HorsesAss.Org

  • Home
  • About HA
  • Advertise
  • Archives
  • Donate

Search Results for: 10,000

Initiative inflation hurts Eyman’s business

by Goldy — Friday, 11/5/04, 4:19 pm

Well, I can gleam one great piece of news from Tuesday’s election, and that is that initiative campaigns in Washington state just got quite a bit more expensive.

To qualify an initiative for the ballot you need a number of valid signatures equal to 8% of the votes cast in the previous gubernatorial election. For the past four years that number came to about 198,000 signatures. Due to fraud, duplicates and other errors, campaigns generally shoot for a cushion of about 20% over the minimum, so 240,000 has been the magic number.

The bar just got higher.

The final count isn’t in, but it looks like approximately 2.85 million votes were cast for governor on Tuesday, resulting in a qualifying threshold of about 228,000 signatures. Add a 20% cushion, and campaigns are looking at a qualifying target of over 273,000.

Long gone are the days when signatures are gathered by an army of energized volunteers. Tim Eyman pioneered reliance on paid petitioners in Washington state, and no campaign has successfully attempted an all volunteer effort in years.

My impression is that Tim’s core base of support is limited, and shrinking. There is a ceiling on the number of volunteer signatures the true believers will gather for him… so those extra 35,000 signatures are going to cost him $1.50 to $5.00 a pop.

It’s been three years since Voters Want More Choices has raised near enough money to qualify an initiative for the ballot — both I-807 and I-864 fell well short of the mark. Depending on the language, Tim’s proposed “performance audits” initiative may not actually be terrible policy… but it certainly won’t be exciting enough to generate the necessary influx of $200.00 contributions.

Throughout the I-864 signature drive Tim told his supporters he needed $400,000 to reach the ballot. He raised a little more than half that. Add the expense of another $100,000 in signatures, and it looks like Tim’s “populist” days are over.

I’m not writing Tim off. He’s done a great job selling himself as a professional initiative whore (and if you ask I-892’s major financial backers, they’ll tell you they’ve been royally screwed.)

But it is ironic that a man who made his career railing against powerful special interests is now entirely beholden to them.

No Comments

Gallup Poll bodes well for Buchanan

by Goldy — Monday, 11/1/04, 11:22 pm

A tidbit from the USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll seems to suggest the vote breaking towards Kerry in Florida:

In Florida, 30% of registered voters said they already had cast their ballots, using early voting sites and absentee ballots. They supported Kerry 51%-43%.

And Ralph Nader?

The independent candidate who helped swing the 2000 election to Bush isn’t much of a factor this time. Among 1,573 likely voters, he was backed by 9.

But…

Let’s see, 51% for Kerry plus 43% for Bush plus about 0.5% for Nader… that comes to 94.5%. Soooo… what? Gallup’s telling us that 5.5% of people who have already voted are still undecided?

But then, this is Florida, so anything could happen.

1 Stoopid Comment

Initiative & Referenda: when in doubt, just say “No”

by Goldy — Monday, 11/1/04, 7:45 pm

Earlier today I flattered myself by posting my endorsements in the most important and competitive races in Washington state. Now I’m going to tell you how to vote on the various initiatives and referenda.

Really. You have to vote exactly as I tell you. Or else.

I-892: No to Slot Machines!

It should be clear to even the most casual reader that Tim Eyman and I don’t see eye-to-eye on the issues. And that I think he is a lying, thieving, blowhard.

So I want to make it absolutely clear that my opposition to I-892 would be just as strong even if Tim had nothing to with it. I-892 would put 18,225 slot machines into over 2000 neighborhood bars, restaurants and bowling alleys scattered through nearly every community in the state, dramatically expanding access to the most addictive form of gambling ever devised.

This is a greedy, deceptive, money grab, pure and simple. I-892 would turn Washington into a poor-man’s Nevada, and in return, homeowners get maybe $29 a month on a $100,000 home, tops.

Of course, another really good reason to vote No is just to stick it to Tim.

Prediction: Eyman has more relevance with the media than he does with voters… No 62%, Yes 38%.

I-872: No on the Louisiana primary

“Waaahhhh! I want my blanket primary!”

