Remember that question? It has been a favorite of leftists in the Seattle area, as it has been for leftists in much of the United States, for years. And it isn't a bad question, if honestly asked. But it almost never was, since the leftists were certain they knew the answer. It was our wicked policies and our wicked (or sometimes moronic) president.
Now in this area, two political proposals have shown that not everyone likes Seattle area leftists. Legislators — and not just a few of them — from Eastern Washington have proposed splitting the state in two. Immediately, a few leaders on this side of the Cascades said they wanted to be in the state without Seattle, despite the mountain barrier.
The proposal to split the state was followed by Representative Toby Nixon's proposal to split King county into Seattle and all the rest, a measure that has a fair amount of support outside Seattle.
Hate may be too strong a word, but it is certainly clear that many Washington residents, including some close enough to know Seattle well, dislike the city's politics and want to escape from them. But are any of the leftists now asking why they are hated? Are they asking why the rest of the state is so unhappy with Seattle and its politicians? Not that I have noticed.
In fact, the same people who were fond of the question before, when they were not its target, are dismissive of the question now. Urban imperialist Joel Connelly complains, in an argument that some will find eerily familiar, that Eastern Washington has forgotten what Western Washington has done for it. The Seattle Times dismissed the question with a patronizing editorial, perhaps not realizing that the patronizing air* so common to Seattle leaders is one of the things that makes them disliked in the rest of the state. Neither Seattle newspaper seems much interested in why so many people in Washington state hate Seattle leftists, or at least want to escape from them.
But it's still a good question. And it would be interesting if one of the Seattle newspapers were to stir themselves enough to send a reporter to, oh, for instance, the wilds of Covington, or even Yakima. (I can supply directions if those locations are unfamiliar to their reporters.)
Cross posted at Jim Miller on Politics.
(*What makes the patronizing air especially infuriating is that Seattle is one of the worst governed parts of the state, something every Seattle journalist should know.)
Posted by Jim Miller at March 02, 2005 05:39 PM | Email ThisFrom an east sider's perspective that is. I apologize if I broke a rule by mentioning my blog. If that is a rule and there are other things I should know about posting here, then please let me know.
Coyote
Posted by: Coyote on March 2, 2005 06:14 PMMy moment of clarity came during the winter floods in 1995, after over two years of "shut down" of the northwest forest in the wake of Al Gore's 'Environmental Summit' in Portland (and that following years of spotted owl litigation attempting to do the same thing). The insult to that injury was local Seattle media's ignoring the human toll of that flooding in the many Cascade mountain communities already reeling from the policies of the Clinton administration. MSM in the northwest has never grappled with the economic toll on our rural communities from that era.
Posted by: P. Scott Cummins on March 2, 2005 06:15 PMI'm sure someone here would be able to supply many examples of how one-party rule in Seattle and King County has had this result.
Posted by: Allen McPheeters on March 2, 2005 06:23 PMSeattle has created its own power base. "Birds of a feather" attraction of leftist envirofreaks and socialist misfits seems to be the growth plan for the area. Seattle is truly a shining example of those on the left being allowed to engage in all of their social experimentation. Thank God that the same folks don't run the country with the same death grip.
Viva Cascade County and the Eastsiders! Leave Seattle to its own devices.
Posted by: dkpcowboy on March 2, 2005 06:45 PMOne recent example was the Seattle City Council's resolution supporting dam removal in areas of the state that depend on that water for their livelihoods...all for the sake of appearing pro-salmon.
I seceded from Seattle years ago...but I like the idea of giving them the boot. Apologies to those conservatives that live there.
Posted by: Shaun on March 2, 2005 06:51 PMYou see, the overpass is on WA 26, the road from Vantage to Pullman (Colfax, Actually) that student use going to and from WSU every break. So it was really a west-sider's highway project and therefore a really poor example for Connelly to raise.
Posted by: DeadWood on March 2, 2005 07:46 PMSmutly nailed it dead on.
Posted by: dkpcowboy on March 2, 2005 08:39 PMSo, why do they hate you?
