiction nonsense looks like it’s the best (I mean worst, obviously) of the lot. I plan to go through it Deeky style over the next several weeks.

Anyway, spoiler alert, I think I have a pretty good idea of the plot based on this post. We’ll dive in shortly, but today, a few thoughts on the book before I start to read: “The Amazing World of Tomorrow: Is It Really Science-Fiction?”

Does he think that we might think the “World of Tomorrow” might not be science fiction? The Amazing World of Tomorrow, is this Really Historical Fiction? wouldn’t work. Anyway, the legal disclaimer clears up the fiction part “All characters in this book are fictions, and any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is coincidental.” So I guess the question: is this science? And I’m going to go ahead and guess the answer: no.

Also, I’m not sure who this book was written for. It’s 100 pages of relatively large type. Perhaps this is supposed to be young adult fiction? I don’t see anything to indicate that Guzzo thinks it’s for young adults, or frankly, knows people exist who were born after 1977 (if I’m generous). Maybe he just ran out of steam.

– Dear Sarah Palin,

Don’t try to use a semicolon; you’ll only embarrass yourself. And yes, the odd punctuation is like the 4th worst thing about this tweet.

Love, Carl.

– This is the most depressing story I’ve read in a long time (hat tip here and here, it’s the story of a rape, and while the link isn’t gratuitous or sensationalist, it may be triggering or not safe for work).

– And speaking of things that make me sad for Texas high school kids, what ABL said.

– I’m surprised this happened so in the open.

– This looks like a lot of fun, Tacoma people.

The Seattle Times has an opinion piece* claiming “Washington Legislature should get serious about budget solutions.” Then they proceed to act like spoiled assholes.

THE value of the two-thirds requirement to pass a tax bill is amply demonstrated by most of the revenue bills offered in Olympia.

The value of writing in the active voice has never been demonstrated by The Seattle Times.

There are a few exceptions. Being heard Wednesday is Senate Bill 5947, sponsored by Sen. Tracey Eide, D-Federal Way. This would repeal the sales-tax exemption for bull semen and fuel for heating chicken coops. We have been hearing Democrats talk for years about these breaks as if they were big and important. The Republicans should do the gracious thing and vote yes. The bill, however, raises only $5 million a year, which is about two ten-thousandths of the state budget.

The Republicans won’t. Because they fuck bulls and are worried about having to pay taxes. There, I said it. Prove me wrong, Republicans, but as long as you vote against this tax hike that even The Seattle Times supports, that must be why.

Anyway, The Seattle Times calls in their headline for the Leg to “get serious” and then throws out a misleading number. Who cares what percent of the budget we’re dealing with? Tell us the percent of the budget hole. That, while still a small amount, comes to much more (the special session is to fill the budget hole, after all).

Also being heard is SB 5945, sponsored by Sen. Phil Rockefeller, D-Bainbridge Island. It raises $245 million a year. But it raises all preferential rates of the business-and-occupation tax by 25 percent, whether the preferences make sense or not. It wipes out a preference for first mortgages. This bill raises 50 times more revenue than the first one, and is much more difficult to justify.

A serious discussion demands that we reinflate the housing bubble while we cut Basic Health, K-12 Education, and Higher Ed. Anyway, they go on, with the same nonsense mentioning a proposed tax increase and then saying something stupid. Why call for a serious discussion and then not even try for seriousness?

[Read more…]

– Looks like the NPI fundraiser was a blast.

– I slept through the royal wedding, but this is more or less what I assumed.

– The planets we’re discovering around other stars are pretty amazing.

– Interesting ideas for the Seattle Center.

Kudos, Seattle Times: I didn’t think Civil Disagreements could get sillier. So, it’s a bit surprising that ostensible liberal Joni Balter and ostensible guy who can grow a mustache Ryan Blethen are the new faces of the thing (I guess, maybe Lynn and Bruce are on vacation). Anyhoo, here’s their first, (I guess) one. It’s super current.

Ryan, I was happy to see the Seattle City Council decided to replace the old ticky tacky Fun Forest with the new Dale Chihuly glass art pavillion [sic] at Seattle Center. I know you feel much [sic] differently. Let me make my case.

I know the vote happened on Monday, and this is a weekly feature. So, yes, this is the first time they can talk about the vote that happened. But wouldn’t people who believe they influence the debate want to talk about something before it happened? We’ve known it’s going to happen for quite some time. In fairness, I just wrote about the NLRB’s Boeing decision, so timeliness isn’t everything, but on the other hand fuck Joni Balther and Pedostach (PS, new sitcom: Balter and Pedostach, Cop show, maybe, should be a good pitch meeting). And, yes, now that you mention it, I do have questionable facial hair.