That’s pretty much what voters and editorialists have been crying ever since the Supreme Court threw out Washington’s odd “blanket” or “open” primary.

Well get over it!

Besides, contrary to popular belief, I-872 does NOT restore the blanket primary… instead it replaces it with the equally odd but decidedly more stupid “Louisiana-style” top-two primary. Yes, I-872 gives you more choice in the primary, but it does so by giving you less choice in the general election… and that, after all, is when the majority of people actually vote.

Prediction: baby wants its blankie… Yes 71%, No 29%.

I-884: Yes to the Education Trust Fund

To be honest, I have a lot of trouble with this initiative. Our children desperately need the extra billion dollars a year it raises for education. But a 1 cent increase in the sales tax hurts those families who can afford it least. Washington already has the most regressive tax structure in the nation, and I-884 will make it worse.

I’m following Ron Sims’ lead on this. He supports I-884 as a stopgap measure to deal with our growing education funding crisis now. And like Ron, I promise to work as hard as I can towards real tax reform that will provide real relief to middle- and low-income families, while assuring an adequate tax base for the services the vast majority of citizens demand.

In real dollars, we are now spending over $500 less per student per year compared to 1993. Anybody who has a child in the public schools has seen the impact, and knows that something has to be done now. So please vote Yes on I-884, and then join me in working for a fair and adequate tax system.

Prediction: I’ll let my optimism get the better of me here… Yes 52%, No 48%.

R-55: No to Charter Schools

I agree 100% with message of R-55’s TV ads… we need to make our schools better. That’s why I’m voting Yes on I-884.

But R-55 gets a big fat NO, because what R-55’s TV ads never mention, is that it authorizes charter schools.

It’s not that I have anything against charter schools… in theory. But in practice, the vast right wing conspiracy is just using charter schools (and vouchers) as a tool to defund public education. In WA, charter schools will be used to bust the teachers unions. Yeah… that’s exactly the way to improve education… pay teachers less.

Charter schools are being driven by a belief in the “free market” that has taken on a religious fervor. Thus it’s not surprising that a large number of charter schools in other states include a religious curriculum.

We need to spend our public education dollars in our public schools. Vote No.

Prediction: once again, WA voters will reject charter schools… No 54%, Yes 46%.

I-297: Yes to cleaning up nuclear waste

Truth is, I don’t know all that much about this initiative, but I’ve been assured by people who know what they’re talking about that I want to vote Yes on this. So take my word on their word.

Not enough? Read the Ballot Summary:

This measure would establish additional requirements for regulating mixed waste (radioactive and nonradioactive hazardous substances) sites, such as the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. The measure would set standards for cleanup and granting permits, would prohibit waste disposal in unlined soil trenches, and require cleanup of tank leaks. Permits would not allow adding more wastes to facilities until existing contamination was cleaned up. Additional public participation would be provided and enforcement through citizen lawsuits would be authorized.

Can’t argue with that.

Prediction: voters can’t argue with that… Yes 55%, No 45%.

3 Stoopid Comments

Post-debate reflux… uh, redux

by Goldy — Saturday, 10/9/04, 9:34 am

Did Kerry win the debate? Well, he didn’t lose, and that’s all that counts.

You’re going to hear a lot about how much better Bush did this time around, but that’s starting from a pretty low standard. Besides, it doesn’t really matter anymore how well Bush does. As long as Kerry performs well, he wins.

Let’s face it, the incumbent is a lying sack of shit with a record of incompetence, possibly unparalleled in American history. Now perhaps the majority of “undecided” voters wouldn’t phrase it so strongly, but if after four years of Bush they are still undecided, they clearly share the sentiment to some degree. All Kerry needs to do to win this election is present himself as a credible alternative, and he has clearly done that. (Again, a pretty low standard to start from.)

The fact that Bush didn’t fall flat on his face this time, doesn’t add up to a victory. Indeed, even by standard debate scoring, Kerry clearly won, a fact the “instant polls” confirm.

When Kerry wins this election, it will be because the undecided made up their minds on Bush a long time ago.