Posted by: Shaun on March 2, 2005 08:50 PMI say this not to be overly dramatic, but as a sense of a native of all parts of this state, wanting the best, most common sense, and supportive measures available to the whole citizenry. (As opposed to special interest groups that have the time and money to lobby while the rest of us actually produce jobs and product)
It's not a mistake that I run under Patches Pal, having been on the show three times, at numerous KIRO events at Southcenter, and a product of all that's happened since the mid sixties here. If you don't know the context of what that means, I question whether you have a true grounding of what it means to be a Washingtonian.
To split the state is wrong headed, no matter how tempting. And I do find myself finding the same temptation within me. This IS Washington, all of it, and forevermore. The same place the brought us George Janovich, Royer, Brock Adams, Gregory Boyington, Bill Nye, Edward R Murrow, and so many others. Good and bad, uplifting and destructive.
Yes, it is entirely irritating to have such a self perpetuating socialist power structure centered in Seattle and infecting King County to larger degrees. Yes, Seattle has a history of such nonsense, even being cited as the only city ever to be run by a union back in the day. Change from that? Perhaps. Just as we had to root out all of the corrupt deputies and the Sheriff of Pierce County, so may we end up having to deal with corruption along the Puget Sound. Maybe then things will get better.
Or, the Whidbey fault might let go and solve our problems for us. Or, people's attitudes may shift if we suffer a 9/11 style attack in downtown Seattle. (Funny, those Al Qaeda guys. They seem to revisit their targets every so often until they get one done. And, we were on the list)
Kline, Rosemary McAuliffe, Lovick, Dave Ross, Ron Sims, hey, they should just be insignificant bugs and laughingstocks for their extremist views. And pandering. And any group that calls themselves 'The people's coalition of...' should be run out of town, in a fashion much more brutal than the Japanese run out of Tacoma in 1925. But, as long as people give them creedence, and enable them, they will run roughshod over us.
One need to see the newly emboldened branches of government and ALL the taxes they intend to inflict on us, to know that it only ends when we stand up and rein in our public servants, institute the will of the people, and work together for truly common (and common sense) goals.
So, let's root out the corruption. Let's institute criminal penalties for the malfeasance. Let's deconstruct the self perpetuating machine a bit, and then start building a suitable, equitable, and integrity based structure for this state.
Posted by: Patches Pal on March 2, 2005 09:05 PMSeattle is such a mess. It's laughable to see them take this holier-than-thou air about splitting the state in two.
Really, they hate it, because the brand of "progressive" (e.g., "totalitarian") politician that operates in Seattle, full of all of their "diversity" and "multicultural" concerns, has an innate need to tell others how to live. They can't stand the idea of not have hegemony over the rest of the state.
The only thing I agree with Connelly on is that the state will not split up. But, dividing King County, it seems to me, has a reasonable change of happening. If it does, it might provide the slap in the face that "progressives" need. They can either all move into the city-state of Seattle, or they need to learn that the rest of us don't believe in their screwed up hysteria about everything except the things that matter.
Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on March 2, 2005 09:08 PMAs a transplant, it's nice to see people who love Washington, and are passionate about it. Not surprisingly, you don't see the same from the left. No love for the state, just angst over everything (as DeadMan stated) unimportant.
Posted by: dkpcowboy on March 2, 2005 09:16 PMThe statistics show that people are dying to go to Seattle, they can't get enough of it.
Are you sure its so bad?
On the other hand, no one wants to move to Lincoln County.
Yes, companies want to locate near Seattle because the quality of life is so much better. Few want to locate In Dusty, Washington (yes that is a Washington city).
There's the free market in action.
You say Seattle is so bad. Yet, people there love it, and yes, most like how it is run. The voters just threw a slew of city council folks out, yet I doubt the policies will change much.
Posted by: Erik on March 2, 2005 09:36 PMBut Seattle makes it just plain ug-ly.
You know, that freak editor from the Stranger was calling for Seattleites to barricade themselves from the rest of the country after Dubya got four more. Why don't we just let them? Think about it. We let the leftists ghettoize themselves, and within ten years the place will implode. Then we can all come back, sweep the vermin off the porch, and square things away. Heck, I don't think they'll last that long. They'll crump as soon as they run out of people to tax.
When a person persists in self-destructive behavior, eventually the best thing for the people who love him to do is just step away and let the guy crash. It doesn't mean they don't care; it's just that the guy is destroying anything that gets too close. Sounds like Seattle to me.
