HorsesAss.Org

I was hoping to attend tonight’s forum in Edmonds with travel show host Rick Steves, State Senator Jeanne Kohl-Welles, State Rep. Mary Helen Roberts, former U.S. Attorney John McKay, and former White House advisor Bud Krogh. It starts in about an hour, but I’m stuck at home with parental duties. I was hoping to ask Mr. McKay the following question:

If Marc Emery is successful in his efforts to avoid extradition to Seattle for drug charges (McKay was the U.S. Attorney who initially went after him) and becomes a free man again, what can Americans do to stay safe?

If anyone is in attendance, let me how it went.

UPDATE: Wow, it looks like McKay has done a 180:

“Federal law makes the possession of any amount of marijuana a crime,” McKay said. “So, even if you’ve got a certificate from your doctor, a federal officer could arrest you. … That’s just bad policy.”

McKay faulted Congress for failing to take initiative on the issue. It is not the place of federal prosecutors or law officers to make policy, he said, nor should the White House go it alone.

In the end, he argued, marijuana should not be lumped in with cocaine, methamphetamine and heroin as part of the war on drugs. Marijuana law, McKay said, “should look a lot more like alcohol (regulations) and a lot less like cocaine and methamphetamine (laws).”

Unfortunately, Marc Emery is still sitting in a Canadian jail cell awaiting extradition. Maybe McKay can meet with new U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan and reverse more than just his stance on this subject.

A Moore Information survey released last week shows challenger Dino Rossi leading incumbent Christine Gregoire 48% to 42% in the 2008 gubernatorial contest, prompting the pollsters to speculate about the Washington state GOP’s rising prospects:

The fact that Rossi leads in this match-up is interesting and encouraging for Republicans in and of itself…

Encouraging news indeed… especially for those Republicans living in that alternate universe where contests are decided a year after the election, and solely on the basis of surveys conducted by Republican pollsters.

I mean honestly, could you get any more deluded?

Rossi, of course, led in the polls throughout 2005. And 2006. And 2007. According to Rasmussen, Rossi even led Gregoire by a substantial 52% to 46% margin as late as September of 2008. And yet on election day, he lost 53% to 46%, and by nearly 200,000 votes.

And that’s the only poll that counts.

Yet local Republicans continue to attempt to spin opinion surveys and East Coast gubernatorial races into evidence of some sort of imminent GOP revival, all the while refusing to address the real cause of their party’s recent string of electoral failures: its own failed and out of touch policies. Is it any wonder that merely branding Susan Hutchison a “Republican” was enough to torpedo her chances when the WSRP proudly endorses the likes of I-1033, an initiative rejected by business and labor groups alike, and which was crushed in King County by a 69% to 31% margin?

It’s not all that hard to capitalize on anti-incumbent sentiment in a hypothetical survey conducted years or even months out from an election. But once voters are asked to make a choice with actual consequences, they tend to vote for the candidates who best share their values. And that’s a metric on which Republicans shouldn’t feel encouraged at all.

While Rep. Dave Reichert worked hard to appear more moderate in response to a tough challenge from Darcy Burner, he’s been veering hard back to the right ever since, culminating in his vote against the House healthcare bill, and his bizarre attacks on the AARP for endorsing it.

Of course, all the polling shows that substantive healthcare reform, including a robust public option, remains popular in Reichert’s district, even amongst seniors, which makes the three-term Republican a prime target for a new round of DNC sponsored radio ads aimed at vulnerable Republicans nationwide.

[audio:http://s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/e625269003db69779a_b6m6va813.mp3]

In last year’s historic election, voters in Washington’s 8th Congressional District supported President Obama and his call for change.

But when it came to fixing our broken health insurance system, Congressman Dave Reichert voted for more of the same.

When the U.S. House passed health insurance reform that would provide Americans quality, affordable care, Congressman Reichert stood with the insurance industry, not the people he was elected to represent.

Congressman Reichert voted against ending discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, against reining in skyrocketing premiums, and against expanding health coverage to more Americans.

Congressman Reichert joined Republicans in Washington and voted against real reform. He stood with the health insurance industry instead of us.

Call Congressman Dave Reichert at (202) 225-3121 and tell him it’s time to stand up for reform, not insurance companies.

Reichert is simply out of step with WA-08 voters on this and many other issues. Perhaps when the reconciled bill comes back to the House floor for one final vote, Reichert might “moderate” his stance one more time if constituents remind him that it could him their vote in 2010?

