Category Archives: Democrats

Time for Automatic Voter Registration in Washington State

Posted on May 5th, 2016 | Comments Off on Time for Automatic Voter Registration in Washington State

Washington State is now the laggard in automatic voter registration on the west coast. Oregon took the first step setting up automatic voter registration when voters apply for a driver’s license. And now California has followed suit.  Two east coast states have also passed automatic voter registration in 2016 – Vermont and West Virginia.

Just over a year ago on March 17, 2015 Oregon Governor Kate Brown signed HB 2177 making Oregon the first state in the nation to automatically register Oregon residents to also be voters when they either renew or first apply for an Oregon driver’s license or state identification card.

As the LA Times noted:

“Those who are registered through the new process will be notified by mail and will be given three weeks to take themselves off the voting rolls. If they do not opt out, the secretary of state’s office will mail them a ballot automatically 20 days before any election.”

NPR reported that Governor Gerry Brown in October 2015 signed their “New  Motor Voter Act” joining Oregon to register voters automatically when they either renew or get a new driver’s license or California state identification card.

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla in a press release stated that:

“In a free society, the right to vote is fundamental. …

“Citizens should not be required to opt-in to their fundamental right to vote,” Padilla added. “We do not have to opt-in to other rights, such as free speech or due process. The right to vote should be no different,” Padilla added.

“The New Motor Voter Act will make voter registration a seamless process and result in the largest sustained voter registration drive in our nation’s history. As we celebrate the 50th anniversary of the federal Voting Rights Act, Governor Brown has affirmed California’s commitment to strengthening voting rights. It is not lost on me that many states are restricting voting rights with the clear goal of preventing citizens from voting. I am proud that California is again demonstrating leadership and providing a shining example of how our nation can and should expand access to the polls,” Padilla added.”

Two legislative bills were introduced in Washington State in 2016.  As reported by the HeraldNet:

Two measures, SB 6379 and HB 2682, would automatically register people who aren’t on the voter rolls but already have or apply for an enhanced driver’s license or commercial driver’s licenses. Those who receive social services that verify citizenship or get health insurance through the state health exchange also would be automatically registered. The measure would take effect Jan. 1, 2017, and be retroactive so that unregistered voters who already have the specialized driver licenses or benefits would have their information sent to the Secretary of State’s Office, which would notify them that they can opt out. If the potential voter doesn’t respond, he or she will be automatically registered within 60 days.

Unfortunately the Washington State Legislature did not enact this legislation. HB 2682  passed in the House but died in the Senate Rules Committee. The Senate is controlled by the Republicans who do not support legislation to make it easier for people to vote. SB 6379 did not get voted out of the Senate Committee it originated in.
Inaction on bills like this is a reason for people to vote Democratic. Republicans are not interested in increasing voter participation but have a nationwide track record of voter suppression making it difficult for many people to vote. It is unfortunately no different in Washington State.

Comments Off on Time for Automatic Voter Registration in Washington State

Posted in Democrats, Elections, Republicans, Washington State Legislature

Tagged , , , , , ,

Two recent cases provide clear evidence that the Federal Elections Commission is broken

Posted on April 9th, 2016 | Comments Off on Two recent cases provide clear evidence that the Federal Elections Commission is broken

Two recent decisions by the Federal Elections Commission provide clear evidence that the Commission is broken and nonfunctional just like Congress. On split partisan votes it took no action on two separate cases.

As the Washington Post reported in an article entitled, “FEC deadlocked on allegations that Gingrich used 2012 campaign to sell books“:

“Former House speaker Newt Gingrich will not face a Federal Election Commission investigation into allegations that he broke federal law by using his 2012 presidential campaign to promote books that he and his wife wrote, documents released Friday show.

…The FEC’s top attorney recommended in 2013 that the agency investigate Gingrich, but the case languished and the six-member commission eventually deadlocked along partisan lines in June, with the three Republican commissioners voting against an inquiry.

The general counsel’s initial review found evidence of seven violations of campaign finance laws, the FEC documents show. Among the findings: Gingrich’s campaign staff and the employees of his production company at times swapped duties as the then-candidate was holding concurrent campaign rallies and book-signing events….

The general counsel also found evidence that the campaign’s resources benefited Gingrich personally, noting that his campaign website included more than 80 links to the Gingrich Productions website, along with blog entries promoting book signings and movie screenings. Many of the links went to pages urging supporters to buy books written by Newt and Callista Gingrich.”

