Blog | Admin | Archives

Ryan’s Election Reccomendations

Washington State’s General election is coming up on Tuesday, November 8th. Here are my recommendations for the races I’m voting in:

Initiative 900: YES
Initiative 901: NO
Initiative 912: YES
Initiative 330: NO
Initiative 336: NO!!!!
Senate Joint Resolution 8207: NO
King County Proposition No. 1: NO
County Executive: David Irons
Sheriff: Greg Schmidt
King County Council District 9: Reagan Dunn
Port of Seattle Commissioner Position 1: John Creighton
Port of Seattle Commissioner Position 3: Lloyd Hara
Port of Seattle Commissioner Position 5: Jack Jolley
Bellevue City Council Position 2: Conrad Lee
Bellevue City Council Position 4: John Albertson
Bellevue City Council Position 6: Don Davidson

If you want to know why, read on below…

Initiative 900: YES
I-900 allows the state auditor to audit all government agencies in Washington — there will no longer be special politically-motivated exemptions for some agencies (ie, Washington State Ferries, Sound Transit, etc…). The opponents of I-900 argue that this expansion of the role of the auditor is unnecessary; I say that auditing all facets of government is essential to prevent wanton abuse of the power that we entrust it with.

Initiative 901: NO
For those of you who don’t know, I-901 proposes to expand the clean indoor air act to apply to every indoor area open to the public, and to all areas within 25 feet of doors or ventilation shafts. Areas open to the public includes every restaurant and bar in the state — oh, except that tribal lands are excluded. Now, I dislike the smell of cigarette smoke quite a bit. But I can stand it for an hour or so when I chose to. For example, I have enjoyed several meals at Seattle’s Hurricane Cafe, a venue that permits smoking. While it is true that the smoke doesn’t make it more pleasant for me, the experience would be entirely different — and in my opinion completely ruined — if the Cafe were not a seedy little joint that allowed smoking. Today, if I don’t want to expose myself to the smoke, I don’t have to go there. There are thousands of server jobs available at places where smoking is not permitted. In short, these days, no one is ever forced to go into a smoky place if they don’t want to. Yet I-901 takes away that choice, telling me that you and I aren’t smart enough to make that decision ourselves. Its the epitome of governmental maternalism in the name of public health. We should not stand for it. I am vehemently against this initiative. As the No on 901 yard signs say, “Freedom is about choice.” I-901 takes a choice away from everyone in Washington State. It especially restricts the rights of property and business owners. We say we live in a free society, yet we let initiatives like this see the light of day. Its sick. No on 901!

Initiative 912: YES
“Its not the nine cents, its the nonsense.” Washingtonians already pay one of the highest gas tax rates in the country, yet in the Puget Sound region we suffer from some of the worst traffic congestion in the country. This is because money is not being spent in ways the relieve congestion; it is not a priority to the people we as a state have elected to office. Instead, our state spends money on dubiously useful mass transportation, and traffic gets worse, not better. Twenty years of refusing to build new infrastructure takes a very real toll. Now, this is where I-912 comes in. After Christine Gregoire ascended to power in Washington State, the legislature voted through $500 million in tax increases. After I-601 passed back in the 90’s, tax increases had to be supported by 2/3 of the legislature, have a 90-day waiting period before being signed into law, and be subject to a voter referendum which could overturn the new taxes. However, our government knows better than us, so they decided to circumvent this process by:

  1. Changed the rules of an emergency provision so that only a simple majority (instead of 2/3) was required to declare a spending bill an emergency
  2. Proceeded to pass the new tax increases as an emergency, allowing Governor Gregoire to sign the increases into law on the same day (preventing the 90-day waiting period)
  3. Convinced Secretary of State Sam Reed that the (wrongly invoked) emergency clause overruled the possibility of citizen referendum

The result is that we now are on schedule to have the highest gas tax in the nation, and most of the projects that I-912 only partially funds are not infrastructure capacity upgrades, but rather rebuilding roads that already exist with no additional single passenger vehicle lanes. For example, I-912 dedicates some money (but not enough) to replace the Viaduct in Seattle. So not only will we have to approve even more money from somewhere for the project if it is to go forward, but thew new Viaduct will not carry any additional vehicles. In fact, if Seattle has its way, the viaduct will turn into a much more expensive tunnel, effectively ruling out all possible future expansion entirely. SR-520, similarly, will only be replaced with HOV lanes. No additional single-passenger traffic lanes will be provided. And there isn’t enough money to do that job either, more than half, and thats just with the current (and always low) projections. The actual project will of course cost much more, take longer, and so on…
So, saying YES on I-912 sends a clear message to the legislature that the emergency clause should not be trifled with; that they have plenty of money to fix up roads already if they would just spend it in that capacity instead of propping up failed mass transportation schemes that suck up all sorts of money without solving any problems.
As a final point, people in Spokane, Walla-Walla, and Kennewick really shouldn’t have to pay for improvements to the Viaduct. Heck, I shouldn’t have to pay for improvements to the viaduct, as I never use it. Let the people who use it, pay for it. Tolls are a great and time-proven way to pay for new roadways. It can work here too.

