Author: Emmett O'Connell (Page 86 of 176)

“they should be working to make all citizens more political”

August 9, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Nafzblog writes about the flip side of the Monica Goodling effect:

In 1992, after the Clinton election, I flew to Washington D.C. with Governor Booth Gardner who met with four western governors to discuss cabinet posts with Clinton’s transition team. Cecil Andrus, Carter Interior Secretary and Governor of Idaho described his frustration in trying to set out a new direction for Interior upon Carter’s election. Every turn or change was thwarted and opposed by the internal bureaucrats. He skillfully laid out the need to root out the embedded Interior bureaucracy that had thrived under 12 years of Republican rule. Bush, facing the same problem after 8 years of Democratic rule met the same charge of “politicizing” government.

While Washington is considered by virtually every governing organization or magazine as one of the top three best managed states, Rossi has a point when he says the same people have ruled Washington’s state government for 25 years. As one of those Democratic insiders, I often wonder why new ideas and approaches are so easily ignored.

Much of the media and good government crowd have spent a lot of time trying to exorcise politics from governing. Instead, they should be working to make all citizens more political. Only through elections and politics is there ever any semblance of changes, creativity, checks and balances.

I wish there was more of a “lay all the cards on the table” sort of attitude towards politics. That, instead of avoiding it as a topic and trying to remove it because its an uncomfortable topic, accept it because it is an important topic. Accept others’ ideas and don’t let them become enemies because you disagree with them.

Except they don’t explain WHY the builders are going after Robin Hunt

August 8, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

So, the Olympian points out builders money going into the Appeals Court races between Robin Hunt and Tim Ford (whose signs look a lot like John McCain’s, btw).

The three cases that the builders are trying to highlight have nothing to do with their typical common refrain of environmental protections being overboard. They’re a public disclosure case, one dealing with a sex predator and another condemnation case (well, I guess that might be close to their wheelhouse).

But, its safe to say that the builders don’t go after a judge because she ruled badly on cases involving public disclosure. They do go after a judge if she ruled on the wrong side of a case involving Thurston County’s comprehensive plan, which governs where people can build things.

From the builders’ perspective, she did (here’s the ruling).

Local conserverative blogger R. Scott has already tried to tie the case to county commision candidate Sandra Romero, who is a board member of the organization that filed the suit. He says that while defending the case that they eventually lost because of Hunt’s ruling, the county spent $1.5 million therby putting the county in deficit.

It isn’t enough for them to go after the person who filed suit against bad growth rules, they’re going after the judge who said the rules were bad.

Washington Land Use Law Blog: Thurston County v. WWGMHB
Oly Master Builders: Futurewise vs. Thurston County Ruling

Another reason I don’t feel bad for third parties in the Top Two

August 7, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Don’t waste that stamp mailing your ballot (24 locations to drop off your ballot)

August 7, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

In Thurston County, you don’t have to bother putting a stamp on your ballot, because there are 24 locations throughout the county where you can easily drop your ballot off.

Here’s my map last time I checked (some are missing because they’ve added more locations. And here’s the updated list from the county.

Chances are you will drive close to one of these locations between right now and the 19th.

Why isn’t there a minor party candidate in LD 22?

August 4, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Another thought about the Top Two is Killing minor party thing: In a district like mine, LD 22, we have only elected Democrats since the 1980s. So, we’re pretty liberal and only a Dem has a chance.

So, as a Green why not try to relegate the Republicans to “third party” status by filing against one of the three established Dem candidates? This year, one Democrat and one Republican filed against the three sitting legislatures.

Say in that race against sitting legislator, Sam Hunt (Dem) and challenger Don Crawford, a Green Party member were to file. Hunt is pretty well funded ($54,000+ raised) and Crawford isn’t (no contributions, just over $800 spent).

If a Green could raise just a bit of money (say $10,000) they could win the primary, and then who knows what happens in the general.

And, maybe they were thinking of doing this, just didn’t have the chance. From the notes of the local Green Party’s most recent retreat:

The Top Two Primary has some advantages we can learn to exploit

And, hey check it out, former Olympia city councilmember TJ Johnson is an officer of the local Greens too.

The Top Two primary won’t kill third parties

August 4, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Because you can’t kill something deader than dead.

Political divisions in the state senate. Click for larger version.

The problem with the minor parties’ argument that the Top Two primary hurts their chances is that a minor party candidate hasn’t been elected to the state legislature since the 1920s. While you could blame that on the original primary system, that system still advanced one member of each party to the general ballot, which is what they’re complaining the Top Two doesn’t necessarily do.

What changed in the 1920s to hurt minor parties was the designation by the state of “minor and major” parties. Because major parties get the gift of state paid for organizational elections (PCO elections) every two years, they have a built in grass roots advantage over minor parties.

