My column in this week's The Stranger is up!
Our three-year-old son loves his trains. He's always asking for more bridges and locomotives. Occasionally, we'll buy him a transportation toy as a reward for accomplishments in, say, potty training.read the whole thing. And stay tuned for next week's column, which will be about the 98 emergencies declared by the legislature this session.Our state legislature also has an insatiable demand for bridges and trains. But they don't seek approval to sustain their appetite. They just go ahead and raise taxes to buy more transportation projects, even when we tell them not to.
That's why they have to be watched like three years olds, they don't have the judgment to act on their own behalf.
I think they all need a time out.
Posted by: Jeff B. on May 12, 2005 02:06 PMIf it were truly an "emergency" and an imminent threat to collapse at anytime, then why didn't "our" legislators vote for a "short term" tax that was specifically designed to fix the problem in the shortest amount of time possible? It seems to me that this is how you address an "emergency".
The legislature has abused the emergency clause and the former AG abetted them by not vetoing that clause in the gas tax bill.
The Nisqually earthquake happened on Gary Locke's watch. There was a gas tax hike on Gary's watch. Why was the viaduct not an imminent danger then? Oops. Sorry, I forgot, there was an election coming up - best to wait on tax hikes until after the dullards vote you in.....
Posted by: Jack on May 12, 2005 02:11 PMThe situation here is awful...when I go to New York City on business, I'm amazed on how much better the traffic situation is there (and aroudn there) than here.
Anybody who wants to undo what the legislators have done should move or stop driving...you contribute way too much to the transportation nightmare we have here already and are unwilling to do anything about it.
Posted by: Tom Franklin on May 12, 2005 02:15 PMNow you've raised the bar by suggesting that we might buy the democrats some (more) trains if they become potty-trained ;'}
Posted by: alphabet soup on May 12, 2005 02:17 PMExcept... 76% of state transportation funding is transit oriented and serves 4% of the population.
When a $750 million viaduct replacement (as quoted on TVW 2002) gets a $2 billion 'initial payment', you don't see a leetle bit of chicanery going on?
Posted by: Al on May 12, 2005 02:29 PMEmergency? The only emergency is the Dems need to pass all this gratuitous pork legislation because they will be on their way OUT come then next election.
Tom: NY and Seattle are two totally different cities. To say the same transportation arrangements will apply to both is like comparing (big) apples to oranges.
Posted by: smoke on May 12, 2005 02:29 PMQuoting a 2002 number is invalid for 1) time reasons and 2) estimate reasons. Too bad our leglisators didn't act back then....would have saved us a bunch of money and a bunch of traffic.
Regarding the transit...why is it that virtually every other metropolitan area has both transit and raods with less traffic headaches than we have?
Time to put away the short-sigthed glasses and do the right thing.
Posted by: Tom Franklin on May 12, 2005 02:32 PMThe traffic backups on I-5, I-90, I-405, Hwy 167, and everywhere else are going to get far, far worse, because democrats are shameless fools with no sense of planning or prioritization let alone any ideas except “tax and spend.”
If Franklin really believes that we have legislators who decided to act on this in a decisive way, he should either move or stop driving...because he contributes way too much to the transportation nightmare we have here already and he is too thick-headed to do anything about it.
It appears that Franklin is another democrat twinkle-toes who desperately needs potty training. Hey Tom -- next time you go to New York, stay.
Let not your heart be troubled, there is not much likelihood of the Dems becoming potty-trained!
Posted by: Jeffro on May 12, 2005 02:43 PMThe problem with the legislature is all of the legislation is additive and nothing ever get repealed...so every politician to get reelected has to do something they can bragg about however picayune to get re-elected.
Posted by: Timman on May 12, 2005 02:50 PMSocially concerned citizens such as Tom Franklin should be more sensitive to the needs of the rest of us, instead of legislatively picking our pockets. I suggest that he place himself at the head of an effective solution: lead those flocks and herds and battalions out of Seattle to reside in any of those "virtually every other metropolises" that have both transit and roads and less traffic headaches, and enjoy life to the fullest.