Posted by: ERNurse on March 2, 2005 09:40 PMI grow more convinced of this with each passing election.
Posted by: Kevin S on March 2, 2005 09:58 PMThe leading politicians of Seattle - McDermott, Pelz, Sims, Jacobsen and Kline embrace Fidel Castro ! What is wrong with this picture ? Isolationism - Ya think ? These people don't even realize that they are a laughing stock and leftist ideologues are not hearing constituents because they are too caught up in herding their constituents. Their lack of support of I-200 indicates that they are covert racists. Ah -gee, I used a tactic of the left - by playing the race card.
By being progressive, the left throws out tradition, which is throwing out the bahy with the bathwater - they don't show by their actions that they want a cohesive society. Up with the gay and secular agenda and down with families and accountability ! Come to think of it, that describes Seattle to a T ! and San Francisco, which is where Seattle wants to emulate - nice role model - NOT!
Posted by: KS on March 2, 2005 10:08 PMNot really because it is based on a false premise.
The desire to split the state in two is based on the fact that there is a fundamental policy divide that is quite natually split by the urban/rural divide, or less cleanly, by the geographic divide of the Cascades. Urban and rural needs and pressures are quite different in many ways. The policies that make sense for one may not make sense for the other.
The Seattle/King County divide is a microcosm of this. However while splitting the state is probably not realistically going to happen, making Seattle and perhaps the near Seattle burbs part of a separate county from the rest of King county has quite a bit of merit. The needs and pressures of Seattle can be quite different that those of eastern King county. Transportation, judiciary, school system, library system, etc... all figure to perhaps benefit from the split, on both sides.
While a state split is probably not in the cards, and a case can be made on both sides that it is not desireable at all, a split of King county is definitely worth discussing constructively.
Posted by: Daniel K on March 2, 2005 10:29 PMJoin Adam Smith and Teresa Heinz Kerry!
On Saturday, March 5, join Adam Smith and Teresa Heinz Kerry for lunch at The Westin in Seattle.
Contact Sarah Hyman at (253) 572-6125 or sarahhy@comcast.net to make a reservation
Ketchup anyone??
Hmmm. Well, don't go there then. Look, everyone gets to live where they want. The people on capital hill don''t want to live in Pullman either. It doesn't mean they hate them, they just have a preference for where they want to live.
The liberals in Austin Texas have to put up being the political minority in the state as well. But that's democracy. Sometimes you end up in the majority, sometimes not. Should Austin have their own state carved out of Texas?
Washington has been a blue state for quite a number of years.
Big deal. Idaho is a red state.
Posted by: Erik on March 2, 2005 10:37 PMI think the phony elitist air of the liberals in Seattle is especially absurd considering the failed Seattle public school system that produced them! Reading some of the troll posts here - I can visualize Seattle's typical liberal - living in Freemont or Capital Hill - un-bathed, stoned, paranoid........Yep! They are so ...er....brilliant! Perfect examples of Seattle's famed (infamous) public school system....cough...
Posted by: Deborah on March 2, 2005 10:40 PMIt clearly shows how densely populated areas voted Democrat in 2004 all over the country. Equivalents to the Seattle/WA differences, are places like Chicago/IL, or Denver/CO, or Portland/OR, Minneapolis/MN, Cleveland/OH, or Miami/FL, etc...
Do urban areas attract liberal populations, or do urban areas produce liberal populations? I suspect a little of both.
Posted by: Daniel K on March 2, 2005 10:47 PM What I found most interesting about SJM 8009 was the much larger number of Senators who signed on as co-sponsors, compared to prior sessions; when IIRC Sen. McCaslin might have been the only co-sponsor. This year the sponsors were:
Morton, McCaslin, Mulliken, Stevens, Delvin, Deccio, Parlette, Schoesler, Swecker, Honeyford, and Kline.
That is just short of one-fourth of the entire State Senate.
And note especially the last name:
Those who follow the doings of the Senate will recognize Sen. Kline as one of the most liberal leftie (D)s from the 37th in Seattle.
I would be willing to bet that if the question of getting a political divorce from Greater Seattle was put to the residents of Okanogan County as an advisory ballot issue in the upcoming general election, you would get 70 percent or better in favor. I expect it would be even higher if it were not for a contingent of mostly-transplanted RADLOZ sprinkled around the Methow Valley and a few other parts of the county (RADLOZ: that's "RADical Left-wing Obstructionist Zealots").