No Comments

Giddyup Gallup

by Goldy — Sunday, 10/3/04, 10:55 pm

Remember those bizarre Gallup polls that showed Bush with as much as a 14 point lead? Well guess what… according to their latest, post debate poll, it’s now a dead heat. Not a statistical dead heat, but an actual dead heat: 49% to 49%.

So what’s more fickle, voters or the Gallup Poll?

Meanwhile, as the NY Times reports, voter registration rolls continue to swell, undermining the “likely voter” model used by all the national polls. [As Deadlines Hit, Rolls of Voters Show Big Surge]

In Montgomery County, Pa., the elections staff has been working nights and weekends since the week before Labor Day to process the crush of registrations – some 32,000 since May and counting.

I grew up in Montgomery County, Pa., and I can tell you, this has never happened before. And I can also tell you that it’s not suburban Republicans that are registering in record numbers… they were already registered. It’s Democrats who are driving this surge in Montgomery County, and across the city line in Philadelphia.

More from the NY Times:

It is harder to say what is driving the registration increase in Montgomery County, which is still considered “a Republican town” even though it went for Mr. Gore in 2000 and Bill Clinton before that. One of the wealthiest counties in Pennsylvania, it has had a lot of new building in recent years. But it also has working-class communities and is about 10 percent minority, and the community organizations say they have worked hard to register people here.

Some people registering have lived here for years but have not voted.

“I’ve been too lazy,” said Kurt Saukaitis, 43, who was registering at the county office. He and his new wife, Candy, both have 16-year-old sons. “The thought of a draft is scary,” Mr. Saukaitis said.

It is one thing to oppose the war in Iraq. It’s another to send your own sons to die there.

No Comments

Kerry leads in latest Newsweek poll

by Goldy — Saturday, 10/2/04, 10:21 pm

Last week I told you not to pay attention to the polls showing Bush with a substantial lead over Kerry. They lie.

As evidence, I cite the latest the Newsweek poll, taken in the wake of Kerry’s thumping of Bush in Thursday’s debate: Kerry 47%… Bush 45%.

Now, do you really believe that Kerry had a slight but steady lead through most of the summer, and then Bush jumped ahead by 10 points on the basis of his convention, only to see it evaporate entirely after a single debate?

The polls are crap.

One thing I am willing to bet money on… by 2000 standards, this election won’t be close (at least in the popular vote.) Whoever wins is going to win by greater than a five percent spread. And I believe it’s going to be Kerry.

No Comments

AWB gives forum to Eyman lies

by Goldy — Friday, 9/24/04, 9:49 am

Tim Eyman got to speak yesterday on behalf of Initiative 892 — unopposed — before the Association of Washington Businesses. His comments were picked up in the Bellingham Herald and the Olympian… and they were lies all! At least the headline was accurate: “Eyman touts his initiative for gambling.”

Timmy continues to call I-892 “revenue neutral.” It is not. According to Office of Financial Management estimates the initiative will cost state and local governments at least $69 million a year in lost revenues from other forms of gambling. And that doesn’t even begin to calculate the lost revenues from other taxable activities that will surely result from this $1.2 billion shift in consumer spending.

Tim continues sell I-892 as “leveling the playing field” by allowing other businesses to compete with the tribes. But the “fairness” issue is a racially-loaded load of crap.

Fairness for whom? The handful of out-of-state and foreign gambling conglomerates who own most of the card rooms… who got into this business knowing the rules, and now want to change them?

Or fairness for the two thousand bars, restaurants and bowling alleys who will be allowed to put slot machines in every community in our state? As I’ve said before, a bowling alley claiming they need slots to compete with the tribal casinos is like Chuck E. Cheese’s saying they need a liquor license and strippers to compete with the Deja Vu.

And of course, Tim continues to say that I-892 is “good for taxpayers.” My ass!

An owner of a $200,000 home will save less than $23 a year! Meanwhile, direct costs to taxpayers from problem gambling — which already approaches $100 million a year — will surely skyrocket as this $23 billion in new wagering increases state gambling over five-fold!

The only winners from I-892 are the big gambling companies that have written and financed it. For example, the Great Canadian Gaming Corporation, will suck $20 million a year in new profits north of border… not a bad return on their $200,000 investment.

