The Columbian reports that State Sen. Don Benton (R-Vancouver) missed the first 17 meetings this session of the Early Learning, K-12 and Higher Education Committee upon which he sits, then finally showed up to push a bill of his, barring from teaching any public school instructors convicted of viewing pornography on school premises.
He arrived with a flourish, passing out copied articles related to the bill during the session, while other senators were hearing testimony on another topic entirely.
The bill failed to clear committee, so he held a press conference blasting the chairman; and even got some Seattle TV face time.
SB 5677 may have actually been good public policy. FWIW, Benton had Democrat co-sponsors on the bill, but his usual bumptious personna got in the way.
Missing the first 17 meetings of the committee constitutes keening arrogance and extreme negligence. You don't suppose he's distracted; uninterested in the hard work of coalition-building with the majority; and just doing some cheap grandstanding, do you?
Gee, dunno.
But Benton also has been declining per-diem payments, due to his frequent absences from his Senate duties, and missed a chance to help advance another bill he sponsored, SB 5276, at a February meeting of the Senate Government Operations and Elections Committee. The measure, which would have prevented local sewer and water districts from collecting more than 12 months of unpaid bills from customers, was opposed by a local sewer district in Benton's Senate district, and by a statewide association. Benton wasn't there to say why it was a good idea. The last reported action on the bill before committee passage deadline was the hearing he missed.
Benton gives the GOP a huge black eye in Olympia. I hope his e-clipping service hustle is such a wild success he retires to the private sector for good.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at March 05, 2005 11:09 AM | Email ThisPlease don't crawl into bed with the Columbian! They have targeted him for removal and don't need any help from SP.
Don Benton is an excellent senator from the 17th district, my district. He has represented us well and hopefully will continue to do so.
Be careful how you portray him if you go with what you read in the Columbian. At least, get it from his mouth.
Posted by: Susu on March 5, 2005 11:59 AMI heard Benton on with Carlson on Thursday and was quite impressed. However, your post today (I assume accurate) provides, as Paul Harvey would say, the rest of the story.
I have zero patience with the left when they grandstand, and even less when it's one of our own. What a shame that 5677 didn't get through because of preening and arrogance.
Posted by: dkpcowboy on March 5, 2005 12:02 PMAlso please forward any official statements from Benton refuting those reports.
Otherwise, don't blame the Columbian for reporting what Benton does. He should take responsibility for his actions (and in this case inactions, such as missing 17 committee meetings).
Neither playing the victim card (which you are doing on his behalf, Susu) nor shirking one's duties as an elected official is remotely representative of what the GOP is supposed to be about.
Posted by: Matt Rosenberg on March 5, 2005 12:11 PMI also heard John Carlson interview Senator Benton on Thursday and his story varies from the Columbian, especially in regard to his dealings with Senator McAuliffe.
I called his office and spoke with his assistant, Linda. She did confirm that Senator Benton had declined an interview with the Columbian.
I would still hope that you would get the full story from Senator Benton instead of relying on The Columbian for your analysis.
And I don't consider that I'm playing any victim card, just a desire to seek a full and fair reporting.
Posted by: Susu on March 5, 2005 12:25 PM
D's are not restricted in anyway. They can, and do, act with impunity and the MSM gives them the cover. The Columbian may stink, but it'd be better if their claims were completely false, rather than Benton giving them ammunition (legitimate or otherwise).
Posted by: dkpcowboy on March 5, 2005 12:30 PMhttp://todayinpolitics.com/Newsletters/default.aspx
...that Sen. Benton actually links to the Columbian in his for-profit e-clippings service, the paper is the source for one of three stories in the section headed "Vancouver." Hmmm.
------------------------------------------------
CAndrew B, you are correct, Click on the "maybe he's just distracted" link in my post for more.
Posted by: Matt R. on March 5, 2005 12:45 PMKudos Matt for challenging politicians on both sides of the spectrum. Its a very rare ability.
Posted by: Erik on March 5, 2005 01:05 PMIt's a flawed amendment, so even a good senator might have difficulty in winning support for it.
If the report you've cited is at all accurate, the amendment is a goner, since the sponsor isn't someone who could win support from a majority of senators for any amendment.
Posted by: Micajah on March 5, 2005 01:44 PMIt's bizarre that you actually bought into that "if Benton hadn't passed out copies of newspaper articles during a hearing" nonsense, the bill, which would require firing teachers for viewing or possessing porn on school grounds, would have been exec'd out.