The second case also was decided on a split partisan vote, meaning no action was taken on what clearly appeared to be political action and avoidance of reporting of campaign donations. As the Washington Post reported “How a film about Obama’s communist ‘real father’ won at the FEC “ was also won because of a partisan split. It is a revisit of the Hillary Clinton case that was decided in the so called “Citizens United” decision by the US Supreme Court which opened the floodgates on money in elections since then. The film in that case mailed also right before the election was  “Hillary:  the movie”

As the Washington Post post reported:

“Four years ago, voters in Ohio and a few other swing states opened their mailboxes to discover a documentary they’d never ordered. “Dreams From My Real Father” posited that the president of the United States was not the son of Barack Obama Sr., but of Frank Marshall Davis, a Communist activist and poet who moved to Hawaii late in life ….

In 2014, a progressive activist named Loren Collins filed a Federal Election Commission complaint against Gilbert, arguing that the filmmaker had a responsibility to disclose his donors. The FEC finally weighed in last month, and in a typical 3-3 split decision — by law, the FEC is perpetually split between Democratic and Republican commissioners — Gilbert’s DVD mailing was considered “press,” not subject to donor disclosure, comparable to any political documentary.

“With the right framing, even the most dishonest, smear-mongering attacks can skirt FEC regulations under our current regulations,” said Collins. “His mailing cost at least $1 million, and that could’ve been paid for by Mitt Romney or Donald Trump, and there’s no way to know. Taken together with [the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision], this could have very serious negative ramifications. The general counsel’s report might as well be an instruction manual on how to avoid the transparency that comes with public disclosure of financiers.”

Asking a Commission composed of partisan politicians divided evenly between Republicans and Democrats in a clearly highly charged partisan Washington DC atmosphere is a sure way to have more gridlock. If anything the decisions need to be made by those without a direct stake in a partisan outcome. Time to restructure the FEC to  enable it to make decisions. The simplest  solution is to add a fifth member chosen by the other four members. Another alternative is to remove partisan politicians  and to have the issues decided by a panel of judges. Clearly the current  system is broken.

 

Comments Off on Two recent cases provide clear evidence that the Federal Elections Commission is broken

Posted in campaign finance, Congress, Democrats, Elections, free speech, Hillary Clinton, Media, Obama, Republicans

Tagged , , , , ,

Naomi Klein – “On why young people see radical action as practical”

Posted on March 14th, 2016 | Comments Off on Naomi Klein – “On why young people see radical action as practical”

Author and activist Naomi Klein has some perceptive comments in an interview in the Tyee – the independent British Columbia journal on why young people are more ready for drastic change to address continuing problems like climate change where progress has been slow or not much at all.

The full article is entitled, “We Faces a Series of Radical Options” Continue reading →

Comments Off on Naomi Klein – “On why young people see radical action as practical”

Posted in Democrats, Elections, Energy, Environment

Tagged , , , ,

Does Hillary Get It?

Posted on April 18th, 2015 | Comments Off on Does Hillary Get It?

As Michael Brenner recently wrote, the challenge for progressive Democrats in the upcoming 2016 Presidential election is determining whether or not there is a new Hillary that both gets it and is willing to act on it.  What is it? It is the need to understand that the economy and economic inequality is distorting everything else in this coming election cycle and that strong leadership for change is needed to motivate Democrats to work hard and elect a Democrat as President. Others have written about this.  I am not the first.  But I agree.

After the 2012 Democratic debacle where Republicans took over the Senate and extended their domination over State Houses and Legislatures across the country  it was clear that the Democratic leadership had been out maneuvered and had fallen into a trap saying “we are not as bad as the other guys”, instead of challenging the GOP on their jaded view of government being for the corporations and the wealthy instead of the people.
As Michael Brenner wrote for the Huffington Post right after the Nov 2014 election:

“At a time when Americans feel more discontent and view their prospects more darkly than on any occasion since the depths of the Great Depression, the Democrats have defaulted. They offer no interpretation that conforms to their bedrock principles; they offer no narrative that fits the pieces into a comprehensible whole; they offer no vision for the future. Instead, they have adapted themselves to the Republican narrative and Republican motifs. They present no robust defense of government as the people’s instrument for meeting communal needs and wants. Rather, they incline toward the assumption that government and public programs should be viewed skeptically.”`

Forward to April 2015.  Hillary Clinton has announced she is running for President. No surprise.  So where does this leave us. An incessant critique from the left right now seems to be that Clinton is just more of the same and is no different that what has resulted in the Democratic decline in voting and the loss of Democrats at all levels in the past.