In any case, there is IMO essentially no chance that Eastern WA could ever become the 51st state. Along with all the other huge hurdles is this fundamental fact:
The other 49 states would never agree, because:
Right now the US population is close to 300M. That makes the average state population around 6M. So WA is right at the average. But Eastern WA would be less than 1/3 of that. The states with the largest populations have a huge advantage in the US House of Representatives, and they would NEVER agree to further dilution of their power in the US Senate by another state with a much smaller than average population.
But what MIGHT sell on a national level and be seen by the other states as a wash (yes: I know the odds against being able to actually make this happen) would be to do what another reader already mentioned: Join eastern WA and eastern OR, and western WA and western OR. Both eastern WA and OR would I believe jump at the chance. If they could be convinced they are sending too much money to eastern WA, western WA *might* just be convinced to go along. But western OR ??... that might be a problem: They might well see themselves as the poor step-child of much more populous western WA.
The other break-even possibility from the national perspective: Join eastern WA to all of current ID, if they would have us. Would they ??.. I have no idea.
And I greatly sympathize with the poor residents of those parts of WESTERN WA that are still primarily rural. As we have seen with the growing desperation of the citizens of east KC to escape the overbearing clutches of the Greater Seattle (D) political machine, there are many good people in western WA who probably want to stage a break-out just as much if not more than the people east of the Cascade Crest.
If we could get to where 20+ Senators are willing to co-sponsor break-out legislation, then it will get interesting. :-] ... but I'm not holding my breath. In the meantime: GO DINO !!..; and work on putting the State Senate back in (R) hands.
More immediately plausible if not quite probable yet, as several other people have already mentioned:
KC = Seattle County + Cascade County.
That is worth pushing for.
Methow Ken
wow - when did I say anything about race? And as for arrogant and condescending.. ok.. those are fairly worthless insults. I'm just telling it how it is and if you don't like it too bad for you. I would recommend, however, that if you charge someone with racism you actually have some evidence.
SHAUN: "Yes, thank you "saxa" for confirming what has been written about Seattle liberals.
So, why do they hate you?"
I'm not sure Seattle liberals agree with me so I'm not sure I confirmed anything about Seattle liberals. But if I did confirm what people have written about Seattle liberals, I have no problem with that. I'm not terribly fond of them either. So why do they hate me? I didn't know anyone hated me nor do I know of any reason why someone should. Except perhaps for criminal employers who prey on desperate people for profit. By the way DKPCOWBOY, my disdain for such criminal employers is strictly equal opportunity and applies to crimal employers of all races. However, if it makes you feel better to continue casting baseless insults, then knock yourself out. While you are at it, you can take up Shark for comparing Ron Sims to Robert Mugabe, a murderous dictator... I'm sure race had nothing to do with that... (note, I am in no way of fan of Ron Sims, but I wouldn't compare him to a murderer just because he is black).
Maybe you could share those statistics with us, Erik.
Posted by: South County on March 3, 2005 03:11 AMTexas does not have the kind of divide geographically OR politically that Washington/Oregon do.
What I find interesting is the number of my Republican friends on the west side that are opposed to this idea and the way they (you?) couch your arguments.
It seems that all ya'll have to give some kind of litany to prove your worth as a Washingtonian (I have lived here... or, I was raised in...).
Well I live in Grant County, grew up in Okanogan County, my family is Indian (yes I use the "I" word) and have been here on the east side for eons.
So with the exception of the one argument I have heard on this board about there being some state history together, all the other arguments from my friends on the west side fall flat. As they are all based on a selfish wish to some day defeat the democrats.
There has been a move in Oregon in the past to also split. THAT would be an interesting propostion. The problem is that those who should be our natural allies (west side republicans) will not allow the conversation to even get started and aid the lefties by dismissing the idea out of hand.
Thanks... (oops... did that sound as if I am annoyed?...hehe)
Coyote
Posted by: Coyote on March 3, 2005 07:09 AMOh, the mix and situation is predictable Urban leftist utopias/oases where they work to build their political machines and power base, then use those successes to take control of the state political leadership, then use that to attempt a takeover of the national leadership. It happens because they've figured it out and built a successful model of how to do it. And repeat it. Seattle is no different than Portland, though we never had Vera as mayor. Or any other significant population base.