Tim Eyman is an admitted liar, and the media needs to do a better job of evaluating his factual claims before repeating them.

No Comments

Little old lady kicks labor’s ass

by Goldy — Thursday, 9/16/04, 1:08 pm

One of the more interesting races on Tuesday was the 36th Legislative District Democratic primary between Rep. Helen Sommers and challenger Alice Woldt. From my perspective, they were both good candidates, but what made this race curious was the enormous — possibly record — amount of money spent in a state house primary.

Legislative primaries are usually low-key affairs, especially since incumbents rarely draw strong challengers. Many incumbents spend less than $20,000. But total spending on this primary could exceed a whopping $400,000, much of it coming from a disgruntled Services Employees International Union, who unsuccessfully targeted Rep. Sommers after her Budget Committee failed to give home health care workers the raise the wanted (and to be fair, deserved.)

Writing in the Seattle Times about Rep. Sommers’ narrow victory, Joni Balter says the union sent a strong message to the Legislature:

The Service Employees International Union sent a message to every legislator in the state. When the tough guys at SEIU come and ask you to jump, the correct response is not “I will think about it” or “I have a budget to balance.” If you would rather not be ground to a pulp next election, the right answer is “How high, sir?”

Joni is one of Seattle’s more thoughtful and evenhanded political commentators, but I think she got this one wrong. That was the message the SEIU intended to send to legislators. The message they really sent was: “Oh my God are we pathetically ineffectual, or what?”

Union “tough guys”? I’ve lived in Philadelphia and New York, cities with unions that make the local SEIU look about as tough as the Seattle Men’s Choir. You want to influence a legislator? You make them an offer they can’t refuse. You want to threaten them? You better back it up, and make sure that, come election day, their political career is sleeping with the fishes.

My regular readers will not be surprised to learn that I generally sympathize with labor on a broad range of issues, and I’m forever grateful for the money they spend fighting the good fight. But it is so disheartening to watch narrow special interest groups, like the evil-genius Building Industry Association of Washington, dominate public policy, while labor — who should be the most powerful and influential political force in the state — can’t even defeat one little old lady!

Personally, I wouldn’t have targeted Sommers, who to be fair, tends to vote overwhelmingly pro-labor. And pro-environment. And pro-other-things-I-believe-in. The SEIU’s interests might have been better served spending the money on behalf of a handful of close general election races, thus possibly swinging control of the Legislature. Win or lose, they would have earned some gratitude.

But if you’re going to put a hit on a politician you damn well better finish them off.

The SEIU seems to be following the Roman dictate, it’s better to be feared than loved. But a couple more fiascos like this, and they’ll be neither.

No Comments

Post-primary election wrap-up

by Goldy — Wednesday, 9/15/04, 11:39 am

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…

No Comments

Eyman’s own sources refute his claims

by Goldy — Monday, 8/23/04, 12:39 pm

Thanks Tim!

I was scrounging around the dailies looking for something to blog on this morning when Tim Eyman graciously dropped a gift in my inbox. In a fundraising email CC’d to the media, Timmy once again attacks the state Department of Revenue for having the gall to release statistics during an election year.

Tim’s media strategy is very simple. He routinely emails the press — sometimes as often as two or three times a week — pushing his own “statistics” and “analysis.” With no year-round opposition to refute his arguments (at least, not until now), his unsupported claims eventually seep into the public debate on the strength of sheer repetition.

This morning’s email is a great example, as it repeats several familiar Eymanisms. But a little investigation makes it easy to pick apart.

Washington is the 7th highest taxed state in the nation (www.taxfoundation.org) but our state’s Department of Revenue says our tax burden ain’t that bad. Gimme a break.

As I’ve stated many times, DOR estimates based on US Census Bureau data show that Washington’s state and local tax burden — that’s taxes paid as a percentage of income — ranked us 32nd in 2002… well below the national average.

So are we 7th or 32nd? Well Tim cites TaxFoundation.org, so let’s go there and see where the discrepancy comes from. Ooops… according to the very first blurb at the top of WA’s page, we rank 21st nationally in state and local tax burden.