HA contributors were unusually busy over the weekend, a typically slow time of the week when both posting and traffic generally dips, so here’s a brief summary of the posts you might have missed.

Even business guys befuddled about Baird’s vote
Spiraling healthcare costs is the number one issue for small businesses here and nationwide, which according to Jon, has even U.S. Rep. Brian Baird’s constituents in the business community puzzled over his vote against healthcare reform.

Post-Election Analysis Heresy
In which I make the downright heretical suggestion that, campaign strategery aside, perhaps the results of our recent election indicate that local voters are for the most part satisfied with the performance of our local government, and think both King County and Seattle are headed in the right direction.

The Great Mystery of Afghanistan in 2005-2006
Rather than a long, slow decline into chaos, the situation on the ground in Afghanistan didn’t start to take a sharp turn for the worse until 2005-2006. What changed at that time? Not surprisingly, Lee focuses in on our futilely misguided War on Drugs.

Packing Irony
Wouldn’t it be ironic, I mused, if the guy packing a pistol into the West Seattle Community Center had been shot in the process by another gun-toting civilian? (Because guns make us safer, you know.)

Another Domino Falls
Lee reports that even the stodgy, old American Medical Association has adopted recommendations encouraging the Federal government to reclassify marijuana away from being a Schedule I drug.

Grandstanding Reichert really shows them
Jon reports on U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert’s expanding war on old people, and the congressman’s failed efforts to have the AARP regulated as an insurance company in retribution for their endorsement of healthcare reform.

Times ed board outsources ideas to South Carolina
The anti-union/pro-Republican editors at the Seattle Times absurdly advise organized labor as to what’s good for workers and the general welfare of the Democratic Party. I, of course, make fun of the Times in response.

Bird’s Eye View Contest
Lee’s weekly aerial photo puzzle, which I personally don’t really get, but apparently has a loyal following. Go figure.

According to the headline in the Seattle Times, the “Airport link makes Sound Transit line the train to somewhere“…

The airport line is not expected to have a huge impact on near-term ridership, but routing to such a logical place squelches earlier complaints that light rail is the train to nowhere.

But… Central Link stops in my neighborhood. Huh. I guess that means I live “nowhere.”

As do all the other residents near stations in Tukwila, Rainier Beach, Rainier Valley, Columbia City, Mt. Baker and Beacon Hill.

At least, in the eyes of Times editors.

I wonder if that attitude might help explain how little the Times seems to care about issues concerning folks here in South Seattle, and how dismissive the Times editorial board is about the values, priorities and preferences of voters around here? Hmm.

UPDATE:
Um… one more thing:

South Tukwila, where the current route ends, was an embarrassment to transit planners who could not afford and design an airport station in time for the opening of the first segment.

Actually, most of the delay in the airport station was due to the fact that Sound Transit couldn’t start designing and engineering it until after the Port of Seattle had finalized its ever-changing airport expansion plans. The fact that this segment is opening so soon — on time and on budget — is a credit to ST, not an embarrassment.

Steve Elliott takes on the useless waste of humanity that is Frank Chopp. It makes absolutely no sense to me that Mike McGinn can win the mayoral race, but that guy can’t be defeated by an actual progessive in the 43rd District.

Last week’s contest was won by milwhcky for the second straight week. The correct answer was The Bronx.

This week’s contest should be more of a challenge, good luck!

Now that’s rich… the Seattle Times editorial board advising organized labor on what’s good for workers and the Democratic Party.

THE revolt of organized labor within the state Democratic Party is a kamikaze effort that works against the interests of the Democratic Party and the workers of Washington.

Yeah, because nobody has the interests of organized labor more at heart than Frank Blethen and his union-busting editors. And nobody is a bigger supporter of the Democratic Party than the Bush/Rossi/McGavick/Reichert/Hutchison endorsing Times.

That’s kinda like an ice axe advising Leon Trotsky on personal security.

The Washington State Labor Council and its allies don’t get this. They have their heads in the world of John L. Lewis and Dave Beck, and it is to the peril of the workers they represent.

We saw the same attitude in the International Association of Machinists’ negotiation with Boeing. The union made its demands, and it lost an airplane assembly line to a nonunion plant in South Carolina. It then held a news conference to announce that the loss was not its fault.

To which, really, the only rational and reasonable response is… FUCK YOU!

Do the Times’ editors bother to even read their own business columnist, the excellent Jon Talton? Do they really believe that cheerleading Boeing’s race-to-the-bottom decision to move thousands of jobs out of state is going to endear the Times to local readers?