1) You need a concentration of people. 2) You come out with 'new ideas' and talk about 'community'. 3) If elected, you support government mandated 'fairness' and impose simple changes that benefit the structure/pay off your power base. 4) You retool the budget to get people to voluntarily raise taxes on themselves to pay for things that were already paid for, but you took those monies to support unpopular programs to help your base. 5) You emplace 'fellow travelers' in mid and low level positions to ensure that they will do everything in their power to make sure you and your friends win. 6) You convince the public that anyone who doesn't think like you will take away everything you own and have come to depend on the government for. 7) You cultivate a supportive relationship with the local media to ensure that only your message is broadcast. 8) You create rules, laws, and judgements that limit the ability of your opponent to gain traction. 9) You repeat until you take that area.
It worked in Seattle. It worked in Chelan. It worked in Yakima. It works all over, because it's a solid model. Has NOTHING to do with democracy or the will of the people, but everything to do with political machinations. Trouble is, the bang for the buck is in the cities, creating little oases in a sea of Erik's favorite red states. Stefan does a service in showing a small part of the distribution system. Vote fraud is not the only thing distributed here, nor is the distributed, unorganized attempts by so many to ensure 'their' agenda is advanced limited to vote fraud. Stefan's on the right track, but has a narrow focus on a big problem.
And then there's Erik. Taking it to a new level by using opposition views on blogs to perpetuate this little blue oasis he's found, fearing that the ne'erdowells may be found out someday and the power structure may be taken down. The distribution continues, and anyone who doesn't pledge allegiance and unconditional support to the blue is branded an extremist right wing kook. You do well for your patron, Erik, and don't let anyone tell you differently.
I welcome people into my state, regardless from where they originate. After having been all over the country and all over the world, there is NO place more pretty and charming than here, in my opinion. I can understand why people would want to share in the bounty, and I am glad for it. I wear my native moniker with pride, but not as a means to intimidate or exclude others. I encourage people to read Puget's Sound, found at the University Bookstore, to gain a sense of this state and it's inception. Read about the 1855 battle outside of Union Gap. Read about Leschi's band that killed some miners up in Wilkeson, then ran to that Yakamas to hide. Learn about Swenson's mill on the Tacoma tideflats. Learn why the ceilings in downtown Tacoma are so high, and how it relates to the Japanese being run out of town. Learn about how the Indians were treated, and the folks fleeing Hawk's Prairie to Fort Nisqually for safety. Learn about Peter Puget's longboats and the first interaction along Brown's point between the Brits and Indians. It all adds up to the collective experience we see today.
As an aside, Steven's was a sleaze, appointed by a Democrat, and DID screw most tribes. The Japanese turmoil came from left leaning Democrat unions. The internment of which you hear so much about was initiated and executed from Democrats on a left bent. Erik merely continues the tradition, and no doubt takes a great deal of pride in being 'right.'
The self perpetuation goes on. Urban, closely packed populace is the easiest way to gain and maintain their power base, and the ability to inflict their rules upon others. So much so, that they came up with the GMA, which forces people into more urban, closely packed societies. An accident? I doubt it. And therein lies the rub. The people who resist GMA (not counting loudmouth individuals in support that always get the press, despite being overwhelmingly underrepresented at meetings) tend to be in the red areas, seeking to preserve their lives, quality of life, and ability to live without fear of government interference, while the 'blue oasis' seeks to force them into the blue world.
What a life...
Steve
That would be because that's the only place they can vote after they are dead!
Posted by: Jim in Clark County on March 3, 2005 07:19 AMAs one who spent much of my life in the area in which you grew up, working the orchards, running to the sound of the volunteer fire department siren, knows why Concunully was the county seat for Okanogan County, and walked along the northern terminus of the riverboat system on the Columbia, perhaps I can help.
There is a great deal of interest among people to elminate Seattle and King County from influencing their lives. County populations are split on the subject, such as Snohomish county. But, through the corruption of the local government by the left, the smaller population centers resist the efforts of the populace, and refuse to recognize the differing view. Whatcom would never separate from King County's desires. Skagit would. Pierce and Thurston wouldn't, except for Eatonville, Wilkeson, and Carbonado. Lewis would. Clark wouldn't. There is little unanimity in purpose and path, agreed.