(Scroll down the page further, and you’ll see that our local property taxes rank us 35th per capita, and 41st as a percentage of personal income. I wonder why Tim hasn’t cited those stats in support of his property tax cutting measures?)

So where does Tim’s 7th ranking come from? Well, he’s using TaxFoundation.org’s ranking of total federal, state and local tax burden. So, isn’t that meaningful?

No.

TaxFoundation.org’s own charts show that WA also ranks 7th for federal tax burden. The fact that adding state and local tax burden doesn’t move the total ranking, merely shows that our state and local burden is near the national average (actually, slightly below it, even according to TaxFoundation.org.)

Washington ranks high nationally in federal tax burden because Washington is a wealthy state, with some very high incomes that skew the state average. To add federal tax burden to state and local tax burden makes national rankings of state and local tax burden meaningless.

In fact, the very notion of “ranking” can be misleading.

For example, let’s go back to 2002, the last year for which data is available from both TaxFoundation.org and the DOR. In 2002, the DOR ranks Washington 32nd nationally with 10.09% state and local tax burden. For the same year, TaxFoundation.org ranks Washington 13th nationally, with a 10.4% burden.

13th or 32nd… that’s a huge difference, right?

Not really.

According to the DOR, the difference in tax burden between top ranked New York and 6th ranked Rhode Island is equal to the difference between Rhode Island and 39th ranked Missouri! TaxFoundation.org reports similar comparative results — the difference between NY and RI (now ranked 5th) is equal to the spread between RI and 32nd ranked Montana.

In both studies, 36 states were within 1% of the national average. Thus a couple tenths of a percent shift in tax burden can result in a dramatic shift in national ranking, with relatively little real impact.

And one final comment on the discrepancy between TaxFoundation.org and DOR numbers. As I read it, TaxFoundation.org calculates WA’s tax burden as higher because it adds in over $1 billion in taxes imported into the state. This looks to me like an argument for a state income tax.

On to the rest of the email:

They say that tax bills went up 4.2% which means they’re lower. Huh? Only politicians and bureaucrats using government double-speak can make an increase into a decrease. It just shows that there’s an election in November that will again decide the direction of taxation in our state — and the government is weighing in.

That’s just plain silly.

What the DOR reported was that tax revenues grew 4.2% from 2000 to 2002, but during the same period, average personal income grew 10%. Tax experts will tell you that the best measure of growth in demand for public services is growth in personal income, which encompasses growth in population, inflation and earnings.

Tax revenues — and thus expenditures — are clearly growing slower than demand for government services. In fact, they’re barely keeping up with inflation.

I-892’s revenue-neutral $400 million property tax reduction, I-884’s $1 billion sales tax increase, and Ron Sims’ massive tax increase by adding a state income tax — the outcomes of these voter decisions will determine the trajectory of taxes for years to come.

First, I-892 is not revenue neutral. The Office of Financial Management recently released a fiscal impact study on I-892, estimating that the state general fund will lose $30 million a year in lottery revenues alone in 2008, and that local governments will lose an additional $8.4 million in taxes on other forms of gambling. And these figures don’t even begin to take into account loses to other taxable business activities.

Second, Tim has long touted his $400 million tax reduction figure without providing any documentation to back it up. The OFM estimates 2008 tax savings at $252 million, based on $112 in revenues per slot machine per day. Under I-892 we could saturate the market with over 36,000 slot machines statewide. By comparison, other saturated markets, like Las Vegas, see daily net revenues of only $88 per day on average.

And finally, Tim is just plain lying when he says that Ron Sims’ proposed tax reform plan would be a “massive tax increase by adding a state income tax.” It doesn’t “add” a state income tax, it replaces the state sales tax and B&O tax. And it results in a net reduction in total state, local and federal tax burden… the tax burden measure Tim is always so quick to tout.

I’ve already gone on too long, so I won’t bother refuting the rest of Tim’s rhetoric. Needless to say, nothing Tim says can be taken at face value.

No Comments

Seattle Times fails to cover failing charter schools

by Goldy — Wednesday, 8/18/04, 8:18 am

In an editorial last week, The Seattle Times talked up the need for media diversity. Well this week they demonstrated it by ignoring the breaking story about our nation’s failing charter schools.