Others offer a more positive voice. Robert Borosage in a post on Nation of Change entitled Hillary’s In: Challenges for the New Populism  writes that there are five simple propositions about Hillary’s candidacy we need to consider:

1. The central question is the economy.

2. Hillary’s challenge is to rouse the democratic Coalition

3 People are looking for a champion but that isn’t an honorary post.

4. Populist movements offer an answer, not a threat.

6. Hillary’s candidacy will test the New Populism.

Borosage sums up the situation and challenge nicely:

“The wealthiest 1 percent% is capturing 95 percent of the income growth coming out of the Great Recession. This doesn’t happen by accident. It happens only because the rules have been rigged to benefit the few. It can only be altered with fundamental changes in policy and direction. Despite the worst economic calamity since the Great Depression and the worst military debacle since Vietnam, the elites and institutions that dominate our economic and national security policy remain largely in place.
As Frederick Douglass taught us, “power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has and it never will.” The lesson of the Obama administration is clear. Those movements that continued to mobilize, drive the debate and challenge the administration made progress. Those that folded into the White House operations got lost.
After a quarter century at the apex of American government, Hillary Clinton is an unlikely champion of the fundamental changes we need. But she is brilliant and resilient. It’s clear that the argument posed by Elizabeth Warren has already concentrated her mind. She’ll lead the charge only if populist movements and upheavals make her do it. This isn’t a time to stand down in the name of party unity. This is a time to turn up the heat.”

Ann Werner on Liberal United in an article entitled “The Warren /Sanders Effect on the Clinton Campaign” adds further to the impact that Senator Elizabeth Warren and also Senator Bernie Sanders is having on Hillary Clinton:

“The truth is, even without a Democratic opponent in the race, Hillary Clinton is being moved to the left. Every time another petition urging Elizabeth Warren to run circulates, every time Bernie Sanders is interviewed about a possible run and people get fired up and say YES! we want a progressive who will stand up for us, she sees the writing on the wall. The mere presence of those two on the planet, and the fact that they are not afraid to speak up and speak out, is moving candidate Clinton to take positions one would expect from either of them.
President Hillary Clinton won’t make the same mistakes President Obama made. She is fully aware that the far right Republicans will never cooperate, no matter what she does. She’s been there, done that and knows it’s a fool’s errand to think that will change.
So I say this: Keep on holding her feet to the fire. Keep on letting her know that we’ll have her back as long as she has ours.”

Many on the left question who Hillary will represent. These are legitimate questions. But we need to be careful while advocating for Clinton to address the issues Democrats have failed to take on in recent years. Constant incessant negativity against Clinton is not going to help move a progressive agenda. The challenge is to put pressure on Clinton to move left and address issues of concern to progressives, including promoting more progressive candidates. The last thing we want to do is turn Democrats off from voting altogether. The Republicans taking over the White House and continuing to expand their advocacy for the wealthy and corporations and special interests running our country for their further concentration of wealth is the last thing we want. Promoting a progressive agenda and not a negative diatribe against Clinton, makes sense in trying to move forward.

Comments Off on Does Hillary Get It?

Posted in Democrats, Elections, Hillary Clinton

Eyman’s 2015 I-1366 is a Repeat of Eyman’s 2014 I-1325

Posted on March 27th, 2015 | Comments Off on Eyman’s 2015 I-1366 is a Repeat of Eyman’s 2014 I-1325

Initiative 1366, sponsored by Tim Eyman, is a citizen’s initiative for the Nov 2015 Election. It is a refiling of Initiative 1325 from 2014 which Eyman failed to get enough signatures on to qualify. Here are a couple of comments from last year  about this proposal.

Spokesman Review – Jan. 10, 2014 Editorial – “Eyman’s Tax Initiative Looking for a Problem”

Tim Eyman has a new idea, his worst ever, and that’s saying something.
The watch salesman turned initiative promoter submitted a proposal to the Washington Secretary of State on Monday that would compel the Legislature to enact and pass along to voters a constitutional amendment requiring a two-thirds vote by state lawmakers or voters on any tax increase.
How compel?
Initiative 1325 would cut the state sales tax rate to 5.5 percent from 6.5 percent. The change would reduce annual revenues by about $1 billion. But the reduction would not occur if the Legislature endorses the amendment by April 15, 2015.
In other words, the initiative puts a $1 billion gun to the head of legislators.
Eyman calls the incentive “oomph.” Blackmail is more like it.
…
This is not about protecting taxpayers. I-1325 is about keeping Eyman in business.