Because looting the whole population to support four percent of commuters in rail-transit heaven just doesn't seem right.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on May 12, 2005 02:52 PMThey did, Tom They raised the gas tax a nickel.
See how much good it did? "Having sat in total backups on I-5 and I-90 for 30 *extra* minutes today"
Traffic will not improve until more capacity is built. The overwhelming majority of Democrats in this state are genetically opposed to that. Yet, they still raise the gas tax.
Posted by: jimg on May 12, 2005 03:11 PM"Regarding the transit...why is it that virtually every other metropolitan area has both transit and raods with less traffic headaches than we have?"
My commute of 13 miles from Seattle to Bellevue takes 20 minutes. For my friends in Chicago 13 miles takes 90 minutes. I'm not sure what you mean by 'virtually every other metropolitan area.'
If you think traffic is bad, you're more than welcome to pony up the dough. But don't expect the rest of us, and all those in the eastern part of Washington, to recognize and pay for your selfish needs (YOU sat in traffic today! Wah wah wah!)
Why would you have ME move, Tom? Why don't you move to greener pastures where the traffic is nil?
Posted by: Larry on May 12, 2005 03:12 PMThe dems didn't like the rules for prez in 2000, and didn't like the rules here in 2004. So far, the dems got away with it here - that will change.
Posted by: Fred on May 12, 2005 03:47 PMAnd while you're at it, dust off history book and learn something before you call anything else stupid.
Just to save you some more 'stupidity' we're a republic, not a democracy.
Posted by: jimg on May 12, 2005 03:51 PMYou should be taking your own liberal advice and use mass transit. I certainly do!
I saw those signs too, were they the ones Sean Hannity handed out or Mr. O'Reiley....I get all my news from Fox also...
Posted by: thinkaboutit on May 12, 2005 04:33 PMLibs will make cars get 5% better milage as their great contribution to the world, while scumbags go around stoning women (where are the libies praising how these women now have more rights?) shooting parents and hanging them on street lights in front of their children because the correct homage wasn't paid, giving people the freedom to choose (libies only concept of good choice is abortion) their destiny and be able to pick their form of government, holding back third world countries so that the only form of energy is to cut down jungle to burn for cooking and heat, etc. etc. etc.
Posted by: Fred on May 12, 2005 04:42 PM"Do you think Iraq was more of a threat then, then N. Korea is now?"
The next time N. Korea funds/supports terrorist groups who actively attack the United States, let me know. Is North Korea more of a threat to US national interests in Asia that Iraq was to our interests (and "allies", as I suppose we must refer to them) in the Middle East?
"I saw those signs too, were they the ones Sean Hannity handed out or Mr. O'Reiley...?"
And I suppose your sign is the one that Jeff Foxworthy is always handing out...
Okay, highjack over--dump the red herring distraction here, and let's get back on topic...
I didn't call you any names in the post where I quoted your words.
But I will now.
Go back to Kos, the DU, Indymedia and the rest of the fevered swamps, you effin' punk. Go plan your revolution and how you're going to take back this country from all the wing-nut Rethuglikkkans.
And when you're done flapping your gums and decide it's time to actually DO something about this McChimpyBushitlerstein police state we live in, let me know. I look forward to it.
There. Feel better?
Posted by: jimg on May 12, 2005 05:13 PMThe numbers are difficult to discern on Seattle's transit because of the way the different groups report. But we already have an astounding level of transit adoption. It is virtually all buses, unlike many other places, but we're well out in the 'poor marginal increase' part of the curve. I think it was in '95 we won an award for transit per capita... and then promptly split up the responsibilities so everything wasn't under the 'Metro' moniker where everything's reported in a single comparable set of stats.
Posted by: Al on May 12, 2005 05:16 PMThe way this is all being done, so many increases in so short a time, with the "emergency" ploy and all, strikes me as a little frantic. I think they know Fraudoire is headed out and maybe more, that their little game of being able to steal elections is about to end. Whatever. Main thing is, Stefan is right. We have to keep saying no, No, NO! until they get the message.