This bill never had a chance. And McAullife is a gutless lackey of the WEA, who has the gall to think that anything LESS than automatic termination and revocation of a teaching credential could somehow EVER be an acceptable alternative. You, OTOH, failed to figure out that what Benton did or did not do should never be the d3eterminant as to the fate of this bill. The ONLY question is: is this bill right for the people of the state? And if Benton were to vaporize tomorrow... that wouldn't change.
In the end, whether Benton shows up or not is none of your business. YOU didn't vote him in... We did. And given the same choice, between him and a turncoat democrat to the left of Lenin that had never set foot in Clark County, let alone actually lived here, it would still be Benton in a walk.
Obviously, you can't stand the guy... and that's your privilege. Obviously, you would be happier if his socialist democrat opponent had won and we'd be ANOTHER seat down in the Senate. But he's not your problem. SO, I suggest you discuss issues that you know something about, and STFU about those things that you've heard... given the admitted fact that you've never talked to the guy.
So, Erik, when can we expect to see some of the same from you?
Posted by: Moscow Mark on March 5, 2005 09:43 PMPlease see my criticism of the democratic attempts to modify I-200 which ran a couple of weeks ago.
I am also critical of democrats opposing HB 2038.
Posted by: Erik on March 6, 2005 01:22 AMWho.... me? wrote:
"Obviously, you can't stand the guy... and that's your privilege. Obviously, you would be happier if his socialist democrat opponent had won and we'd be ANOTHER seat down in the Senate. But he's not your problem. SO, I suggest you discuss issues that you know something about, and STFU about those things that you've heard... given the admitted fact that you've never talked to the guy."
Yipe! If I were as partisan as some have indicated, I'd be cheering that the vipers were fanging each other.
But... While I often disagree with Mr. Rosenberg, I don't remember any post in which he came out against SB 5677. He just seems annoyed that its primary sponsor did little to advance the bill, while managing to personally alienate many of the members of the committee.
I was surprised that it didn't go through. It almost looks like he was trying to scuttle the bill in order to make a good campaign issue. Another of those "evil Democrats don't care about your children" things.
As to your comments about what Mr. Rosenberg "wants," I saw nothing of that sort in his post. Perhaps what he really wants is to have an honest, dedicated conservative in that position. Even your friendly token liberal could deal with that, even though it would be much worse for our causes. Still, honesty and dedication are pearls beyond price. If I must take a politician with a conservative viewpoint along with them, so be it.
While Mr. Benton is not near as good a "poster child" for the left as, say Ms. McMahan was, he still does our side far more service than yours. Your lashing out at a fellow conservative that happens to disagree with you also does your side a disservice.
Posted by: John Barelli on March 6, 2005 09:26 AMAs Matt and others have pointed out, Benton has a long record of giving the party a bad name while serving in the state Senate...and no one has even touched on his less than glorious tenure as state party chair. There he went from just giving the party a bad name to causing it real and substantial harm.
If we can't criticize our own where appropriate, self-policing if you will, then we'll inevitably end up at the stagnant point the national Democratic party is at right now; and that is not a pretty sight.
Posted by: Eric Earling on March 6, 2005 02:02 PMYou talk a lot of BS about Benton giving the Party a "bad name." How exactly, did he do that?
Chris Vance couldn't carry Don Benton's jock. Vance has been, and continues to be, an unmitigated disaster. But, like Matt, you engage in unsubstantiated character assasination... because you have some personal hard on against the guy.
The state democratic party kicks our collective ass every hour on the hour due to the complete incompetence of the state and KingCo GOP organizations.
At the end of the day, you have far more to concern yourself with getting those two organizations squared away before you worry about Benton.
Essentially, Benton is none of your concern.... or Matt's. The people of the 17th District will be the sole judge of who is best suited to represent them in the legislature... and your yapping about giving the GOP a "bad name" in the face of the utter worthlessness of those two "stellar" organizations is like painting the deck chairs on the Titanic after everyone felt a "bump."
You don't like Benton, either? Swell. But then, he doesn't represent you, either... does he? So… you don’t like what Benton does or does not do? Tough noogies. In time, I earnestly hope you both get over it.
Moreover, I didn't thank Vance, or any other arm of the GOP was really the issue here so I don't see the relevance of you bringing them into this discussion, this is about Benton and Benton alone. Now somewhat related to Vance, one could note that whomever followed Benton as WSRP Chair they had a lot of cleaning up to do. The list there is long, and I'm not sure worth detailing in this forum, but here's one of the most glaring examples: there were a number of close races in WA in 2000 yet Benton put aside several hundred thousand dollars, didn't use it for campaign activity, and then tried to buy a new party headquarters in Olympia right after the election without the approval of the party Executive Committee. All of this led to him being justifiably sacked as party chair. That sort of negligent behavior speaks for itself.