To me, Seattle Center is neither a greensward-like Central Park, nor a place completely frozen in time. The Fun Forest was truly enjoyable while it lasted. But as an attraction, the fun and the forest were slipping; rent became a problem. The whole center needs an upgrade. In the old days, the Center was an eclectic collection of venues and it remains so today. Chihuly glass adds to the ballet, opera, theater, EMP, the fountain and everything else.

Look, it was fun, it was enjoyable, it was great for children. But it’s no glass whatever. Anyway, here’s my favorite paragraph:

I really like Chihuly and am not bothered by the fact that he shows and — gasp, sells — his stuff in Vegas, Venice and many other places. He is a one-of-a-kind talent who has trained many disciples.

Gasp. Straw men feel so offended that he sells his art in Venice! And he’s super unique, but has many, many, many people who he’s trained to be just like him.

Anyway, then Ryan Blethen says Joni is right, but he’ll be sad. Civil Disagreements, folks.

– People keep telling me that McGinn is obsessed with Highway 99, but when I read his Facebook, Twitter, and official blog, I’m not sure it’s even the highway project he spends the most time on.

– Those green bike lanes look pretty snazzy.

– Greatest open letter ever.

– Shorter Pudge: The fact that all those people didn’t believe Obama was really American proves that there’s something bad. About Obama.

– Is HA Back on track for everyone? I haven’t noticed anything funky on the front page/comments the last few days, but the first time I tried to post this, WordPress ate it.

One of my least favorite arguments ever is about how little difference there is between the parties. Yes, the Democrats are spineless and often plain bad on policy. But there are huge, important policy differences. At some point in those arguments, someone always brings up how it’s important to get the right federal judges in place. After all, with lifetime appointments and so many important things going on, no doubt the direction of the judiciary matters a hell of a lot. While this is true, because of those lifetime appointments, the judiciary tends to change slowly. In all my lifetime, for instance, the Supreme Court and much of the Federal judiciary has been very conservative.

By comparison, federal boards and commissions turn over much faster. In some cases like the debt commission, the balance is pretty much even, and it wasn’t going to be much more liberal than if a Republican was President. But with things like the National Labor Relations Board, the pendulum swings much faster in the other direction: 2 and a half years into his first term, Obama has already appointed 4 of the board members and the 5th is vacant. And this is largely true with any president: When a Democrat sits in the White House, the NLRB works for workers rights and when a Republican gets to appoint the board, it pushes the agenda of the already powerful.

So it is when the NLRB made a decision to actually enforce the labor rights of Boeing workers. This decision means the broad middle class in Western Washington will continue to grow. That if you maybe didn’t go to college, but are willing to work hard now, that a good job that feeds your family is still within reach. While Microsoft and others are important to the economy of the region, Boeing has always been a great way for many to move into the middle class. And I don’t think an NLRB appointed by McCain would have ruled the same way.

– Platinum!

– Some inclines are like that.

– Last week’s Parks and Recreation had me in stitches with what Tom calls foods. I’m so glad this exists.

– Will someone please run against Scott Brown?

– It’s nice to know that there is a bridge too far for racist Republicanism. Although, it’s true Barbour wasn’t going to be president anyway.

– Solar panels in roads?! Somebody get on this in America. (h/t)

There are a group of state, King County people and Seattle City Council people who insist that the cost overrun provision on the tunnel is meaningless. They stand in stark contrast with Mayor McGinn, and most of the non-Seattle legislators who support the cost overruns provision. And they keep getting angrier and angrier at McGinn for keeping his campaign promise to oppose the cost overrun provision. They think (perhaps with reason) that it’s an excuse to go back on his saying he wouldn’t oppose the tunnel itself.

But don’t believe Governor Gregoire, Exec Constantine, or any legislator or City Council member who says that Seattle won’t be on the hook for cost overruns while they keep acting like Seattle will be on the hook for those cost overruns. The state, the county especially, but also the city council all have had the opportunity to call McGinn’s bluff and instead have insisted on poisoning the well. This may be good politics, but if they want the project to go forward without the mayor trying to block it, it’s not in the interest of their policy.

A quick recap: a few weeks before the mayoral election, the city council passed an ordinance that McGinn felt (or said at the time he felt) hemmed Seattle into the tunnel option. As such, he announced that since he couldn’t stop the tunnel he would still oppose the provisions that put Seattle on the hook for cost overruns. In this environment, McGinn went on basically doing what he said he would do until Richard Conlin illegally signed the draft Environmental Impact Statement. From that point on, McGinn took a much harder line, including vetoing a tunnel ordinance, and supporting initiatives to put the tunnel itself to a vote. Still, publicly, his position throughout has been that if the city doesn’t have to pay cost overruns, he’ll get out of the way. The state has lied to Seattle about the project repeatedly.