Not that the sentiment doesn't exist.
Still, culturally, geographically, and such, the mountains divide the state. It's far easier to get the population to agree, in good faith, because of that natural dividing line. Been that way for years, to include the relations between the tribes as time has evolved. There are some stark differences, and we just see them today.
West side Republicans, with exceptions, are trying to maintain their ability to retain what little power they have in spite of the takeover of government. Rather than stand up with integrity and risk their position, they will try to 'work within the system' and mitigate the damage of the left. It's a defensive battle, and one that will not result in a win. There is an attraction to power, to influence, to the 'status' that comes from being in government, and most do not want to risk being kicked out for supporting what's right. Therein, the Republicans who you might think would be supportive fall short. It's sad, truly. Yet, the counter argument is that if someone tried to campaign for a split as they sought a seat in Snohomish County, would not be electable. And they may be right. That thought has entered my mind as I consider from time to time, getting into the game and take a leadership role in government. The question becomes, how can you be honest in the campaign, and then gain the opportunity to promote uplifting measures? I'll let you know when I figure it out.
And, someday, Erik may be able to talk smack about me by name. Wouldn't that be fun?
:)
Enjoy the day in Grant County, Coyote.
Steve
Posted by: Patches Pal on March 3, 2005 07:41 AMWith Chris Vance at the head, we'll never see the west side R's do anything different. He, as a part of the crowd, doesn't want to see HIS power base erode by splitting the state. His loyalty and fealty to the party and himself will not allow a major threat to his power base to occur.
He's a part of the problem.
Steve
Posted by: Patches Pal on March 3, 2005 07:44 AMhttp://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002195327_popchange03m.html
Posted by: Jim in Clark County on March 3, 2005 08:15 AMI live on the East side of Lake Washington, where the proposed Cascade County would be. Nice area and don't intend to move from here. Erik is obviously distraught that Bush was reelected and Canada would welcome him where socialism is the way of being and there is more blue surrounding him and fellow left-wingers.
"The people on capital hill don''t want to live in Pullman either. It doesn't mean they hate them, they just have a preference for where they want to live. "
The people in Capital Hill mock those living in Pullman - hate may be a bit strong, but not beyond what the left calls hate speech. The so-called hicks in Pullman or any other rural area would be labeled as homophobes and racists by many of the tolerant (NOT!) inhabitants and the vocal activists who reside in Capital Hill. The CAO is just one example of how the Socialist elites who currently rule and live in the blue area of WA want to control those who live in the red areas of King County.
Posted by: KS on March 3, 2005 08:24 AMI wouldn't look to Erik for any statistics or hard facts. He's as wrong as he's ever been according to an article in this morning's Seattle Times:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002195327_popchange03m.html
"His and other departures from King County during those first three years of the decade resulted in a net domestic population loss of nearly 50,000, census estimates show. In other words, 50,000 more people left King County than arrived here from another county or state between April 2000 and July 2003.
Even an influx of 42,000 newcomers from overseas wasn't enough to overcome an overall migration loss for the county during that time."
Erik....wrong...AGAIN.
Posted by: Larry on March 3, 2005 09:23 AMPopulation figures:
1990- Seattle:516,259 - King:1,507,319 - Pierce:586,203 - Snohomish:465,642
2000- Seattle:563,374 - King:1,737,034 - Pierce:700,818 - Snohomish:606,024
2004- Seattle:572,600 - King:1,788,300 - Pierce:744,000 - Snohomish:644,800
Growth% (1990 - 2004)
Seattle:10% - King:18% - Pierce:26% - Snohomish:38%
In addition to the fact that east-siders are citizens of the state as well as west-siders are, all traffic to Seattle from points east and southeast must use either I-90, US Hwy 2, US Hwy 395 or some combination of these. Let's ponder how well the Sound economy would fare without adequate transportation money being spent to maintain highway infrastructure outside of King, Snohomish, Pierce and Thurston counties.
Connelly also fails to note that several lawmakers from the WEST SIDE of the state support a split, or acknowledge the movement WITHIN King County to break the county apart. It is not just a bunch of whiny hicks from the sticks that feel alienated by the overriding influence that King County, and Seattle in particular, have on all aspects of our everyday lives.
