Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “Washington legislature”

A Seattle blogstorm

June 12, 2009

The Democrats who run the Washington Legislature gave Republican exceedingly little to work with in the next campaign: No tax increases, very little that could even be campaigned against as "anti-business." (The Oregon legislative Democrats, on the other hand, are providing some material.) That, anyway, is one way of looking at it.

David Goldstein of Horse's Ass, a left-of-center blog, is taking another approach: Going after the legislative leadership for being Republican-lite. As in his most recent post, "Who wants a primary challenge?"

The irony is, we all know there’s a fair share of deadwood in the Seattle delegation, along with a handful legislators who simply aren’t as progressive as their constituents on a number of important issues, such as pay day lending, the homebuyers bill of rights, tax restructuring, and more. Indeed, start this conversation at nearly any political gathering, and the same names keep popping up again and again, the usual suspects of Democratic incumbents who deserve a serious, well-financed primary challenge, and who just might not survive should they face one.

So why don’t I name names, as some in the comment threads have challenged me to do? Oh God, I’m tempted, but coming from a lowly blogger like me it would only come off as a personal hit list, and do little more than earn me animosity from those legislators on it, some of whom I personally like, even if I think it past time for them to move on and give somebody else a chance at getting stuff done before Republican Rob McKenna seizes the line-item veto pen.

There will be more of this.

An education lobby crackup

May 17, 2009

Here's a column out of Tacoma that some of the Salem budget-setters, and influencers upon budget-setters, might want to read. It could suggest where Oregon's education community may find itself a few months hence- not far from where Washington's does now.

A key quote: "To be specific, the Washington Education Association has decided it’s no longer friends with groups that have long been in its political clique. That includes the Washington State PTA, the union that represents school staffers, the League of Education Voters, the Children’s Alliance, Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire and Democrats in the state House and Senate."

Oregon's situation is no less severe than Washington's was. Could be that Oregon is a little less rigorous in unwillingness to go the tax route, but there's little doubt significant cuts are coming. As in Washington.

Done is done

May 7, 2009

Looks like they're not coming back to Olympia after all.

Special sessions can work. A model, maybe, may be the April 20, 2006 session - yes, it lasted only one day ("The gang that could get something done") - in Oregon, and under conditions when control of the legislature was split between the parties (Senate Democratic, House Republican). But both sides wanted to get certain things done, and they were able to reach agreements. They cleared them all, even though some were strenuously debated, in just a few hours. But the key was the advance agreements (and with the governor as well); without those, the thing would have devolved into a mess.

So the legislative leaders seem to have concluded in Olympia, where those agreements weren't available. That, and the conclusion that the three remaining bills left hanging at the end of the regular session weren't so critical that they couldn't wait until next year.

When and what, but not if

April 27, 2009

They've adjourned in Olympia, right on the razor edge of completing business. Had seemed highly questionable whether they'd be able to push through a budget in time for Sunday adjournment, but they did. The speed and determination near the end was a little impressive.

Does the legislature need to return in a special session? Evidently the views on that are mixed, among legislators notably. But the governor's quote was that she plans to meet with leaders “to determine when the Legislature will reconvene.”

When, not if.

Out of fuel, for now

April 23, 2009
brown

Lisa Brown

It was the probability that income taxes in Washington would get only so far before the plug was pulled, as it was today by the Senate Democrats. The income tax - even this version applying only to those with annual income of a quarter-million dollars or more - is just a tough sell in Washington, and doesn't have "the legislative support to move forward at this point."

The immediate news article notes that the proposal is "politically risky," which makes the sponsorship interesting. The key figure behind it, and publicly, is Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, and at this point maybe the single most likely entrant into the 2012 gubernatorial race.

That suggests the issue won't go away, and Brown's comment on the subject from a couple of weeks ago suggests the form it might take.

Opponents to a modest income tax on the most affluent in our state have been vocal and vociferous. Because they can’t argue about what the proposal is, they focus on the specter of what it might become. In the past, this has been a prescription for the status quo, preserving a tax system that is more unstable and less fair than the people of Washington deserve.

Fortunately, there are also those rising to voice support. I have heard in recent days from religious leaders and representatives of higher education faculty as well as from individual citizens from all over the state, who are pleased that this conversation is taking place.

In the end, I predict that any proposal, whether this session or in the future, will go to voters. I hope and trust that with an open dialogue about the modest costs to those who can afford them and the tremendous benefits to everyone else, that common sense and the common good will prevail.

Will the income tax actually be a major piece of the debate in 2012?

How things work, local/state . . .

February 21, 2009

There's a complex little story in the new post on Adam Wilson's Olympia blog, about the lines of intersection between the state legislature and government, and the surrounding (and surrounded) city of Olympia.

The specific issues are parochial, having to do with control of the pretty Capitol Lake which the statehouse overviews, and with a legislative staffer running for Olympia elective office. But the linkages and bounces are well worth the read.

But will they know it when they see it?

February 11, 2009
Mark Miloscia

Mark Miloscia

The definitions are so often what trip you up.

It was Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart who remarked in a 1964 decision that he would not "attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [hard-core pornography]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it . . ." The know-it-when-I-see-it standard, though, never quite works for state laws, which creates no end of difficulties.

A group of Washington legislators, evidently led by Representative Mark Miloscia, D-Federal Way, has the idea of helping fill a bit of the state revenue deficit with a porn tax of 18.5% on goods and services. That concept may not get too much criticism, apart from the affected industry. Buy how do you define exactly what is covered?

Here's the attempt in House Bill 2103:

"Adult entertainment materials and services" means those entertainment materials and services that are primarily oriented to an interest in sex, including but not limited to magazines, photographs, motion pictures, videotapes, videodiscs, cable television services, telephone services, audiotapes, computer programs, and paraphernalia. "Adult entertainment materials and services" does not include (a) books or magazines that contain no photographs or other graphics; or (b) motion pictures, videotapes, videodiscs, or cable television services that do not contain any explicit sex of the type that would be rated "X" using the standards existing on January 1, 2009, of the motion picture association of America, inc. Any motion picture, videotape, videodisc, cable television service, or other visual medium that contains any explicit sex of the type that would be rated "X" using these standards is considered to be primarily oriented to an interest in sex.

You can probably start listing the question-mark areas - how about this? how about that? - about as well as we can. Passed in present form, this one will probably be shot down in court. But there's some indication it may be amended before going much further. We'll be interested to see what improvements they come up with.