Crosscut, Feb 6, 2014 – “A 2/3 vote for tax bumps?  Tim Eyman will rise again” – article on a vote by the Legislature for a constitutional amendment for a  2/3 vote for revenue to be placed on the ballot. It received a vote of 25 to 21, far short of the 2/3 needed to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot.

“Minority Democrats countered that the Legislature struggled to meet financial requirements when the two-thirds requirement was in effect. They unsuccessfully tried to remove the two-thirds requirements to close tax breaks and to allow majority approval of some fund transfers covered by the supermajority requirement in Roach’s bill. The Democratic attempts failed.
Also, Democrats pointed to the need to comply with a 2012 Supreme Court ruling to upgrade education and to restore a frequently suppressed voters initiative to provide cost-of-living increases to teachers.
Democratic Senate budget chief James Hargrove of Hoquiam noted that it took two extra special sessions in 2013 to close two tax breaks to balance the state budget — with a simple majority rule in place. He said 17 senators — 12 percent of the entire Legislature  — could hold the budget hostage in order to get their pet bills passed. “It’s called the rule of 17, a super-minority,” said Sen. Karen Keiser, D-Kent.

From the Washington State Secretary of State’s website:

Ballot Title
Initiative Measure No. 1366 concerns state taxes and fees.

This measure would decrease the sales tax rate unless the legislature refers to voters a constitutional amendment requiring two-thirds legislative approval or voter approval to raise taxes, and legislative approval for fee increases.

Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]

Ballot Measure Summary
This measure would decrease the state retail sales tax rate on April 15, 2016, from 6.5 percent to 5.5 percent. The sales tax rate would not be decreased if, by April 15, 2016, two-thirds of both legislative houses refer to the ballot a vote on a constitutional amendment that requires two-thirds legislative approval or voter approval to raise taxes, and majority legislative approval to set the amount of a fee increase.

View Complete Text PDF

Initiative 1366 is an Ted Cruz style of coercion measure, threatening to remove $1 billion a year in revenue from the state budget. It would severely cripple funding for education in this state.  It is a libertarian ant- government, anti-tax initiative intended  to lock in tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy and severely limit funding of public services by requiring a 2/3 vote to raise revenue or repeal tax loopholes.

Do not sign or support or vote for Initiative 1366!

Comments Off on Eyman’s 2015 I-1366 is a Repeat of Eyman’s 2014 I-1325

Posted in Democrats, Elections, Initiatives, Republicans, Tax Exemptions, Washington State Legislature

Tagged , , , , , , ,

King County Legislative Town Hall Meetings March 14, 2015

Posted on March 10th, 2015 | Comments Off on King County Legislative Town Hall Meetings March 14, 2015

This Saturday, March 14, 2015 is a great time to meet with your Legislators across King County and urge them to act on  Democratic priority legislation.  Most legislative districts are holding town hall meetings.  You can attend your own LD or any other you want. Take this opportunity to get updated on the current status of bills. Use it to ask questions about the issues and bills you are concerned about and support or oppose.

Use the King County Democrats 2015 Legislative Agenda to focus in on Democratic priorities. Use the latest  bill tracking status (updated 3/9/2015)  to check the status of specific bills the King County Democrats are following.  Then let Legislators know your priorities and ask them to work to pass specific bills.

Other things you can ask include:

Are you going to fund K-12 education as mandated by the Washington State Supreme Court?
Are you going to eliminate any tax loopholes?
Are you going to pass a capital gains tax?
Are you going to address carbon pollution?
Are you going to make rail transport of oil safer?
Are you  going to raise the minimum wage?

Legislative  Town Hall Meetings

Saturday March 14

1st District – Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe, Reps. Derek Stanford and Luis Moscoso WhereNorthshore Senior Center in the Wellness Center, 10212 East Riverside Drive, Bothell, WA 98011 When: 10 a.m.. – noon

11th District  – Sen. Bob Hasegawa, Reps. Zack Hudgins and Steve Bergquist  Where:  King County Regional Communications & Emergency Coordination Center (RCECC) 3511 NE 2nd Street, Renton, WA 98056
When:1-3 p.m.