And magically the tenor of the debate has already changed from “of course, Seattle has to pay cost overruns, they get this awesome tunnel!” to “of course, the city won’t have to pay for cost overruns, what would possibly give you that idea?” Still, many people outside of Seattle are taking the first tack, and there haven’t been any laws changed about it since everyone was saying the first part. So, despite assurances from the state, it’s tough to believe that they won’t put “Seattle area property owners” on the hook for cost overruns.

Of course Washington State and King County could do things to assure Seattle that they won’t have to pay cost overruns. The most obvious, is the state could repeal the cost overrun provision, and commit to paying for cost over runs, just like every other state highway project. If King County is as sure as Dow and others say they are that the state is picking up the tab, they could easily work out an agreement with the city to take over any cost overruns that the state imposes on “Seattle area property owners.” If the county people don’t trust McGinn, they could structure the deal in a way that says if Seattle challenges the tunnel, they are back on the hook for cost overruns, so that the tunnel can go forward.

Until the state or the county do something like this, they may believe that Seattle won’t pay cost overruns, but they’re not betting with their own money.

But who cares, right? I mean if there are cost overruns, someone is paying for them? Why does it matter if it’s Seattle? With or without the City Council, McGinn is going to get a proposal on the ballot (and we’ve seen his ability to get the signatures to put things on the ballot without the City Council) to put light rail around the city. It’ll be a much better plan if there isn’t a gigantic question mark in the budget from the state. Simply, Washington should pay for its highways with gas tax money, not local property taxes: Seattle has a better use for the local property tax money.

Now, maybe it is good politics to oppose McGinn. To say he’s just being intransigent or a flipflopper, or whatever. But when the cost overruns do come, when the traffic from taking away exits and onramps and adding tolls comes, when Seattle goes into the red to pay for a shitty road, when we’re still tethered to cars with gas $5, $6, $7 a gallon, it won’t be McGinn’s fault.

– Oh my:

Pajamas Media’s resident fashion-plate and bow-tie adorned dildo brings us his latest installment in the wingnut myth that Obama Is a Muslim intent on imposing sharia law in the United States. Kimball’s editors — no doubt concerned that the typical Pajamas Media lip-moving reader rarely makes it past the headline — pack everything into the post title: “Why It’s OK for the U.S. Govt. to Burn Bibles But Condemn Burning the Koran.”

– The tunnel is a stupid project (also Pete Holems is a coward).

– Procession of the species!

– What Booman said.

Update [Darryl]

– I was going to write about Rick Perlstein’s feature in this month’s Mother Jones titled “Inside the GOP’s Fact-Free Nation. From Nixon’s plumbers to James O’Keefe’s video smears: How political lying became normal”, but will offer it as a link here instead. The article is an interesting history of the modern political lie in American politics.

In my post on I-1053, I wrote, “I’m not a fan of the initiative process, but I think we do need to respect the will of the people.” This post will expand on that a little. Initiatives are simply a tool to make laws. We shouldn’t treat them as anything more or less.

The biggest problem is that they are a blunt tool. The legislative process has hearings and amendments. Better (or worse) ideas make it into the final product. With initiatives, the final outcome is the same one people were collecting signatures on months and months prior. It doesn’t take into concern the opposition. You don’t need to talk to attorneys to see if it passes constitutional muster, or look into other ways of doing something. It is all or nothing.

And this all or nothing approach tends to hamper debate. If an initiative passes, then it’s the will of the people. This despite the fact that the people didn’t get any alternatives. Their will was based on if they approved the language of the initiative or not, not on what their most preferred alternative might have been. That has real value, and should be respected, but we should also keep it in perspective. And when an initiative fails, it often kills momentum for whatever was being worked for, like the income tax (although, I’m not sure how much momentum it actually had, and oddly it hasn’t done much about liquor privatization).

Another problem is the influence of money. Most of these Eyman initiatives in recent years have got on the ballot with the financing largely of one man. Of course, most normal people can’t afford to do that. And when they do get on the ballot, even political junkies like me get sick of seeing all the ads and getting mailings. Money does play too large a role in the initiative process. Still, money also plays too large a role in the legislative process. The rich and powerful will use their power in the crafting of laws, no matter how we make those laws.

Because of all this money, often the more grassroots voices the initiative process was envisioned to give a voice get shouted out. It’s tougher for grassroots signature gathering efforts to get a foothold amid the paid signature gathering. It’s tougher for the opposition to raise the money to compete with some of the corporate campaigns we’ve seen recently.

Still, even for all the faults in the process, people still do get to vote on specific issues, and that is rather remarkable. So, how do we judge an initiative? The same way we’d judge any law: who wins, who loses, who it helps, and who it hurts.