Welcome to Jayne's 2016 Olympia Voters Guide!
I'll be updating this shortly in order to make it easier to navigate. In the meantime, it's laid out in the same order as the ballot is. Sorry for all the scrolling!
Initiative no. 1433
Vote YES
Why? This would raise Washington’s minimum wage to $13.50 by
2020. I don’t think I need to do a lot of convincing for folks reading this
guide about why this is a good idea.
Initiative No. 1464
Vote YES
It will help level the playing field for third-party
candidates and give ordinary citizens a bigger role in campaigns. The then uses
that money to give WA citizens the opportunity to direct funds to their
candidate(s) of choice. It has been endorsed by pretty much every progressive
group that endorses things, including The Stranger, Sightline, and the League
of Women Voters.
Initiative No. 1491
Vote YES!
This is, frankly, a great idea. This law would give a
variety of folks (including both family members and police) the ability to
request that a judge temporarily prevent a person’s access to firearms. The
person would need to turn over their guns and be prohibited from buying more
for up to one year. This is the kind of compromise legislation that even many
second amendment fans can get behind. (The NRA, of course, hates it.)
Remember, the vast majority of firearm deaths are from
suicides and suicides can often be prevented by removing access to firearms
until a person can get help. Additionally, women who are shot are overwhelmingly
shot by family members, and this law would provide an extra level of protection.
Initiative No. 1501
Vote NO
This initiative is worthless BS.
You know what I love? Washington’s public disclosure laws. I
love them even when progressive folks want to ignore them, which is sadly why
we have this initiative. (See The Stranger’s amusing and spot-on analysis
here).
Other than making it so that state-employed home health care aides can’t have their names
released via public disclosure, all this initiative does is increase the
current civil and legal penalties for identity theft and fraud when it is
perpetrated upon people age 65 and over. There are already penalties for these.
Making penalties bigger is not going to make an appreciable dent in the problem
of senior-focused scams. Frankly, I’m sort of pissed off that SEIU is wasting
our time on this.
Initiative No. 732
Vote YES
Let’s implement a basic change to our system that will help
fight climate change! This will make the carbon tax a reality in Washington, a
cause that is long overdue. Nearly everyone agrees that taxing carbon is a
great idea. Yes, there are some things that are not completely ideal about this
particular law (there are arguments about whether it raises enough money in
carbon taxes to pay for the taxes it cuts) but it’s still a good law overall. The
drafters did a good job in limiting impacts on low-income and working class
families.
There is another group that has been working on an even more
progressive carbon tax, but they don’t have an actual proposal yet. If they try
to run an initiative during the next three years (non-presidential election
years) you can solidly bet that it will fail.
So vote yes to this year’s initiative, and then if the
coalition can run a better initiative in four years, we can all vote for that
one instead. But let’s not do nothing
for four years – or longer – simply because there’s a theoretical possibility
that a better law might exist. This one is a strong step forward.
Initiative No. 735
Vote YES
Although this will have no direct effect on overturning the
Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United ruling, it will affirm that Washingtonians
don’t believe in corporate persons having constitutional rights.
Advisory Votes:
Vote MAINTAINED
We’re only voting on these because Tim Eyman is an anti-tax
corporate stooge. I tend to vote “maintained” on these both on principle (stick
it to Eyman!) and because they’re usually good decisions. Have you ever looked
at what it takes to pass something in our legislature that raises fees or taxes
of any kind? It’s extremely difficult, and thus what does pass is usually
completely common-sense and unoffensive. In any case, these advisory votes have
zero effect on actual governance.
Proposed Amendment to the State Constitution
Joint Resolution no. 8210
Vote YES
The legislature unanimously agreed that the deadline for
redistricting should be Nov 15 instead of Jan 1. As you may have noticed in
your own job, very little gets done during the holiday season so this makes a
lot of sense. As a bonus, it might save us a little money.
President
Vote *JILL STEIN or
HILLARY CLINTON
*so long as you are voting in Washington – i.e. NOT a
swing state.
Hillary Clinton is the most qualified person to vote for and
(sadly for us) will probably be the candidate who would actually get the most
done on progressive issues if elected.
However, a vote for Jill Stein is a vote for the Green Party
to have more funding for the next presidential election (which they will get if
they receive 5% of the vote) and since it’s highly unlikely that Washington
will swing to Trump, she’s a pretty safe third-party vote.
This has been an ugly, ugly election year when it comes to
the presidential race. Emotions are high, and misinformation has been rampant.