There’s easy access to the machinery of major parties through becoming a PCO, and because they’re required by state law, most legislative districts and counties have local major party organizations. Minor parties, not so much.

It would be better for the minor party folks to worry less about getting candidates to a November ballot where they’re going to lose anyway, and worry more about the structural and organizational benefits major parties enjoy.

KUOW: Will The Top Two Primary Kill Third Parties?
Seattle Times: Third parties say top-two primary hurts their chances

Norm Dicks’ old field organizer endorses challenger

August 2, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Interesting stuff, via email:

As ballots go out in the mail, Congressman Norm Dicks 2006 Field Organizer Endorses Democratic Challenger Paul Richmond

William Jamie Nixon, 2006 Field Organizer for the Dicks Campaign gave his support to Democratic Challenger Paul Richmond.

In a letter released today, Dicks former Field Organizer describes how he worked tirele ssly for the Dicks Campaign because he had wanted to hold the Bush administration accountable and end the Iraq War. He grew unsettled when none of these happened.

“The time for new leadership has come,” Nixon concludes. “Let us thank Norm for his service and give our vote to Paul Richmond. “

“Paul Richmond has the judgment we need now,” wrote Nixon. “Why would we settle for a candidate that continues to show an inability to heed the wishes of the people of his district, or one whose vision is simply outdated? Instead let us come together to select the candidate that will put the people’s needs first.”

“I couldn’t have been happier to work for Congressman Dicks during the 2006 election cycle,” Nixon wrote. “All of us on the campaign worked tirelessly to help Norm win one of his largest victories. I was filled with hope and pride as we gathered together on election night and realized that not only had Norm won re-election in a landslide, but the Democrats had won huge victories all over the country giving them control of the house and the senate. The Democrats, and Dicks with them, were given a mandate to end the war in Iraq, and hold the Bush Administration accountable for its actions. That hope and pride has been replaced with frustration that two years later neither has happened or appears likely to happen with representatives such as Congressman Dicks in office.”

Nixon states that Dicks has continued to ally himself with the leadership of his party on issues like impeachment and the Iraq War. He also takes issue with many of the incumbent’s votes. These include Dicks’ votes in favor of the updated FISA Bill granting retroactive immunity to telecoms and damaging the Fourth Amendment, Dicks vote on the PATRIOT Act, and Dicks support of the Homegrown Terrorism Act, which he describes as little more than “reawakening of McCarthyism.”

The letter:

Paul Richmond is the Right Candidate in the 6th District
By William Jamie Nixon, Field Organizer Norm Dicks for Congress, 2006

The time has come in Washington’s 6th Congressional District for new leadership. Congressman Dicks should be thanked for his many years of service to our community, however that thanks need not come in the form of our vote. The constituents of this district deserve a leader with the judgment and courage to stand up to the D.C. establishment and put our needs first.

I couldn’t have been happier to work for Congressman Dicks during the 2006 election cycle. Canvassing the 6th district put me face to face with the good people of our area, and seeing first hand their frustrations with the direction of the country made me even more motivated to help Norm get the job done. All of us on the campaign worked tirelessly to help Norm win one of his largest victories. I was filled with hope and pride as we gathered together on election night and realized that not only had Norm won re-election in a landslide, but the Democrats had won huge victories all over the country giving them control of the house and the senate. The Democrats, and Dicks with them, were given a mandate to end the war in Iraq, and hold the Bush Administration accountable for its actions. That hope and pride has been replaced with frustration that two years later neither has happened or appears likely to happen with representatives such as Congressman Dicks in office.

Dicks, while saying that he now wishes he hadn’t voted for the war, has been a tireless supporter of those who profit from it most. He has also continued to vote into law the blank checks President Bush has needed to continue the worst foreign policy blunder in our nation’s history. His judgment was poor then and it remains so today with his continued support of the Iraq catastrophe.

Paul Richmond is fully committed to ending the war in Iraq. He has pledged to vote to cut off funds for the war and to bring our men and women in uniform home as soon as is possible.

Norm has continued to align himself with the leadership of his party over the wishes of the people of his district on the issue of impeachment. When we canvassed on Norm’s behalf in 2006 the most talked about issues at the doors of the 6th district were Iraq and impeachment. He has been openly vocal in his opposition to impeachment hearings. When asked about impeachment by Mr. Richmond, Dicks replied “It’s not what Nancy Pelosi wants.” To which Mr. Richmond rightly responded, “but are you representing us to Nancy Pelosi, or do you represent her to us?”

Paul Richmond fully supports hearings into possible impeachable offenses committed by President Bush and Vice President Cheney. He will also act first and foremost for the people of our district and not just the Democratic leadership.