On that note it sure is cool to see how much money and interest Carlson and Wilbur were able to raise in so short a time. A few more months and court rulings from now we may be able to kick the bum out. Meantime, with this initiative we can say, VETO!!!
Posted by: chuck Miller on May 12, 2005 07:28 PMThey outlawed *spankings*! It is against the law to spank your child in the liberal State of Hawaii.....A *No discipline* measure - brought to you from those who benefit the most from a society raised without discipline!
Our Liberal legislature wants to outlaw *legislative spankings* by reversing initiatives like 601! If the liberals can restrict something as powerful and sacred as Parental Rights - restricting the rights and the will of the people should be easy!
Posted by: Deborah on May 12, 2005 07:40 PM
Haw. Rev. Stat. § 350-1 (1998)
'Child abuse or neglect' means the acts or omissions of any person who, or legal entity which, is in any manner or degree related to the child, is residing with the child, or is otherwise responsible for the child's care, that have resulted in the physical or psychological health or welfare of the child, who is under the age of 18, to be harmed, or to be subject to any reasonably foreseeable, substantial risk of being harmed. The acts or omissions are indicated for the purposes of reports by circumstances that include but are not limited to:
When the child exhibits evidence of substantial or multiple skin bruising or any other internal bleeding; any injury to skin causing substantial bleeding; malnutrition; failure to thrive; burn or burns; poisoning; fracture of any bone; subdural hematoma; soft tissue swelling; extreme pain; extreme mental distress; gross degradation; death; and such injury is not justifiably explained, or when the history given concerning such condition or death is at variance with the degree or type of such condition or death, or circumstances indicate that such condition or death may not be the product of an accidental occurrence; or
When the child has been the victim of sexual contact or conduct, including, but not limited to, sexual assault as defined in the Penal Code, molestation, sexual fondling, inces t, or prostitution; obscene or pornographic photographing, filming, or depiction; or other similar forms of sexual exploitation; or
When there exists injury to the psychological capacity of a child as is evidenced by an observable and substantial impairment in the child's ability to function; or
When the child is not provided in a timely manner with adequate food, clothing, shelter, psychological care, physical care, medical care, or supervision; or
When the child is provided with dangerous, harmful, or detrimental drugs; provided that this paragraph shall not apply when such drugs are provided to the child pursuant to the direction or prescription of a practitioner
---
It seems like a reasonable law to me. No mention is made of spanking.
Posted by: Boss Tweed on May 12, 2005 09:09 PMReplacing our aging viaduct with a tunnel will not only cost many times more than simply repairing/rebuilding the failing sections of the current viaduct, but it will completely halt north/south traffic through Seattle for years. The tunnel is projected to take several years to complete. During that time, the 100,000+ trips on the viaduct will either go to surface streets or to the already congested I5 bottleneck through downtown Seattle.
There is no valid reason to build a tunnel instead of repairing/replacing the viaduct.
Posted by: iconoclast on May 12, 2005 09:37 PMGee....One would think it only applied to severe abuse cases! But not in a liberal mind.....
'Child abuse or neglect' means the acts or omissions of any person who, or legal entity which, is in any manner or degree related to the child, is residing with the child, or is otherwise responsible for the child's care, that have resulted in the physical or psychological health or welfare of the child, who is under the age of 18, to be harmed, or to be subject to any reasonably foreseeable, substantial risk of being harmed. The acts or omissions are indicated for the purposes of reports by circumstances that include but are not limited to:
When the child exhibits evidence of substantial or multiple skin bruising
This equates to a spanking! We aren't talking about beatings or abuse..just a spanking that leaves any mark - or a bruise on the arm from controlling your child!