Here are my general thoughts:
While Clinton has made many decisions that I
disagree with (particularly in regard to trade agreements and pro-war votes),
she has also been vilified more than is reasonable or factual. She’s a strong
centrist and a behind-the-scenes consensus-builder – which means she’s to the
right of most folks reading this guide. I’ll look forward to protesting a
variety of her decisions for the next four years, but she’ll also continue some
of the things I most liked about Obama, like appointing good people to the
judiciary (and not just the Supreme Court, which everyone focuses on, but the
lower judicial appointments which are the pipeline to Supreme Court nominees in
the future.)
Stein, although I agree with almost all of the Green Party’s
policy stances, would be a completely ineffectual president and frankly, based
on her campaign’s Facebook posts and listening to her speak on Democracy Now!,
I don’t think she’s smart enough or has enough backbone to be president. I was
excited about Bernie. I am not excited about Stein.
As for Gary Johnson, the things I agree with him on
(legalizing drugs, protecting abortion rights, etc.) aren’t enough to overpower
my dislike for his stances on social programs (i.e. getting rid of them.) Also,
he’s dangerously unqualified to deal with foreign policy.
Trump: I’m not even going to comment.
US Senator:
Vote for PATTY MURRAY
She’s better than Vance, and we really, really need to keep
congress as Democratic as possible if we want our president to be able to do
anything positive (or to block bad legislation, should Trump win.)
US Representative
Vote for DENNY HECK
Same reason as why we should vote for Murray.
Governor
Vote for JAY INSLEE
This is one where your vote can really count, folks. Having
a Democrat in office will significantly improve our chances of passing
progressive legislation in our state and/or vetoing bad legislation. So far,
Inslee’s polling ahead, but remember that Gregoire beat Rossi by only 133 votes
statewide in 2004.
Lieutenant Governor
Vote CYRUS HABIB
Here’s a candidate that you can be happy to vote for. Habib
has been a legislator in the House of Representatives and a Senator, where he
sponsored and supported legislation that ranged from the Voting Rights Act to
bipartisan transportation bills, guaranteed sick leave, and language
acknowledging climate change. He’s an Iranian-American who lost his sight at
age 8 from cancer (and he also apparently has a great sense of humor - for a
traditional event in which junior lawmakers bring gifts for the rest of the
legislature, he brought glasses similar to his own so that everyone else “could
be as cool as (him)".) In addition to filling in for the governor if he’s ever
incapacitated, Habib would be the tiebreaker in the Senate, so we want someone
progressive in this position.
His opponent (Marty McClendon) is a right-wing radio host,
preacher, and Tea Party supporter.
Secretary of State
Vote KIM WYMAN
Yes, I know, she’s a Republican. But she’s a good public
servant with years of experience running elections (she was the Thurston County
Elections manager for eight years and our County Auditor for another twelve
years.) Have you had problems in the past voting in our area? Probably not. And
that’s because Wyman knows what she’s doing. We haven’t seen any of the
illegal-voter scare tactics that Republicans have pushed in other parts of the
country. Furthermore, she’s endorsed by a huge number of county election
officials, both Democrat and Republican. The King and Pierce county
election officials made a TV ad for her.
I literally do not know of another candidate that has ever had this level of
cross-party support.
Claims have made the rounds that she supported a voter ID
law (not true) and violated campaign disclosure laws. The latter is true, but
only in that her campaign missed deadlines for reporting information. They
reported all the proper information after the deadline and guess why the public
knows that they missed the deadlines? Because her campaign reported it
themselves. It’s a complete non-issue.
As for the voter ID law, what she actually did was suggest
that Washington follow the federal Real ID Act (that’s the thing where, if we
don’t do it soon, our state IDs will no longer work to get on planes) and that
when we do that we automatically register people to vote when they get their ID.
This would likely increase voter
registration, and still would not require people to show IDs in order to
register to vote.
State Treasurer
Vote DUANE DAVIDSON
Our choices for State Treasurer are both Republicans. One of
them has four terms worth of experience as a county treasurer (Davidson) and
the other is a private investments manager (Waite).
Davidson made incremental changes to improve efficiency in
Benton County and we can probably expect more of the same in state office.
Waite, on the other hand, wants to bring “innovation” to our
state’s investments and plans to use the office to push his anti-tax agenda
(according to his website, he plans to “work with legislators so that State
Government does not take on one penny more in debt or taxes until we begin to
reduce our escalating [sixth highest in the country] current debt. Now is no
time to talk of an income tax.”)
State Auditor
Vote PAT (PATRICE) MCCARTHY
She has experience as the Pierce County Executive and County
Auditor which will help her ensure that our state government is working
properly.
Her opponent is an anti-trans and anti-abortion rights
Republican who I certainly wouldn’t trust to oversee government accountability.
Attorney General
Vote BOB FERGUSON
Ferguson has been our Attorney General for the past four
years and has done a good job. (I have to support anyone who sued Comcast for
us!)