If you’re ever confused about how to access the SOV lanes to and from Mercer Island, you might want to turn to the Times’ editors for advice. But when it comes to what’s good for workers and the Democratic Party… not so much.

Rep. Dave Reichert, R-WA-08, is “just getting started” in his jihad against AARP. From The News-Tribune:

In e-mails to the office of Washington’s insurance commissioner, Reichert’s staff wanted to know if AARP needed to be regulated under state insurance laws. An official in the insurance commissioner’s office, Gayle Pasero, company licensing manager, responded that AARP didn’t qualify as an insurance company covered by state law.

Wow. Just wow. AARP is now cowering under its covers at the mighty wrath of Dave, who called the state insurance commissioner, and was rejected. EPIC—well, you know.

Next up: Davey turns his back on AARP when it wants to play, staring at the ceiling and pretending not to notice AARP wagging its tail.

I also notice via Think Progress that Grandpa John McCain supposedly wants seniors to cut up their AARP cards to protest the group’s support of health care insurance reform. Yeah, like they’re going to give up those 5% discounts at RV parks, sure.

This is still the fundamental problem with Republicans: they don’t live in the real world. Gun owners may loudly proclaim that some undetermined, mythical entity will have to pry their guns from their “cold, dead fingers,” but try taking away a twenty five cent ketchup coupon from an AARP member. You’ll pull back a stump.

The American Medical Association this week adopted a report from the Council on Science and Public Health that encourages the Federal government to reclassify marijuana away from a Schedule I drug. Schedule I drugs, by definition, have no medical value, and now even the more conservative AMA is recognizing that marijuana does not belong in that category. The full report is here.

The AMA also concluded that more research should be done and that the current body of evidence doesn’t meet the standard for FDA approval (Bruce Mirken discusses that in more detail here), but they also rejected an amendment that would have added that doctors shouldn’t recommend smoked marijuana. The topic of smoked marijuana is largely an irrelevant distraction, considering that alternative forms of ingesting the drug, such as vaporizing, are readily available to anyone who’s concerned about the side effects of smoking it.

Kudos to local medical marijuana expert Dr. Sunil Aggarwal, who played a role in reviewing the CSAPH paper and has long been pushing the AMA to recognize the research being done on cannabinoids and the endocannabinoid system. It’s important to remember that when marijuana was first made illegal in 1937, it was an AMA representative who argued against it because doctors even then were concerned that a plant that was safe and had potential as medicine should not be restricted by the Federal government.

Some news from The Onion – Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be

I think it would have been funny if that guy carrying a gun into the West Seattle community center had been promptly shot.

Well, no… not funny, exactly. What’s the word I’m thinking of…? Ironic. That’s it.

Yes, I think it would have been ironic.

Via Attackerman, I see that John Hannah, a former aide to Dick Cheney, is still scratching his head about what went wrong in Afghanistan:

Ever since last year’s presidential campaign, there’s been an unfortunate tendency to assess America’s Afghan campaign as one long, steady downward spiral to disaster. “Eight years of drift,” according to Obama administration officials seeking to explain their lengthy deliberations over strategy and troop numbers. But, as Stephens suggests, the reality is a good deal more complex. The fact is that, after a period of genuine progress following the Taliban’s removal in late 2001, the situation in Afghanistan only began to deteriorate markedly between 2005 and 2006. Suicide attacks quintupled that year. Remotely detonated bombs more than doubled. Insurgent attacks nearly tripled. And the trends have steadily worsened every year since. The question is why? What changed in that time period that might help account for the sharp decline in America’s war fortunes?

Hannah provides a couple of guesses, but doesn’t stumble upon the answer. But what happened there during that time wasn’t much of a mystery. In fact it was fairly obvious that it would produce the outcome that it did. Let’s take a look back at what happened:

[Read more…]

Only one year after Barack Obama’s “change we can believe in” election, and in the midst of a crushing economic recession that has caused home prices to plummet, unemployment to spike, and state and local budgets to plunge into nearly unprecedented crisis, you might have expected incumbents to face more than a little pressure in our recent local elections.

Well… not so much.

In countywide races the sheriff, the one port commissioner seeking reelection and four of five county council incumbents faced no opposition at all, while Councilmember Reagan Dunn easily trounced his unfunded challenger 77-23. In Seattle, City Council President Richard Conlin easily waltzed to victory, while fellow incumbent Nick Licata beat highly touted Jesse Israel by a more than comfortable margin.