Now as to whether or not I have something to get over, I really don't have a lot of emotion about the issue. I'm just looking at the facts, recognizing that Benton is a less than esteemable example of what one should expect in an elected official, and agreeing with Matt's original assessment.
The reason it is our concern is that we have vested interest in a state Senate that is able to implement policy we support. Benton's baggage, including his "jock" (which I'm pretty sure no one wants to carry), is a barrier to that happening. And by your logic of geography, you shouldn't care in the least about the King County GOP structure.
If people being willing and able to have a debate on the facts at hand bothers you, well, that's your right.
Posted by: Eric Earling on March 6, 2005 03:36 PMSee… I really don’t have to go much farther then this to root out your bias… and that’s what this is…. Bias.
You and so many others claim the clipping issue was “ethically questionable.”
Please detail (since you seem to have all these “facts” at hand) how many and who have filed ANY complaints against Benton to the Ethics Board. And then, by all means…. Regale us with the decisions where the Ethics Board has drawn the same conclusion you have.
Take your time… we’ve got all day.
and his french chef letter
“His?” 34 Senators from both parties AND Brad Owen signed that letter. Yet it’s “his” letter? I’ve just got to ask…. The letter in question didn’t bother the voters of the 17th District (and make no mistake…. We have heard and no doubt will continue from those in the “I hate Benton Club” about that letter… as if it made any difference about anything) so why does it bother you?
You ever BEEN a Senator, Eric? You don’t LIKE the job Benton is doing for the people of his district…. You know…. The people who actually elected him? They why don’t YOU come on down here and take that seat away from him in 2008, eh? Obviously, we’re too friggen stupid to know who we should want to represent us down here…. So why don’t you come on down and straighten us ignorants out, eh?
are all evidence of his ability to give himself, his party, and the institution in which he serves a bad name...there is nothing "unsubstantiated" about that.
On the contrary… it is COMPLETELY unsubstantiated.
You see, Eric, at the end of the day, Benton has been re-elected. The ultra leftist democrat he was running against, who sounded remarkably similar to you, I might add… just couldn’t make the case… as you can’t make the case, that Benton has given anyone or anything a “bad name,” or has, for example, caused the loss of a single seat in the House or Senate (while Vance, of course, has been at the “helm” while we’ve lost 6 House seats and 2 Senate seats… Is there ANY bad outcome for the GOP that those who operate on what they’ve “heard” instead what they “know” DON’T blame on Benton?) And I’m sure it was Benton’s fault that Vance, the incompetent idiot he is, put a criminal on the statewide ballot to run for state auditor, right? I’m sure THAT particular piece of political brilliance did far more damage to the “name” of the Party (as if Vance’s incompetence could make it much more of a laughing-stock than it already is) then anything Benton ever did.
On the absenteeism issue, regardless of the political bent of the Columbian, the facts speak for themselves.
Really? You mean the fact that McAullife is a leftist lackey of the WEA who would have dived into a pool of warm spit before she would have actually acted to protect our children from teachers who would have the lack of sense God gave a rock to keep their porn habit off the school grounds? You mean the fact that it wouldn’t have mattered a lick if Benton had been there for EVERY meeting…. EVERY day…. That she would have killed the bill no matter what? THOSE facts?
I thought you did.
Moreover, I didn't thank Vance, or any other arm of the GOP was really the issue here so I don't see the relevance of you bringing them into this discussion, this is about Benton and Benton alone.
Not surprising, given you focus on how much better off we’d all be if Benton had only lost in the last election… To be replaced by another leftist neo-comm.
The relevance is this: You’re all about the “bad name” Benton has allegedly caused The state GOP… as if ANYTHING Benton had done had caused any political damage anywhere. It hasn’t. It doesn’t. It’s won’t.
But in expending all your time and energy talking so much about something that has no effect on you either personally or even indirectly, you give the people who cause our Party… and our efforts, real, genuine harm… why, you give them a pass.
Clearly, this isn’t about a “bad name.” Because if it was, you and Matt would be tap-dancing all over Chris Vance’s skull every hour on the hour.
There. You get it now?
Now somewhat related to Vance, one could note that whomever followed Benton as WSRP Chair they had a lot of cleaning up to do.
