History, politics, people of Oly WA

Category: Washington Politics (Page 10 of 27)

RE: Political Parties Reap What They Sow

You can’t pull at the edges of our electoral system and not expect the voters to react:

The Republicans and the Democrats are also complaining about Initiative 872.

Well, that is just two bad for these political parties. They are now reaping what they sowed. They took away the right of the people to vote in a truly democratic manner, and now they complain and whine about the alternative chosen by those self-same voters. There is a movement in King County to make all county elected positions non-partisan. Hopefully, this effort will succeed, and another voter initiative will drive the authoritarian political parties out the door. The parties started this battle, and now the voters need to finish it. The voters need to make every state office, from the governor to the legislature, legally and publicly non-partisan.

From everything I’ve heard, the state parties have decided to continue to challenge the Top Two primary. By nominating our own candidates, we’re supposed to be able to show damages when those candidates don’t make it to the general election ballot.

If the courts then do strike down the Top Two, putting back the Montana Primary, the Grange has said they’re going after a true non-partisan system.

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

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

More on this:

Twenty seven legislative candidates are running unopposed this year.

Down by 12 from the all time high of 39 two years ago, but still a weirdly high number for people interested in healthy democracy. And, I would assume that anyone who would give their time to a third party would be someone interested in a healthy democracy.

If you’re a member or a leader of a third party, and you think the Top Two primary hurts your organization because it forces you off the November ballot, look at the 27 seats where there will only be one candidate in November (hell, one candidate in August).

Then, ask yourself why your party didn’t file a candidate in that district.

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

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

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

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

Hire a good campaign tracker, and some references

With both Gregoire and Dino employing campaign trackers (staffers with video cameras who attend opponents events looking for a macaca) here are some important links.

A Seattleite in Idaho will be back in Seattle in a couple of weeks and is apparently the Ty Cobb of campaign trackers:

I tracked for an organization that provided me with the top notch equipment that made my job easier. I had a Macbook and Final Cut Express for editing, a sweet Canon HD Camcorder, a nice microphone that captured great sound, a fancy Manfrotto tripod, the cords and adapters to plug into a mult box, a digital voice recorder, and more.

So, Washington State Democratic Party, if you want to track and ensure that the crook Dino Rossi doesn’t win, and ensure a Darcy Burner victory so that douchebag Reichart loses his seat, I suggest you not only keep tracking their events, but you invest in equipment that will capture great images and, more importantly, GREAT sound.

Concord Monitor: Campaign trackers: boot, block or befriend?
MPR: Candidates have few secrets from campaign ‘trackers’

New PDC web site REALLY kicks ass

I was about to write the exact same post that Aneurin just wrote, so I’ll just link to it and add two comments.

Makes you wonder why the PDC stuck around with their first generation site for so long when this one is so much cooler. Its almost like they missed a step in between.

The effectiveness of reporting laws are only as good as the tools the government uses to push information to the public. If the data is locked in a filing cabinet, or in a bad online database, we might as well not be reporting.

Campaign watchers and the Rossi and Gregoire campaigns

Rossi and the Republicans send a campaign watcher to Gregoire’s events. That by itself isn’t all that interesting. Thought it is when you realize that Rossi and the Republicans prevent a Democratic campaign watcher from getting into Rossi event.

From the comments of the original video, which for some reason doesn’t have any sound:

I don’t get it. Why was someone from the Democratic Party wanting to get in to a Rossi event with a video camera? I’m not sure I would have allowed you guys in either! Seems a bit suspicious to me.

And, in response:

It’s because Washington state Democrats, much like their counterparts all over this country, are hypocritical frauds. Do you think for one second that they would allow a Republican into a Gregoire event with a video camera? Of course not. Like their presidential candidate, they are complete phonies.

Well, rather, of course they would. Look at the first video again.

One video of Rossi’s closed events, one with sound, one without

I heard about the Rossi folks complaining about the Italian mobster music, but not about country music.

Ok, take a look. This video at the Washington Dems Youtube channel without a soundtrack.

Same video, at another channel (the creator of the video’s channel?) with soundtrack.

What’s going on here? Did Rossi complain? Why would he complain? Why just remove the soundtrack if he complained?

Did the Washington Democratic Party imply Rossi was a hick?

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2026 Olympia Time

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