Yesterday the NY Times reported that “in almost every racial, economic and geographic category, fourth graders attending charter schools are outperformed by their peers in traditional public schools.” [Nation’s Charter Schools Lagging Behind, U.S. Test Scores Reveal]

This is a huge story… front page, above the fold in the NY Times. Over 600,000 children already attend charter schools, and the number is expected to grow dramatically under President Bush’s ironically named “No Child Left Behind” Act. No wonder this story was featured prominently in newspapers and media broadcasts nationwide.

But The Seattle Times? Nada. Not a mention. Not a word. Zilch.

The Seattle P-I and Tacoma News Tribune managed to squeeze the story into their pages yesterday. But The Times couldn’t be bothered… despite the fact that Referendum 55 — authorizing charter schools — will be on the Washington state ballot this November.

Or perhaps the Times didn’t cover the story because R-55 is on the ballot, and it would undermine their previously stated support for charter schools? In a June 11 editorial the Times called opposition to charter schools “an enormous waste of time,” lamenting that R-55 delays implementation past the start of the new school year.

Reasonable voters will see the state’s modest new charter-school law for what it is: one creative way to give some of our neediest students a top-notch education.

Knowing that fourth graders in charter schools lag half a year behind those in traditional public schools, “reasonable voters” might choose to err on the side of caution. And it is the responsibility of our region’s largest and most influential newspaper to give voters this information.

I’m not suggesting that the Times’ editors conspired to keep this story out of print, so as to protect their own political agenda. But every news outlet has its own editorial bias, and it surely influences decisions on which stories to run.

All the more reason why Seattle should remain a two-newspaper town.

1 Stoopid Comment

Huh? Seattle Times promotes diverse media ownership?

by Goldy — Tuesday, 8/10/04, 3:56 pm

I found an editorial in today’s Seattle Times rather curious. [Kerry and the FCC, forcing the issue]

On Aug. 5, Kerry promised to appoint to the Federal Communications Commission people who would maintain the existing restrictions. “As president,” Kerry said, “I will pursue a policy that tries to have as diverse and broad an ownership as possible. It is critical to who we are as a free people. It’s critical to our democracy.” That is exactly right. Media ownership should not be analyzed in economic terms only, as if what mattered were advertising rates. At issue is the public dialogue. For the same reason we do not allow the government to manage that dialogue, we cannot allow one private owner to do so either, unless one owner is all the market will support. If it supports only one newspaper and one TV station, those should be owned by different people.

Of course, what The Seattle Times is really saying is, we cannot allow one private owner to manage the public dialogue… unless that owner is The Seattle Times.

There is no arguing with the editorial’s main premise that media diversity is critical to our democracy. Yet this self-evident thesis is clearly contradicted by The Times’ own single-minded effort to drive the competing Seattle P-I out of business, thus turning Seattle into a one newspaper town.

The Times apparently understands this hypocrisy and proffers the caveat that the principle of media diversity can be discarded if “one owner is all the market will support.”

Well, I suppose from an economic perspective, that’s a reasonable corollary. Newspapers are businesses after all.

But who exactly decides whether Seattle can continue to support two newspapers? The P-I obviously has concluded that it can (unless you believe the Hearst Corporation is willing to lose money as a public service.)

The Times however, says “no.”

And there’s the rub. For if The Times were indeed the only newspaper in town, theirs would be the only voice we would hear on this issue.

I can understand — even sympathize with — the Blethen’s desire to eliminate the competition. It can’t be easy scratching out a profit in this competitive market. But their own editorial board said it best: “Media ownership should not be analyzed in economic terms only, as if what mattered were advertising rates. At issue is the public dialogue.”

There is no question that it is in The Times’ best interest to dissolve the Joint Operating Agreement. But they need to come clean with readers and admit that it is not in the public interest.

1 Stoopid Comment

You get the economy you pay for

by Goldy — Sunday, 7/25/04, 2:04 pm

This state’s higher education system is faltering. Students are being turned away, yet employers say there are not enough trained workers to fill all of the job vacancies.