 30th District – Sen. Mark Milosca, Rep. Carol Gregory, Rep. Kochmar
Where:  Federal Way City Hall, Council Chambers, 33325 8th Ave S,, Federal Way, WA  When: 10 a.m. – 11:30 am Where: Milton City Hall, 1000 Laurel St, Milton, WA When: 12:30 pm – 2:00 pm.

32nd District – Sen. Maralyn Chase and Rep. Cindy Ryu Where: Shoreline Fire Dept. 17525 Aurora Ave. N. Shoreline, WA 98133 When: 2 p.m.-3:30 p.m.

36th District – Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, Reps. Reuven Carlyle and Gael Tarleton Where: Phinney Neighborhood Association, community room, 6532 Phinney Avenue North, Seattle, WA 98103  When: 10 a.m. – noon

37th District – Sen. Pramiia Jayapal, Reps. Tomoko Santos and Eric Pettigrew Where: Rainier Valley Cultural Center—3515 S Alaska St, Seattle, WA 98118 When 9-11 a.m.

41st District – Sen. Steve Litzow, Rep. Tana Senn, Rep. Judy Clibborn Where: Somerset Elementary School, 14100 Somerset Blvd, Bellevue, WA  When 10 a.m. – 12 noon

43rd District – Sen. Jamie Pedersen, Speaker Frank Chopp and Rep. Brady Walkinshaw Where: Erickson Theater, 1524 Harvard Avenue, Seattle, WA 98122 When:1 p.m. – 2:30 p.m.

45th District – Sen. Andy Hill, Rep. Roger Goodman, Rep. Larry Springer Where Woodinville High School Auditorium, 19819 – 136th Ave NE, Woodinville, WA When: 10 am – 11:30

48th District- Sen. Cyrus Habib, Reps. Ross Hunter and Joan McBride Where: Redmond City Hall, 15670 NE 85th St., Redmond, WA 98052 When: 10 a.m. – 12 noon

Please attend a town hall meeting this Saturday and urge legislators to pass our priority legislation.  There will be no LAC meeting this Sunday, March 15th because we believe directly talking with Legislators this weekend is the best use of your time.

Comments Off on King County Legislative Town Hall Meetings March 14, 2015

Posted in Democrats, Tax Exemptions, Washington State Legislature

Tagged ,

Washington State Senate Republicans Again Want to Ignore State Constitution

Posted on January 9th, 2015 | Comments Off on Washington State Senate Republicans Again Want to Ignore State Constitution

“”The Republicans in the Washington State Senate when the Legislature convenes on Monday will try to bypass the Washington State Constitution calling for majority votes to pass legislation. Two Republicans – Doug Erickson of Bellingham and Mike Baumgartner of Spokane – have announced that they  intend to try to amend Senate Rules to require a 2/3 vote of the Senate to bring any  legislation calling for a tax increase to the floor for a vote. In a great display of hypocrisy, this vote will require by their calculation only a majority of Senators to pass it.

Republicans in the Senate have a 26 to 23 majority but it seems they are not content with even that – wanting to give 1/3 of the sitting Senators veto power over the other 2/3.  Thus a minority of 17 Senators, if this rule change passes, would have veto power over the wishes of 32 Senators – a clear coup of rule by the minority.  As the Spokesman Review’s Jim Camden notes ” This would cover bills with new taxes …, raises in existing taxes and reduction or elimination in tax exemptions, sometimes known as loopholes — unless they had a referendum clause that was sending them to the ballot for voter approval”

This rule would require that any attempt to repeal non performing tax exemptions or reduce the exemption would also need to have a 2/3 vote to come to the senate floor for a vote. In again a  twisted sense of majority rules it would only require a simple majority to pass a tax exemption.  All of the current 650 plus tax exemptions in place only required a majority vote. Yet even if the Legislature through its JLARC review process determined that a specific exemption was not resulting in any benefit to state taxpayers, like increasing state employment and jobs, 1/3 of the members of the Senate could prevent the exemption being cut. This is the power of minority rule – whereby even if a majority wants to eliminate a tax exemption because it is not benefiting the state or meeting state priorities, the minority position wins.