His opponent (Trumbull) has zero public experience and his
main campaign promises are to “protect life, liberty and property” and to not be a
Democrat or Republican.
Commissioner of Public Lands
Vote HILLARY FRANZ
I love easy choices. Franz has a long history of
environmental work, including work on salmon recovery, green jobs, and climate
action.
Her opponent (McLaughlin) is listed by the Southern Poverty
Law Center as a politician who supports “antigovernment” movements (like the
Bundy brothers’ takeover of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge) and says that he wants
to create more logging jobs and re-open more roads through our forests.
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Vote CHRIS REYKDAL
Reykdal is a solid choice for SPI. His experience with the
legislature and as a teacher will make him an effective leader for our schools,
and his grasp of educational issues is both broad and nuanced. I was impressed
with the “Opportunity Gap” section on his website, which includes the
following:
“Our failure to address inequitable resources in our communities and in our schools leads to the opportunity gap. Native American students, African-Americans, Hispanics, and a host of other ethnic and racial populations are systemically discriminated against in the way we fund schools, our inability to address poverty, our discipline policies, and our narrowing definition of how students demonstrate proficiency by use of standardized, often culturally biased, and generally English-only exams. We cannot approach 100% graduation rates until we take a more sincere, more persistent, and more honest approach to how we connect our diverse communities with our public education system. Our education system was designed by people of privilege, it reflects their advantages, right down to the nine month agrarian calendar.”
Like many, I’ve lost trust in Jones over time. Her slippery
comments on gender identity and associated curricula gives me pause, especially
in combination with her involvement in school-based religious organizations.
Her stance on charter schools seems similarly slippery and her supporters
include prominent school privatization proponents.
Insurance Commissioner
Vote MIKE KREIDLER
Kreidler has been our insurance commissioner for sixteen
years and he’s doing a good job! There’s no reason to switch to a “progressive
Republican” (what does that even mean?)
Senator, District 22
Vote SAM HUNT
Hunt is a pretty boring Democrat. Don’t expect him to show
up in the front lines of a protest anytime soon. But his opponent (Owens) wants
to decrease environmental regulations, reduce the Department of Ecology’s
ability to punish wrongdoers, and make public assistance more difficult to get.
Representative, District No. 22, Position No. 1
Vote LAURIE DOLAN
Another boring Democrat with the usual endorsements running
against another Republican (Austin) who wants lower taxes, less public
transportation, et cetera.
Representative, District No. 22, Position No. 2
Vote BETH DOGLIO or write someone in or don’t vote at all!
No one else is running, so she’s going to win.
County Commissioner District No. 1
Vote JIM COOPER
From Olympia City Council to County Commissioner, Cooper is
clearly aiming for the legislature in the future. He’s the adult, nonprofit
version of the high school kid who gets involved in every extracurricular
activity that he can in order to improve his college application: from the
Olympia Regional Clean Air Agency to the Thurston Council on Children and Youth
to United Way et cetera. So far, he’s expressed support for issues ranging from
Indigenous Peoples’ Day to securing land from developers for LBA park, to the
$15 minimum wage. Let’s see if he keeps it up as he moves up the political food
chain.
Hutchings, on the other hand, is a former police chief from
Tenino who wants to “balance” environmental and property rights (which is code for loosening regulation). He’s been endorsed by police and
sheriffs’ groups, prosecuting attorneys, the Olympia Master Builders (whose
endorsements can almost always be used as a list of who not to vote for), as well as the crazy right-wing guy who made this
picture:
 |
| I think this picture alone would make me want to vote for Cooper. |
County Commissioner District No. 2
Vote KELSEY HULSE
Hulse is the progressive upstart in this race. She supports
environmental regulations and the Growth Management Act as well as diversionary
programs rather than increased incarceration.
Gary Edwards, much like Hutchings (above) is endorsed by the
Olympia Master Builders, sheriffs, and prosecuting attorneys. He’s running as
“no party preference” but since he’s interested in “reigning in government” and
loosening regulations in order to improve the “business climate” and “support
job creators”, I don’t think I’m going out on a limb to suggest he’s a
Republican.
Supreme Court Justice Position No. 1
Vote MARY YU
Yu is a career lawyer and current state supreme court
justice who supports diversity and rethinking juvenile detention. She’s also
the first Asian American, Latina, and openly gay woman on the court.
Her opponent (DeWolfe) has been endorsed by the
anti-evolution/”intelligent design” Discovery Institute (he apparently believes
in Creationism) and the NRA.
Supreme Court Justice Position No. 5
Vote BARBARA MADSEN
Madsen has been on the state supreme court since 1992. She’s
rated “exceptionally qualified” by the Latina/o Bar Association, the Joint
Asian Judicial Evaluations Committee, and Qlaw (the LGBTQ Bar Association) and
endorsed by many progressive organizations.