That’s from an editorial in today’s Olympian: “Tuition can be a barrier to college.”

I’m not the kind of person who likes to beat a dead horse. No wait… yes I am. And so I keep pointing out editorial after editorial (and blog after blog) about our failure to properly fund higher education, and the inevitable economic decline that will result. For example, take a look at the Olympian’s estimates of average income by educational level:

-$18,900 for a person who has not graduated from high school.
-$25,900 for a high school graduate.
-$31,200 for a person with some college education.
-$33,000 for a student with an AA degree.
-$45,400 for a bachelor’s degree.

Just as individuals invest in their own future by attending college, our state invests in our future economy by making college more accessible. Education consumes the single largest chunk of our state and local taxes, so when Tim Eyman talks about eliminating “government waste” this is what he has in mind.

You get what you pay for. If we buy ourselves a second-rate educational system, our children will inherit a second-rate economy.

No Comments

Will cut taxes for food

by Goldy — Tuesday, 7/20/04, 11:07 pm

Political consultant Christian Sinderman calls Tim Eyman “the state’s highest paid panhandler,” and Timmy’s out rattling his tin cup once again. [Eyman again solicits salary fund – despite setback]

Personally, I find it hard to believe that even his most fervent supporters will continue throwing good money after bad if Tim continues to fail to get his so-called “grassroots” initiatives on the ballot.

Last year it was I-807, this year I-864. Tim often asks supporters to “reinvest” their car-tab savings in his current tax-cutting scheme, but over the past two years contributors haven’t seen much return on their investment.

Tim claims to have collected 160,000 signatures for I-864, about two-thirds of his target… but I don’t really believe he came even that close. Hell, if I had been standing in front of cameras at the Secretary of State’s office trying to spin victory out of a failed petition drive, I might have exaggerated the numbers too. It’s hard to imagine an admitted liar like Tim could resist the temptation.

My educated guess is he didn’t break 100,000 valid signatures, and probably significantly less. I could write a week of blogs on how Tim screwed up this campaign, but I don’t need to give him any free advice.

Suffice it to say that the fact that Tim can’t raise enough money to hire the signature gatherers needed to qualify his “grassroots” initiatives for the ballot, suggests that there isn’t much grassroots support in Washington state for his anti-government, tax-cutting agenda. Tim might point to his gambling industry financed I-892 as evidence to the contrary, but if that campaign hints at any anti-tax fervor, it seems limited to corporate boardrooms in Nevada and British Columbia, where much of the contributions originated.

As far as I’m concerned, if Tim’s true believers want to spend their hard earned dollars paying the mortgage on his Mukilteo McMansion, more power to them. Those are dollars that won’t be spent on some other, more destructive cause.

2 Stoopid Comments

We’ve got nothing to lose but our chains… and laptops

by Goldy — Thursday, 7/15/04, 12:12 pm

Perhaps if Collin Levey spent a little less time reading the Wall Street Journal editorial page, and a little more time watching TV, she’d be better informed.

Oh, I’m not suggesting she tune in “Who Wants to Marry an Apprentice Survivor,” or whatever the latest hit reality show is (although that would probably still be more informative than the WSJ editorial page.) But if she was planning to write on federal forest management policies, she might have benefited from KCTS’s Tuesday airing of the NOVA episode “Fire Wars,” which chronicles the devastating 2000 forest fire season, and explains how a century of misguided fire suppression policy led to the monster fires we see today.

But no, just like the Bush administration, she prefers to base her opinions on political polemic rather than science. [It takes a tree-hugger to raze a forest]

So for Collin, the real culprit is the hoard of “downy youngsters with laptops chaining themselves to old-growth trees.” She finds this image so amusing she mentions it three times, and I admit it might have a satirical impact with readers if the image it parodied actually had any currency.

I’m an avid news-hound, and while I don’t doubt that somewhere in this great nation an idealistic, young environmentalist is protesting old-growth logging, I don’t recall a recent news story involving chains and laptops. (At least not related to forestry.)