The framers of the US Constitution looked at this issue in the Federalist papers.  Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist Papers No.#22 noted:

“To give a minority a negative upon the majority (which is always the case where more than a majority is requisite to a decision), is, in its tendency, to subject the sense of the greater number to that of the lesser.” …

“…The necessity of unanimity in public bodies, or of something approaching towards it, has been founded upon a supposition that it would contribute to security. But its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of the government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice, or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent, or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority. In those emergencies of a nation, in which the goodness or badness, the weakness or strength of its government, is of the greatest importance, there is commonly a necessity for action. The public business must, in some way or other, go forward. If a pertinacious minority can control the opinion of a majority, respecting the best mode of conducting it, the majority, in order that something may be done, must conform to the views of the minority; and thus the sense of the smaller number will overrule that of the greater, and give a tone to the national proceedings. Hence, tedious delays; continual negotiation and intrigue; contemptible compromises of the public good. And yet, in such a system, it is even happy when such compromises can take place: for upon some occasions things will not admit of accommodation; and then the measures of government must be injuriously suspended, or fatally defeated. It is often, by the impracticability of obtaining the concurrence of the necessary number of votes, kept in a state of inaction. Its situation must always savor of weakness, sometimes border upon anarchy.”

Ironic isn’t it that Republicans who profess they want to uphold the Constitution would try to impose rules of legislative action that run opposite of what the framers of the US Constitution felt that government needed to do to be effective.  Majority rules for legislative action must be adhered to in passing legislation, not the imposition of rule by a minority to impose their will on the majority.

The Washington State Supreme Court has already ruled on the issue of majority votes being requires for passing legislation. It has ruled that requiring a supermajority like a 2/3 vote of all legislators is unconstitutional. This latest Republican proposed attempt to circumvent the Washington State Constitution shows the repeated hypocrisy of those that profess the need to adhere to the Constitution, in this case the Washington State Constitution, but repeatedly attempt to come up with ways to bypass it or ignore it to further their personal political agenda.

Voters need to take note of Washington Legislators like Senators Ericksen and Baumgartner who are not willing to abide by the intent and language of the Washington State Constitution and the Washington State Supreme Court and vote them out of office.

Comments Off on Washington State Senate Republicans Again Want to Ignore State Constitution

Posted in Democrats, Republicans, Right Wing, Tax Exemptions, Washington State Legislature

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Washington State Governor Jay Inslee and Climate Change

Posted on December 15th, 2014 | Comments Off on Washington State Governor Jay Inslee and Climate Change

Washington State Governor Jay Inslee was a featured speaker at the Budget Matters 2014 Conference held Friday December 12, 2014 in Seattle Washington at the Washington State Convention Center. Remy Turpin, the Executive Director of the Washington State Budget and Policy Center asked the Governor questions in a conversation on climate and income inequality.

DSC_0703

Remy Turpin and Governor Jay Inslee

Governor Inslee started out by responding as to why he was concerned about climate change and pointed out a number of reasons. One reason Inslee said was personal – it was about what kind of world we were going to leave our grandchildren and this was at risk in fundamental ways. Another reason is about economic passion – how we grow jobs. But he said it was also about health issues caused by pollutants released from burning fossil fuels. He noted that asthma rates are high along heavily traveled roads and industrial sites. Asthma rates statistically go up closer to freeways. Children are particularly vulnerable and Inslee commented on a 14 year old he recently talked with whose friends all had asthma and thought it was normal until realizing that not all children had asthma.

Inslee also noted the impacts of carbon pollution on  increasing ocean acidification and its impacts on sea life. Warming associated with climate change is also increasing health risks by increased forest fires and the resultant air pollution.

Carbon pollution is particularly hard on low income people who live in lower priced homes next to freeways or in or near industrial areas releasing  pollutants from burning carbon based fuels. The current economy while growing is mostly benefiting those at the top and is not working for many working families leaving them more vulnerable.

Asked about what type of legislation he was going to propose to the Washington State Legislature on dealing with carbon pollution, the Governor said that to reduce carbon pollution it was necessary to internalize the cost.  The costs to the environment, peoples’ health and the economy are not currently borne by those making money off of carbon fuels but is passed back to everyone else.  Governor Inslee said there were two main ways to internalize the cost and they were to pass either a carbon pollution tax or a cap and trade system that puts a fixed cost per ton of CO2 produced.

While Inslee did not say which way he was going to propose, he seemed to talk most about the benefits of a cap and trade system. British Columbia has a carbon pollution tax but Australia’s right leaning government earlier this year repealed it’s carbon tax. California three years ago moved forward on implementing its cap and trade system  signed into law by former Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2006.