I think the best way to clarify the difference between
Madsen and her opponent (Greg Zempel) is that Madsen previously served as a
public defender, while Zempel served as a prosecutor.
Did you notice that there are no Tim Eyman initiatives this
year? I assume that’s because he’s putting more time into running candidates
for the courts, like Zempel. Almost all of this year’s challengers to supreme
court incumbents are supported by Eyman. The courts have regularly overturned Eyman’s
initiatives for being unconstitutional and apparently Eyman has turned his
energy toward stacking the court in his favor.
Supreme Court Justice No. 6
Vote CHARLES (CHARLIE) WIGGINS
Wiggins is another current justice who is endorsed by
progressive groups.
His opponent (Dave Larsen), on the other hand, is endorsed
by a variety of conservative groups. Larsen states that he is running because
he thinks the current court is “too political”.
Superior Court Judge Position No. 1
Vote CHRIS LANESE
Lanese has a huge list of local endorsements and community
involvement. His past involves work with our Attorney General’s office and pro
bono work with Legal Aid.
His opponent (Laura M. Murphy) has had experience as a judge
pro tem, but her background is primarily as a prosecuting attorney and she has
very few endorsements.
You can learn practically everything you need to know by
comparing these candidates’ entries in The Olympian’s Voter Guide.
Superior Court Judge Position No. 7
Vote for whoever you want, because Skinder is going to win.
Skinder is endorsed by Fuse’s Progressive Voter’s Guide but
he’s also endorsed by many conservative leaders. In short, he’s endorsed by
everyone because there really isn’t another credible candidate. He’s a former
prosecuting attorney, which always gives me pause, but at least he was a
prosecutor for sexual assault and domestic violence.
Jim Foley’s voter statement says that he is a fiscal
conservative who is against deportations. I’d love to tell you more about him
but he doesn’t even have a website, much less endorsements.
Public Utility District Commissioner, District No. 2
Russ Olsen is the only person running for this office.
City of Olympia Initiative No. 1
Vote YES
To be clear, a yes vote on this initiative is a vote toward
the City of Olympia defending lawsuits against the initiative, which might end
with the state Supreme Court reconsidering the constitutionality of an income
tax in Washington. It’s not really a vote for this particular program.
There’s a lot of rumors and assertions flying around about this
initiative. Here’s what I’ve found:
There are some problems with the initiative
If this initiative was about actually creating an income tax
that funded scholarships, it would face some barriers.
First, the initiative sets a limit of 5% to be used for
administering the program, which absolutely would not be enough. $125,000 may
seem like a lot of money, but once you start thinking about how much city
employees cost (remember to include healthcare costs, retirement, L&I
taxes, etc.) and how much work it would take to administer a program that
basically sets up our own income taxation system and administers scholarships
to thousands of people… well, that’s going to be a lot of work.
Second, the initiative includes no penalties for failure to
pay the tax. So the plan is “pay up, or we’ll ask you to pay up again!”
It will go to court
The purpose of this ballot is to go to court and try to
overturn the state supreme court ruling which prevents us from instituting any
kind of graduated income tax (which is part of the reason that Washington has
one of the most regressive and unfair tax systems in the entire country.)
Opponents claim that the measure is being funded by “Seattle
liberals” via the Economic Opportunity Institute. This is true! The Economic
Opportunity Institute was involved in drafting the initiative, which I suspect
means that it has a fighting chance to make it through the courts. I feel more
confident in it than I would if it had been drafted by some random local people
in Olympia.
Opponents also claim the measure will cost Olympia a lot of
money to defend in court. This is also true. However, the Economic Opportunity
Institute has said they will defend the law, and fundraise to pay for the
defense, so part of that cost may be defrayed. Thank you, Seattle liberals!
It may or may not have any impact
Whether or not the initiative will make it to a positive
supreme court ruling is anybody’s guess. The City of Olympia will almost
certainly try to get out of defending it. The court could refuse to hear it.
The court could hear it but strike it down on a technicality, rather than on
the issue of graduated income taxes. The court could hear it, strike down the
prohibition on graduated income tax, and also strike down the ballot measure
(which, in my opinion, would be the best outcome.) Depending on whether one
believes proponents or opponents, it either has no chance or it has a great
chance.
However, it has already been to court once where it was struck down at
our local level (the court said that it was “invalid and beyond the city’s
taxation powers”) but the appellate court ruled that it had to be put on the
ballot anyway.
TLDR:
Courts are fickle, and this could end up being an
exercise in tilting at windmills. But we need to take some chances if we’re
going to make change. And if it succeeds in nothing else, it will clearly
signal to our political leaders that this is the kind of change Olympians
want.