I’m particularly leery of Collin’s tales of summer-camp-like tree sitting outings, with campers emailing home personal hygiene reports. It’s not the lack of showers that makes me suspicious — that’s consistent with my own overnight camp experience. It’s her obsession with laptops.

First of all, it can be hard enough configuring a WIFI network to extend 60 feet from the den to the living-room, let alone hundreds of miles deep into roadless, virgin forest. So it’s not like these purported young activists are passing the days browsing the internet.

Second, the average laptop is lucky to get 2 to 3 hours per charge, so unless these old growth stands happen to be strategically located near power outlets, I doubt these laptops are good for much more than protecting your lap from angry squirrels. In fact, harkening back to my own summer camp days, the only laptop I remember is that of a particularly odd counselor who always seemed a bit too fond of the younger boys.

I’m not saying Collin made this anecdote up; I’m sure she based it on something or other she read somewhere… before completely blowing it out of proportion. But as I’m too ethically rigid (i.e. cheap) to send a dime to the WSJ for the privilege of reading their editorial page slanders, I don’t usually have access to her primary source material.

In any case… there never is much subtext to Collin’s arguments, and this column struts the usual rhetorical cahones, branding Bill Clinton’s now-defunct road building ban “a giveaway.” A giveaway to whom? The American public who owns the national forests?

Calling it a “giveaway” implies that road building through virgin timber is somehow the natural state of affairs, but we’re talking about our national forests, not the interstate highway system. This isn’t the I-5 corridor, it’s the last 10% of old growth forest that once symbolized the Evergreen State.

Saving for future generations the few remaining patches of unspoiled wilderness is not a giveaway. A giveaway is subsidizing the logging industry by spending taxpayer dollars to build roads through virgin timber that would otherwise be uneconomical to cut.

By measuring forests in “board feet”, and attacking John Kerry for “sidling up to hunting and sportsmen groups,” it is clear that Collins idea of “more-localized accountability for the management of public lands” envisions our national forests as little more than the unfinished two-by-four section of Home Depot.

I understand Collin’s partisan zeal to reduce this issue to a fight between Democrats and the rest of us, but in so doing she dumbs down a complex debate that would best be decided by forestry experts rather than politicians, columnists and bloggers. It is convenient for her to blame the recent spate of fires on “hands-off” forestry policy, but she’s clearly spent little if any effort researching the issue.

If Collin really wants to understand the scientific and historical context of todays forestry practices, she should set her VCR for Saturday, July 17 at 2:00 AM, when KCTS rebroadcasts “Fire Wars.”

But I doubt she’s interested. See, the problem with science is that — unlike the WSJ editorial page — it doesn’t always tell you what you want to hear.

No Comments

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • Next Page »

Recent HA Brilliance…

  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 10/14/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 10/13/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 10/10/25
  • Friday Open Thread Friday, 10/10/25
  • Was This What the Righties Wanted All Along? Thursday, 10/9/25
  • Wednesday Open Thread Wednesday, 10/8/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 10/7/25
  • Monday Open Thread Monday, 10/6/25
  • Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza! Friday, 10/3/25
  • Drinking Liberally — Seattle Tuesday, 9/30/25

Tweets from @GoldyHA

I no longer use Twitter because, you know, Elon is a fascist. But I do post occasionally to BlueSky at @goldy.horsesass.org

From the Cesspool…

  • EvergreenRailfan on Drinking Liberally — Seattle
  • XX Chromosone on Drinking Liberally — Seattle
  • XY Chromosome on Drinking Liberally — Seattle
  • Yes, release the Epstein files! on Drinking Liberally — Seattle
  • teh babblin' butthole on Drinking Liberally — Seattle
  • Roger Rabbit on Drinking Liberally — Seattle
  • Release the Epstein Files on Drinking Liberally — Seattle
  • lmao on Monday Open Thread
  • EvergreenRailfan on Monday Open Thread
  • Alpha Male on Monday Open Thread

Please Donate

Currency:

Amount:

Archives

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

I no longer use Twitter or Facebook because Nazis. But until BlueSky is bought and enshittified, you can still follow me at @goldy.horsesass.org

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.

© 2004–2025, All rights reserved worldwide. Except for the comment threads. Because fuck those guys. So there.