One COULD say that the moon is made out of green cheese. One would be wrong on both counts. Vance’s inability to raise funds, compared with Benton’s talent in the field (Which candidate in which legislative race raised more money than any other?) has nothing to do with Benton’s tenure as GOP chair. It has to do with the fact that Vance can’t raise money worth a damn.
The list there is long,
So.... why not give us the top 5, eh?
and I'm not sure worth detailing in this forum, but here's one of the most glaring examples: there were a number of close races in WA in 2000 yet Benton put aside several hundred thousand dollars, didn't use it for campaign activity, and then tried to buy a new party headquarters in Olympia right after the election without the approval of the party Executive Committee.
Sigh.
Ignorance is bliss… and you seem so calm.
Benton did nothing of the kind.
There were surplus funds left in Vote 2000 because the Bellevue Mafia failed to spend them. Benton had no control over those monies… until AFTER the election. The suggestion to buy the building, which came from the executive BOARD’S comptroller, was executed because Benton ran for GOP chair on a platform of, among other things, moving Party HQ’s to Olympia, where it belongs, and he, Benton, was elected as a result.
The decision by the Executive BOARD to interfere with that decision cost the Party tens of thousands of dollars… For years. The state committee, which, incidentally, twice voted to move to Olympia only to have the Executive BOARD IGNORE that order, was BS’d out of approving the decision because, unfortunately for us all, too many of them are sheep.
Imagine that, Eric. Attempting to fulfill a campaign promise, one that got you elected. Yeah… I can see how that alone would cast the party in such a terrible light.
All of this led to him being justifiably sacked as party chair. That sort of negligent behavior speaks for itself.
Really? “Justifiably sacked?”
You’re a liar, Eric. You got that?
Benton was never “sacked.” The executive BOARD, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bellevue Mafia, WANTED to fire him…. But they couldn’t do it.
Oh… I admit, Vance was elected and Benton lost for re-election… But that’s hardly getting “sacked,” now is it?
And when it comes to “behavior,” Eric… was does your behavior here speak about?
Now as to whether or not I have something to get over, I really don't have a lot of emotion about the issue. I'm just looking at the facts, recognizing that Benton is a less than esteemable [sic] example of what one should expect in an elected official, and agreeing with Matt's original assessment.
Unfortunately, your command of the “facts” is somewhat less than complete. A great deal less, it would seem.
The reason it is our concern is that we have vested interest in a state Senate that is able to implement policy we support. Benton's baggage, including his "jock" (which I'm pretty sure no one wants to carry), is a barrier to that happening.
Here’s a bulletin, Eric…. We’re in the minority. Are you capable of understanding that? The minority… a great minority achieved through a combination of the incompetence of Senate Republican leadership and the incompetence of the KingCo GOP and, well, you guessed it… the state GOP.
Compared to that, Benton isn’t even a bump on the road. Benton is a barrier to nothing except in the ignorance of your mind.
And by your logic of geography, you shouldn't care in the least about the King County GOP structure.
Wrong, of course.
Benton’s actions here in the 17th have cost us nothing. The combination of the state and KingCo GOP’s inability to engage in minority outreach. inability to successfully fight the democrats for control over King County, inability to get and support quality candidates have cost us everything at every level, legislative through presidential.
There is, of course, a huge difference. You just lack the ability to recognize it.
If people being willing and able to have a debate on the facts at hand bothers you, well, that's your right.
Willing? I’ll grant you that. Able? Not hardly. This would be quite different if you were able… if you knew what you were talking about… And if you didn’t let your bias interfere with the facts.
And until you get a clue, I truly do hope you can get over it.
No offense, though readers of this site will likely understand, but your style of response, total negativity, and refusal to accept alternative points of view are disturbingly similar to that of Doug Parris. You, however, number/letter your points less than him and for that I thank you.
Nonetheless, it is clear there is no value if having a conversation with you on disputed points, of which there are many between us. If you feel to need to accuse the entire Executive Board – elected separately in each Congressional district across the state - of being part of the so-called "Bellevue Mafia" and insist on whitewashing Benton's absenteeism by ignoring his missed meetings and rehashing what we already know about McAuliffe that’s your choice, but speaks poorly of your arguments as a whole.
At the end of the day, Benton would be a semi-obscure legislator if it were not for his ability to draw negative attention to himself. The man is no hero, he probably has some good qualities, but he's doing more harm than good – at least outside his district – right now. As for inside his district, I will agree with you there, that is indeed your problem.