Initiative 330: NO
This one was the hardest decision I had on the entire ballot. Generally, I feel that doctors are trying to help people out, and that high malpractice insurance rates are unfortunate; however, I don’t see the crisis that all the doctors are crying about. Doctors are generally quite wealthy; they can always choose not to offer services; the result is that things really aren’t so bad. The biggest thing that I-330 had going for it for me was that the people who were for I-336 (a terrible travesty that i will discuss next) were against this one. However, the provisions about binding arbitration and generally the addition of new laws to a system that has many larger problems than just “out of control” malpractice lawsuits, I urge a no vote on this. But I won’t be devastated if it passes.

Initiative 336: NO!!!!
I-336 is a disaster waiting to happen. Sponsored primarily by those who get rich by suing doctors, it basically sets up a taxpayer-funded supplemental insurance fund that will allow even more pilfering by trial lawyers. Furthermore, any voter-approved agency is almost guaranteed to balloon out of control because Washington’s spend-happy legislatures will see that they an do no evil where the agency is involved (since its voter-approved!) and will bestow upon it all sorts of powers that will generally make life worse for everyone in the state. While this has some strong points, such as yanking licenses after too many malpractice suits are won against a doctor, the state really shouldn’t be in the business of certifying doctors in the first place. Finally, just like 330, this initiative claims to solve a problem that I don’t really buy. Please say NO to this absolutely horrendous travesty. Thank you.

Senate Joint Resolution 8207: NO
I don’t think the state constitution should be amended for such trivial matters.

King County Proposition No. 1: NO
The county has plenty of our money to do this sort of thing with already; they really don’t need more. If they just stopped idling the #72X bus that I pass every time I drive up Lake City Way, they could find this much money in savings.

County Executive: David Irons
Irons:Rossi as Sims:Gregoire. It would be nice to have real leadership, an end to endless tax rate increases, and someone not afraid to say no to Seattle.

Sheriff: Greg Schmidt
Sue Rahr’s top priority is Meth and the crimes associated with it including identity theft and fraud. WTF?! People on Meth don’t have the time or patience to steal identity. They’ll walk right past an expensive laptop to steal pocket change to buy more drugs, because they don’t want to wait around to sell the laptop. Sue Rahr must be on crack to think that these crimes are related. Well, probably not, but I think it shows she has no idea whats up. Greg Schmidt doesn’t seem to have a perfect past, but at least his top priorities building up trust, which might, just might, involve fewer speeding tickets. I can hope and dream, at least.

King County Council District 9: Reagan Dunn
I don’t like the negative ad he ran against Steve Hammond at the end of the primary, but he’s certainly a better choice that the activist Gaunt-Smith

Port of Seattle Commissioner Position 1: John Creighton
Creighton’s opponent, Lawrence Molloy, is a tool of labor and environmentalists. We need someone more interested in those that pay his salary than in those that work at or live in the port.

Port of Seattle Commissioner Position 3: Lloyd Hara
I’m not real fond of either of these candidates, but from the candidate statements, Hara sounded more in line with what I want out of the port – namely no more taxes, self-sufficiency, and accountability.

Port of Seattle Commissioner Position 5: Jack Jolley
Incumbent Pat Davis lies through her teeth on her statement, claiming that she helped reduce the port tax rate by 33% — the opposite is true. Any property owner who has statements dating back a few years can show you the large jump the port taxes took under Davis’ watch. I don’t know why so many newspapers support Davis, but she also has lots of support from within the Port community, something to be wary of in my opinion. Jack Jolley has run his campaign as an advocate for those that just want a self-sufficient, accountable port.

Bellevue City Council Position 2: Conrad Lee
Lee has been a strong advocate for lowering property taxes whenever possible while maintaining a great city. I am generally very happy with how Bellevue is run, and I think Lee has proven himself an independent, strong candidate always pushing in the right direction. He isn’t afraid to be the lone dissenting vote in the city council, and doesn’t buy in to the fancy talk of sound transit and other dumb ideas like some of his peers. His opponent, Vicki Orico, acts like an activist — the breed I generally try to keep out of government. Conrad Lee all the way!

Bellevue City Council Position 4: John Albertson
While I am generally happy with how Bellevue is run, Connie Marshall’s stance on things like Sound Transit concerned me. Furthermore, our family contacted Conrad Lee to see who he would prefer to work with. He told us that John Albertson is an independent voice not willing to simply rubber-stamp anything coming out of the city offices, but willing to ask hard questions and make the right choices. I greatly respect Conrad’s opinion, and combined with my doubts about Marshall, makes this an easy choice.

Bellevue City Council Position 6: Don Davidson
A good voter’s statement and no issues with him allow to to vote for this uncontested candidate. Maybe someday I’ll run for his office.

Issaquah School District positions: Both candidates are unopposed, so I wrote myself in for both…

2 Responses to “Ryan’s Election Reccomendations”

  1. Stickman Says:

    Vote for me! Port commissioner!

  2. Bernie Zimmermann Says:

    Thanks for this post, Ryan. It sure would be great if editorials like this one showed up in the supplementary materials that come with your ballot. The ballot descriptions of initiatives and candidates are always so boring, colorless, and often leave me so confused that, in the end, I don’t really even know what I voted for (or against).

    Even if only one side were provided (like in your post), a somewhat educated person like myself can either agree or disagree with the points you’ve made and vote accordingly. Granted, I guess I have to have a certain level of trust in your reporting, but I do so this will work well for me.

    Maybe these types of things are always available online now that we’ve hit such a digital age, but having it show up in my feed subscriptions automatically is just so nice ;)

Leave a Reply