I lived there. I saw many good families put through hell by the reports of simple bruises on childrens arms or legs! These were almost always reported by public school teachers and staff! As though it were their job to physically inspect each child daily for bruises! (and No - I never personally had to experience that ordeal - or I'm sure the law would have been changed or clarified by now..)
A liberal mind takes that law and sees dollar signs and sees power over parental rights! In Hawaii - your child custody is safe if you have a broken family with no money!
In Washington State, your custody of the contents in your wallet is not safe. The Liberal machine will always spin laws and create causes to gain custody of your money....
JimL's hyperbole is showing...
Amazing what a little research on the web will find (since I don't work for ST or WSDOT, I have to get records from online)...
Hmmm... lets see. Sounder service has been running from Tacoma to Seattle since 1999. Too bad that those 3000+ daily boardings are simple fiction since "a shovel of dirt" hadn't been moved by the time that Tacoma-Seattle service started in Sept. 2000. Of course, the dot-com bust in Seattle and post 9/11 slam on Boeing probably didn't help ridership any.
The South 317th/I-5 interchange, paid for by Sound Transit, began moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some) last year is scheduled for completion in 2005. http://www.soundtransit.org/projects/co/south/st-express/federalwayhov.asp
The South 317th Transit Center is scheduled for completion in 2006. Would have been done sooner if the City of Federal Way Councilmember hadn't gotten his panties in a twist AFTER the City had executed an agreement with Sound Transit on the site and permit issuance.
The I-5/ 164th Direct Access Ramps began moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some) in March 2003, with completion scheduled for Fall 2005. http://www.soundtransit.org/projects/co/sno/st-express/ashway.asp
The Eastgate Transit Access (I-90 at 142nd) began moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some)in March 2005.
http://www.soundtransit.org/projects/co/east/st-express/eastgate.asp
The Issaquah Highlands Park and Ride, $8 million of which is coming from ST, began moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some) in October 2004.
http://www.soundtransit.org/projects/co/east/st-express/issaquahhighlands.asp
Phase II expansion of the Tacoma Dome parking garage, serving ST Express, Sounder, Tacoma Link, began moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some)in 1999, and was finished the following year.
The Pacific Avenue Overpass in Everett moved "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some) (and then some) and completed the project in 2001
http://www.soundtransit.org/projects/completed/st-express_pacific.asp
The Pacific Highway/272nd Park and Ride facility --$2.4 million from ST -- began moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some) in November 2003, and the job is scheduled for close-out in the following couple of months.
http://www.soundtransit.org/pdf/projects/updates/apr_projects/apr_53350.pdf
The SR900 improvements south of I-90 began moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some) last year and construction was complete two months ago.
http://www.soundtransit.org/pdf/projects/updates/apr_projects/apr_53350.pdf
Oh, and all the whining about "Where did that Nickel go to?"... Hmmmm. The SR 16 project in Tacoma began moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some) back last year, and, holy merde, actually includes rebuilding TWO interchanges, and gets all four lanes of SR16 off of one overpass over 6th! $90 million of the funding from the Nickel. Holy smackers! $380,000,000 of Nickel tax money being spent in Tacoma? Getting an improvement to the I-5 C-D lanes (no. not HOV. the weaving lanes) between SR 16 and Interstate 705 -- with utility work beginning this month. Shoot. That magic shovel of dirt not being moved might actually get moved in the next couple of weeks. And, the Nalley Valley Viaduct and I-5 interchange? $155 million for shovels to start moving in 2008. I don't believe it. There haven't been any shovels-full of dirt being moved with the Nickel package. Nope. No sir. But wait.
Hmmm... another project outside of Seattle... Stupid WSDOT. Spending money away from 'blue' WA -- and on general capacity, at that. Imagine, taking people's preconceptions away. But, they don't have to see it from Duvall, and it isn't work on NE 124th, Woodinville-Duvall Road or Novelty Hill Road, so, they can pretend that it doesn't exist, but, when the Stage 3 interchange at SR 202 and Avondale/SR 520 starts moving that "not one shovel" in 2008 (Yep. Nickel package), even JC and KW might see it.