Inslee noted that eight New England states participate in a cap and trade system that is legally binding, that is limiting the number of pollution permits and that operate by a market system that auctions the permits. Cap and trade was also successfully used 20 years ago in the east to limit sulfur dioxide from coal burning.

Some 20 European countries also have a cap and trade system. While there has been some controversy over the declining permit costs to emit carbon pollution, the goals that were purposed to be met look like it is working. As noted in a New York Times post by Stig Schjolset:

“…the European Union experience suggests that designed in the right way, in line with the polluter-pays principle and with a strong compliance regime, emissions trading systems will put an effective cap on carbon emissions – a cap that can be gradually tightened as politicians sign up to more ambitious reduction targets.”

Governor Inslee warned that any attempt to put a price tag on carbon pollution would result in a full court press by the carbon extraction industries that are creating the pollution. Inslee said it was time to make ” the polluting industries rather than poor people pay.”  He said the fight would be expensive and like that the tobacco industry launched-  full of nonfactual and untrue statements.  He said the fight has already started  but that this effort will create thousands of jobs and help build infrastructure for repairing highways and education as well as help clean the air we all breathe.

Comments Off on Washington State Governor Jay Inslee and Climate Change

Posted in Democrats, Economy, Energy, Environment, Washington State Legislature

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Rich Erwin Elected New King County Democrats Chair

Posted on December 14th, 2014 | Comments Off on Rich Erwin Elected New King County Democrats Chair

 

Rich Erwin - Chair - King County Democrats

Rich Erwin – Chair – King County Democrats

 

Every two years the King County Democrats in Washington state elect new officers as do other county and legislative districts and the Washington State Democrats. On Saturday December 6th, 2014 some 208 King County precinct committee officers were present and signed in out of the 820 elected in the August Primary. The meeting was in south Seattle at the Machinists Hall.

Three candidates were running to succeed the previous Chair who decided not to re-run.  They were Rich Erwin – a former Chair of the 41st LD Democrats, Omaha Sternberg – Chair of the 33rd LD Democrats, and Betsy Walker – Chair of the King County Young Democrats. The meeting was full of surprises, including the power and lights going out during the election of the Chair and the extreme closeness of several votes. Rich Erwin after 3 votes was elected the new Chair.

In the initial vote for Chair the following results were obtained:

Rich Erwin 68

Omaha Sternberg 67

Betsy Walker 67

spoiled ballot 1

After much discussion of how to proceed a revote was taken with the following tally:

Rich Erwin 69

Omaha Sternberg 70

Betsy Walker 63

A third vote was then taken, dropping the lowest vote. The lights were  still out. The new tally was:

Rich Erwin 105 – elected Chair

Omaha Sternberg 89

Almost immediately after Rich Erwin was declared the new Chair, the  power and lights came back.

1st Vice Chair

Omaha Sternberg was nominated to be 1st Vice Chair and was elected by acclimation.

The 2nd Vice Chair election was as follows:

Joel Ware 108 – elected 2nd Vice-Chair

Roger Crew 54

The 3rd Vice Chair results:

Christina Lewis 116 – elected 3rd Vice-Chair

Julius Caesar Robinson 20

Linda Seltzer 23

The 4th vice-chair position drew 4 nominees.

Roger Crew 20

Sara Franklin 53

Julius Caesar Robinson  64

Linda Seltzer 7

Roger Crew withdrew and the vote was held on the top 2.

Sara Franklin 68

Julius Caesar Robinson 68

one spoiled ballot labeled Sara Robinson

A revote was taken:

Sara Franklin 62

Julius Caesar Robinson 65 – elected 4th Vice Chair

Other officers elected:

Javier Valdez was nominated and elected by acclimation as the male State Committeeman

Ann Martin was nominated and elected by acclimation as the female State Committeewoman

Dave Fish was nominated and elected by acclimation to be the Treasurer

Roger Crew was nominated and elected by acclimation to be the Secretary

news reports on elections:

Bothell Reporter

Mercer Island Reporter

 

Comments Off on Rich Erwin Elected New King County Democrats Chair

Posted in Democrats, Elections

Tagged , ,

WA 30th LD Democrats Nominate 3 Candidates to Replace Rep. Roger Freeman

Posted on December 2nd, 2014 | Comments Off on WA 30th LD Democrats Nominate 3 Candidates to Replace Rep. Roger Freeman

On Monday, Dec 1, 2014 Democratic PCO’s in Washington State’s 30th Legislative District meet to nominate 3 candidates to be considered to replace Democratic Representative Roger Freeman.  Roger Freeman died several days before the November 4th, 2014 Election but still received enough votes to win the election. His death then commenced a process to replace him. In rank order the 30th LD Democrats nominated Carol Gregory, Richard Champion and Shari Song to be considered by the King and Pierce County Councils to replace him.

