Sound Politics: Secretary of State race

September 21, 2004

Secretary of State race

Back in May I took the unusual step of endorsing Democrat Laura Ruderman for Secretary of State. I decided to endorse Ruderman for one basic reason: I was unhappy with Republican incumbent Sam Reed's support for the "Top Two" primary initiative, which would effectively destroy the state's political parties. Ruderman, on the other hand, gave a sensible reply to my e-mail inquiry:

I was absolutely in support of the Governor's partial veto. I think that the way that the current Sec. of State wrote the "Top Two" bill would have led to huge opportunities for the parties to game the system. I think that the Montana is the best compromise (although actually, the way I understood it, Arizona's model might have been even better).

I took all kinds of grief from other Republicans over my endorsement of Ruderman, but Reed's support for Top Two primary is a non-negotiable deal-killer. Now Ruderman appears to be weaseling:

Laura Ruderman, the Democratic candidate for Secretary of State, declined to take a position on I-872.

"What I have said is that I think it's inappropriate for the secretary of state to support or oppose any initiative on the ballot," she said, because that office must certify ballot measures. "I don't think a candidate for secretary of state should do that either."

Is this a flip-flop, a carefully nuanced statement, or was she misquoted by the reporter? She needs to take a clear stand.

In the meantime, there's one other good reason to support Laura Ruderman over Sam Reed. The Washington Education Association is supporting Sam Reed. (presumably because Ruderman voted for charter schools in the legislature last session) Sam Reed is part of the Axis of Evil! The only reasonable action is to defeat him.

I should also mention that Libertarian candidate Jacqueline Passey is a nice lady too. If you can't bring yourself to vote for the Democrat, vote for Jacqueline. Whatever you do, don't vote for Sam Reed.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at September 21, 2004 12:06 PM | Email This

Comments

1. Sam Reed is not a Republican. He was the only "R" statewide elected official to endorse Governor Locke's most recent appointee to the Pierce County Superior Court, when the candidate opposing Locke's politically-motivated appointee was endorsed by every Republican elected official in Pierce County, by Rob McKenna, and by Doug Sutherland, as well as by the Pierce County Republican Party. For Sam Reed to act against party interests not just repeatedly, but as a matter of course, makes him unfit to hold any elected or appointed office with an "R" behind his name.

Posted by: JC on September 21, 2004 02:06 PM

2. One doesn't HAVE to vote for anybody for Sec of State, or any office in which two candidates, um, leave a lot to be desired.

Also, if the Top Two gets passed I suspect we'll see a lot of vacant ballots from Rs in D districts and vice-versa.

Posted by: jimg on September 21, 2004 04:14 PM

3. I'd be REALLY, REALLY AND DID I SAY REALLY careful about using the precise phrase "Axis of Evil." That means terrorist. I know you didn't mean that, but to most small minds - you did.

However, in all fairness and as advice, I have used a different form. Call this "The Axis of Elitism" - or the commitment of certain Skagit Valley College trustees and Presidents (Ledesma-Reese then, now Tollefson and NEVER Smith) to anti-American ideology such as 2-minute public comment, spendthriftiness with the taxpayer dollar and a solemn commitment to govern without "accountability to community".

If it were me, I'd call Gregoire and the SEIU (and there's probably untold more) the "Axis of Statists". Just as effective, without the direct comparison to rogue nations.

Posted by: Josef on September 21, 2004 08:19 PM

4. It would be very hard for me to back a Demo. But Reed has been a big disappointment. I am not aware that he has taken on the noncitizens who are allowed to vote in WA. And the top-two cajun primary is worse, not better, than the free for all. We pay him to make things worse!

Posted by: Ron on September 21, 2004 11:11 PM

5. Josef,

I disagree. They scoffed at Ronald Reagan when he had the moral clarity to call the Soviet Union "evil". I'll follow his example and call out evil when I see it. The WEA is also evil. A different kind of evil than the USSR and North Korea. But still a form of evil. The SEIU might be less evil than the WEA, but as a WEA ally, they're still part of the Axis of Evil.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on September 22, 2004 12:02 AM

6. Stefan;

I see your point. Evil IS Evil. I just wouldn't add the "Axis of" part to calling them Evil. The WEA leadership IS EVIL, that I'm convinced of. Oh and I really miss the days of Reagan - at least you could trust him.

Josef

Posted by: Josef on September 22, 2004 09:46 AM

7. The CBS newsfeed on the radio just reported that "John Kerry is up 8 points in Washington state long considered a presidential battleground..."

Note to CBS: Forged documents make lousy rolling papers for whatever you're smoking.

Posted by: Matt J Kurlander on September 22, 2004 10:11 AM

8. SEIU are in Britain!

See this link: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/txtmsg/0,1305,550814,00.html

Oh, goodness - poor Tony.

Posted by: Josef on September 23, 2004 01:39 AM