And of course in the marquee matchup this election season, longtime county councilmember Dow Constantine ran on experience in walloping putative reformer Susan Hutchison by a better than 18-point margin in the King County Executive race.

So what happened?

While most of the post-election punditry, including my own, has thus far focused on the horse race usuals of fundraising, messaging, strategy, and candidate performance, I think it fair to offer a suggestion that some may find somewhat heretical, and which is sure to disappoint those who feel themselves on the political outside:  perhaps incumbents did so well in our recent elections because voters are largely satisfied with the status quo?

Perhaps voters are generally okay with the level and quality of services provided by local government, and the level of taxes levied to pay for them? Perhaps voters appreciate the near total lack of public corruption our region has enjoyed since… well… at least since I moved here in 1992. Perhaps, despite the current economic downturn and our much publicized fits of paralysis when it comes to making a decision on important infrastructure projects, voters generally feel that our region is moving in the right direction?

Yes, much has been made in the news about the huge budget shortfalls hitting both the city and the county, and there has been much effort to blame this crisis on the overspending and mismanagement of the incumbents in charge, but perhaps local voters understand that with a few exceptions, both Seattle and King County have been pretty well managed in recent years, as evidenced by some of the highest municipal bond ratings in nation?

Perhaps voters are smart enough to look around and see that nearly every local government in every state is facing equal or worse financial difficulties, and thus it would be foolish to blame local budget writers for the inevitable consequences of the worst global economic downturn since the Great Depression?

And with the one Seattle levy on the ballot passing by a two to one margin, while Tim Eyman’s tax slashing I-1033 failed countywide with an overwhelming 69% no vote, perhaps the majority of local voters have even come to accept that it is a structural revenue deficit that threatens city and county budgets long term, not the out-of-control government spending that is the favored boogeyman of Republicans and Seattle Times editorialists alike?

Perhaps.

Yes, I know, two-term Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels came in an embarrassing third in the August primary, but that was really the exception this election, not the rule, and considering the buyer’s remorse expressed in the weeks following, it’s not hard to imagine him having beaten either Joe Mallahan or Mike McGinn in the general. But regardless, beyond that and the disastrously run campaign of ousted City Attorney Tom Carr, there really wasn’t much anti-incumbent/anti-government mood to speak of.

While I have my own well founded criticism of the general lack of passion, creativity and, well, balls of our state’s elected officials as a whole, voters here enjoy some of the cleanest, most transparent, scandal free local government in the nation. And while the Seattle metropolitan area certainly faces its own problems, they ain’t nothing like those confronting most other big cities.

Let’s face it, relatively speaking, things around here don’t suck, and perhaps, in rewarding incumbents, voters are giving credit where at least a little bit of credit is due?

In fact, as much as I might have a reputation with some as being a cheerleader for local Democrats, I’m arguably less sanguine about the direction in which our region is headed than the vast majority of voters. I know that the long term structural revenue deficit afflicting both state and local budgets threatens the quality of life and economic prosperity we’ve come to expect here in the Puget Sound region, and I have little faith in the current Democratic leadership to adequately address our present and looming fiscal crisis headlong. And without even a hint of a viable, reasonable, pro-government Republican faction to challenge it, I fear for the ability and willingness of our Democratic majority to challenge its leaders from within.

That said, at least for the moment, it’s pretty hard to run around these parts on a throw the bums out platform, when voters for the most part seem somewhat satisfied with the local government their getting. And all the usual horse race bullshit notwithstanding, that perhaps explains the woeful performance of challengers and self-proclaimed outsiders in this November’s election.

Paul Leonard of Vancouver Business Journal, in a piece dated yesterday:

One of the reasons behind his “No” vote, according to Baird, was that there was not enough time to consider Republican amendments to the legislation – a concern apparently held without regard to the GOP-led chants of “Kill the Bill” outside the Capitol last week.

As written here and here, the spiraling cost of employee healthcare coverage is the number one issue for small businesses – one that threatens the survival of those lucky or nimble enough to get this far through the deepest and most prolonged recession in 60 years.

These are concerns that Baird, as evidenced by VBJ’s Q&A with the Congressman last September, shares with his business constituency – making his vote against the healthcare bill all the more puzzling.

Small business is frequently hailed in campaign ads as the backbone of the American economy, if not its soul. Which is fine, as thriving small businesses hold the promise of future breakthroughs in technology and industry.

So it’s kind of strange that the national debate hasn’t featured more talk about the sometimes insurmountable challenges small businesses face when it comes to health care insurance. They need reform as badly as anyone.