Dicks shows disturbing arrogance in his disregard of the democratic process. He has refused to debate his challengers during the primary. Why? The people of the 6th district deserve a debate on the issues so that they may make an informed choice. One is left to ponder just what Norm Dicks fears from standing side by side with candidates of good faith and having it out in the American tradition. Paul Richmond is ready to do just this, and Congressman Dicks is ducking him.

Recently Congressman Dicks voted in favor of the updated FISA bill which handed retro-active immunity to the telecomm companies that helped the current President ignore our 4th Amendment protections from unreasonable search and seizure. It seems that Congressman Dicks couldn’t care less about accountability or civil liberties. This vote along with his reprehensible vote on the Patriot Act and his support of the Homegrown Terrorism Act, which is little more than a reawakening of McCarthyism, show a continuing lack of judgment on Dicks’ part. Our most cherished freedoms seem of little concern t o our Congressman. It may be that he does in fact have the people’s needs in mind when he casts these votes, but if he refuses to debate challengers, hold town hall meetings, or even to respond to postings on his own blog before deleting them, how are we to know?

Paul Richmond supports holding those accountable who attempt to undermine the laws of our nation whether they are large corporations or not. Congressman Dicks should know that no one is above the law.

These issues and others have led me to throw my full support behind Paul Richmond.
Paul Richmond has the judgment we need now. Why would we settle for a candidate that continues to show an inability to heed the wishes of the people of his district, or one whose vision is simply outdated? Instead let us come together to select the candidate that will put the people’s needs first.

The time for new leadership has come. Let us thank Norm for his service and give our vote to Paul Richmond.

William Jamie Nixon
Field Organizer, 2006 Dicks Campaign

Rhenda sez chill out folks

July 31, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Rhenda Strub, a new city councilmember here in Olympia, writes a pretty good piece on the ithmus issue here in town. Not on what she believes we should do, but on how we all need to take a deep breath:

The hyperbole is objectionable enough, but the anger coming from the people who want to talk about this issue is really astonishing. People who have lived here for much longer than me (6 years) tell me they’ve never seen anything like it.

To tell you the truth, I haven’t seen anything like it either. Even the old convention center debate wasn’t this divisive. What I think happened is that the social and political groups that formed around the port protest issue have continued and this is their new target. And, of course, there is a reaction to that energy and it keeps on bouncing around.

Also, good to see Rhenda blogging.

Walmart effect in Yelm, Saars Marketplace

July 28, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Walmart effect in Yelm?

Maybe not so much:

Months after QFC shut its doors, area residents will soon have a grocery store besides Safeway or Wal-Mart to choose from.

Saar’s Market Place is set to open in Yelm sometime in July, and its operating manager may be a familiar face for longtime residents.

Saar’s will open in the former QFC location. Because the space was formerly a grocery store, it’s expected to shorten the relatively quick time frame for opening.

If Walmart did have an impact, it influenced one large national chain out of town, but then convinced a locally owned chain that there was enough going on in Yelm for them to open a store.

I hope Saar’s sticks around. Not saying there isn’t actually a Walmart effect, but at least it isn’t be felt in Yelm.

How a Ron Paul acolyte can win in Oly?

July 28, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Hmm:

As a candidate from the Campaign for Liberty movement you have the potential for strong support in Olympia, by appealing to what I call Olympia’s anarchist tendencies. The campaign may also need to morph its stance on illegal immigration to something that does not focus on a group of people. I might expound on that more later. There needs to be more emphasis on things that matter to people in liberal Olympia. There is a streak, a vein that runs through Olympia, and that is fear of unchecked power, and if that chord was struck I think Delavar can achieve stronger support. Here is just a couple of things that need emphaisis for your to garner support.

Opposition to war based on a non-interventionist stance.

Championing and, really, defend the Constitution, any transgression against it will not be tolerated.

Attack inflation. This issue alone can be tackled effectively by Delavar. The answer is there, it’s not rising prices, but falling dollar, right? And your solutions, Delavar, is different from other candidates, and it could ease the anxiety of many a voter.

I wonder… I would assume that the folks who would feel like even Cheryl Crist is too centrist would go for this guy. Though, maybe they’d hitch their wagons to him, thinking he actually has a chance to get to the general election.

I know the upcoming primary is essentially non-partisan, but assume that Crist doesn’t make it into the Top Two, losing too many Dem votes to incumbent Baird. That leaves Delavar and the other Republican, Christine Webb.

She might not be able to pick up enough of the conservative vote (because her campaign started really late) to get to face off against Baird, leaving Delavar the only hope of anarchists. In that case, in Delaver vs. Baird, I see Olympia (the far left part of town) going to Delavar.