Carol Gregory

Carol Gregory

DSC_0530

Richard Champion

Shari Song

Shari Song

 

The replacement process under Washington State  law calls for candidates whose Legislative District straddles 2 counties to be selected from a list of 3 candidates nominated by Precinct Committee Officers of the same political party as the deceased candidate from the Legislative District. The State Central Committee then approves this list and forwards it to the respective County Councils who have 30 days to select a replacement person. If they do not agree on a candidate, the Governor then makes the appointment.

States vary in how they fill vacant legislative  positions caused by a death or resignation.  The National Conference of States Legislatures has a detailed list of how the various states do it. Twenty five states fill the seat by a special election. In five states the political party of the deceased candidate  makes the appointment. In eleven states the Governor makes the appointment. In one state the political party and the House makes the appointment. Seven states including Washington make the appointment of someone of the same political party as the last person to hold the office and delegate the final appointment to their county commissioners.  Besides Washington, the other states leaving the appointment up to county commissioners are Arizona, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon and Wyoming.

The Democratic Precinct Committee Officers of Washington’s  30th LD commenced the process by narrowing a list of 6 candidates down to a ranked list of 3 candidates as required by state law.  The following candidates in the order nominated as candidates to be considered fby the 30th LD Democrats for filling the vacancy. Richard Champion, Hope Elder, Roger Flygare, Carol Gregory, Shari Song, and Rose Osherin Edwards.

Richard Champion is the current 1st Vice Chair of the 30th LD Democrats and served in the past as a Vice – Chair of the King County Democrats. He was active in the SeaTac campaign for a $15 minimum wage and serves on the Board of PSARA – Puget Sound Advocates for Retirement Action.

Hope Elder is active in her local church and is on the Board of Fusion. She has been a Deputy Mayor of Federal Way and has been involved with the Community Supper effort.

Roger Flygare is a small businessman and has run for both the legislature and for the Federal Way City Council.

Carol Gregory is a former teacher and past President of the Washington Education Association. She has worked in the Governor’s Office, lobbied the legislature and ran for legislature twice before, losing her last attempt by only 301 votes.

Shari Song ran for the State Senate in the 30th LD in the 2014 election.  Previously she ran for a seat on the King County Council.  She has been active in a number of civic organizations and grew up in the district.

Rose Osherin Edwards is a nurse and has 3 kids She is a member of SEIU  and has been active in her kid’s PTA , including chairing the garden committee.

The first vote taken was to select the top ranked candidate:

Richard Champion 9

Hope Elder 1

Roger Flygare 7

Carol Gregory 8

Shari Song 4

Rose Osherin Edwards 0

Since no one received a majority, a second ballot was taken between the top 2 candidates.

Carol Gregory 15

Richard Champion 14

Carol Gregory became the #1 top ranked candidate

A third ballot was taken to select the #2 ranked nomination:

Richard Champion 17

Roger Flygare 6

Shari Song 6

Richard Champion became the #2 ranked candidate

A fourth ballot was taken to select the #3 candidate:

Roger Flygare 10

Shari Song  14

Hope Elder 2

Rose Osherin Edwards 2

Since no one of the candidates received a majority a 5th vote was taken between the top 2 candidates:

Shari Song 18

Roger Flygare 11

Shari Song was selected as the #3 ranked candidate.

The final decision is now up to a joint meeting of the King Country and Pierce County Councils.  No date has been selected yet for that meeting. Usually the top ranked candidate in the voting by the precinct committees officers in selected as the appointee by the Councils voting  but that is not always the case. Mia Gregerson now a Representative in the 33rd LD was not the top choice of the precinct committee officers but was selected in what became a controversial choice last year by the King County Council. The County Councils are not required by law to pick the top choice but must choose amng the three nominated by the precinct committee officers or the decision goes to the Governor.

 

Comments Off on WA 30th LD Democrats Nominate 3 Candidates to Replace Rep. Roger Freeman

Posted in Democrats, Elections, Washington State Legislature

Tagged , , , , ,