Spokane County is a "donor county", i.e. the dollar amount of taxes we contribute exceed the dollar amount of taxes spent here. But (if Connelly were to spend time here, he would know this) we in Spokane County don't complain that the rural counties don't thank us for subsidizing some of their costs. Similarly, as a federal taxpayer, the idea that Wyoming somehow owes me something (even gratitude) because it is sparsely populated would never occur to me.
Connelly then proceeds to denigrate Eastern Washington as having not contributed a governor in over 64 years, or a US Senator in over 70. Gee, why might that be? Because over 75% of the voting population lives in Western Washington? No, that couldn't possibly have anything to do with it - it HAS to be because people from Eastern Washington are genetically inferior.
He implies that somehow the Columbia dams were built with west-side money, exclusively to the benefit of the PUDs of the counties in which the dams lie. The dams were built primarily with Federal funds, and whether those funds were secured with the help of a Seattle democrat or not, it is west-side residents who have reaped the greatest benefit, in terms of greatly reduced rates for electricity.
The rest of the public projects mentioned are superb, but again, mostly secured with Federal funds. Because the lawmakers who helped to secure those funds are from the west side of the state means little, because the vast majority of posts decided by statewide elections are won by west-siders (remember the 75%+ of the electorate?). Because this part of the state is not COMPLETELY overlooked or ignored by our lawmakers automatically means that we owe a debt of great gratitude?
Seattle has Starbucks, Microsoft, and used to have Boeing until they were driven away. What have the great Seattle-grown lawmakers done to bring large employers to Eastern Washington? In Spokane County, the five largest employers are the US Govt, the State, the City, the Spokane School District, and a hospital group. The business-unfriendly laws promulgated by west-side politicians have done nothing to aid our economy. More employers means more jobs means more tax revenues means........
While I believe that the talk of secession is rather silly, it is NOT the brainchild of a few whiny malcontents. It is symptomatic of a greater disconnect between the citizens of one half of the state with the machinery that resides in the other half of the state and makes the decisions for the entire state.
Connelly's piece was a joke, but hey - that's what op/ed is all about.
Posted by: Spokane Repub on March 3, 2005 11:09 AMI'm still learning my way around the politics, but I can't help but notice that, while Seattle is very cosmopolitain, and looks much like San Fransisco, Spokane reminds me of Pittsburg, which is a "working town"...
Posted by: Sgt. B. on March 3, 2005 11:41 AMSeattle does have Starbucks, but Redmond has Microsoft.
Which employers are you refering to as being criminal, or are you playing judge and jury? What criminal code did they break?
In what way are the illegal workers being exploited? They could go to the federal building and get a free pass back to Mexico. Obviously they feel it is better here than Mexico.
It seems to be you have your definition of criminal backwards. The companies providing jobs which people voluntarily accept you are calling criminal, and the people that break immigration laws you call the exploited. Interesting!
Posted by: Jonathan on March 3, 2005 12:19 PMAlan
Posted by: Spokane Repub on March 3, 2005 01:41 PM1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.
I do not agree with anything you said. Race is not really an issue over here.
Posted by: cc on March 3, 2005 02:13 PMI take exception to that one comment. Those "rural counties" spend a heck of a lot of money in Spokane. As a matter of fact, they are there this week as we speak for the state B basketball tournaments. My husbands company will be attending a convention there this weekend. The wives are encouraged to attend. We will shop til we drop.
So Spokane repub, here is my "thanks" to you for "subsidizing" my little county.
"we in Spokane County don't complain that the rural counties don't thank us for subsidizing some of their costs."
my point was that NO "donor" county or political subdivision should EXPECT thanks from any rural area for subsidizing them - as Connelly implied that the entire east side of the state should thank Seattle and the west for giving us everything we have that is good.
I am very aware of how much money is spent in Spokane by residents of outlying rural areas, not only in conjunction with State B and conventions, but also in shopping jaunts, vacations, etc.
We are all in it together, and one group shouldn't boast that they contribute all of the money. That's just a gross oversimplification of the reality.
Spokane Repub
Posted by: Spokane Repuba on March 4, 2005 11:02 AM