US 12 - Widening From SR 124 to the Walla Walla River. 75% of the funding from that damn Nickel. Oh, the "not one shovel of dirt" for Phase II was moved in January.
AND ANOTHER SR 12 PROJECT -- WILL WSDOT NEVER LEARN TO SPEND MONEY ONLY FOR HOV AND IN THE PS AREA? US12 - SR 124 to McNary Pool http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/US12SR124Wallula/US12_SR124_McNary . Dammit! They moved a shovel of dirt!
The reconstruction of the 2nd Street bridge in Mount Vernon, funded by the Nickel Package, began moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some)beginning in Oct 2004. Good heavens -- the only remaining bridge on I-5 with substandard clearance for trucks, between San Diego and the Canadian border, gets replaced? With the Nickel? Naw. Say it ain't so, Joe!
The I-5 project in Everett that, among other things, gets rid of that damned left "trap" lane on northbound I-5 to Broadway, is scheduled to start by moving "a single shovel of dirt" (and then some) this summer. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/I5/HOVSR526toUS2/
The I-5 - NE 175th St. to NE 205th St. - NB Auxiliary Lanes in Shoreline went to ad in October of last year and the contract was awarded in December. I'll ask JimL and Kirby and John know when the first shovel of dirt is moved this summer, since they seem to always know when something is being shoveled in on us...
The I-5, Pierce County Line to South 320th project was ready to start last month. Aside from the HOV lanes, the following safety improvements are in the project: Improved guardrails
New concrete barriers
New guardrail at steep median slopes and sign posts
Grinding of new and existing pavement to provide additional skid resistance
The I-5 widening project between the NE 99th interchange and I-205 got $32 million of its $37 million from the Nickel package. Sorry to disappoint the chronic whiners, but the improvements appears to incorporate general vehicle capacity rather than HOV lanes. The infamous "not a single shovel of dirt" actually was moved in August 2003.
Sheesh. 6 miles of bridge railings replaced in the past two years with that 9.8 million in Nickel funds? Safety improvements? Naw. Those WSDOT folks wouldn't want to create the impression that only "HOV" lanes are getting built.
Hokey-smoke, Bullwinkle. SR 99 in Shoreline, too? Access restrictions to reduce accidents? Sidewalks? Traffic signals? $10,000,000 from the Nickel Package? Hmmm. Bids were due on May 3rd. Oh. The shovel hasn't been moved. Yet.
In a really suck-y bit of bad luck, WSDOT actually moved a single shovel of dirt in August 2003, and then some, on I-90 in Spokane -- widening that freeway with **** GASP **** general vehicle capacity lanes (I know! WSDOT will simply re-mark the lanes after they're done -- E-E-EVIL WSDOT!)
Now. I resent the way that the Legislature acted this year. I'm ticked. Not because there weren't some deserving general capacity and HOV and bridge improvements in the overall package, but because of the way that they -- the way that many of the representatives that WE sent to Olympia -- acted -- and the way that HRH, Queen Christine has acted while temporarily residing in the Dino's residence.
I have to admit that the $2 Billion that could likely be allocated around the state when the LLLs in Seattle can't come up with the remaining funds (having given their extra latte money to the traveling monorail salesman who hit town) -- of course, I'm sure that the President and the Executive agencies would LOVE to give money to SEATTLE given all the love that flows from our Capitol Hill to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Posted by: FlyingTigres on May 12, 2005 09:56 PMThe problem isn't engineering, it's the anti-automobile culture at DOT and in the legislature. If they were getting good direction form compitent management who care about the public, we would have solved all regional traffic problems 30 years ago without any tax increases.
Projects like the 520 bridge replacement and the viaduct replacement would seem to indicate that there's not so much of an "anti-automobile" bias at the DOT as there is the realization that we've got to pay our dues for years of poor planning.
Additionally, I'd bet a lot of the problems have to do with unanticipated growth in the suburbs and/or total lack of management of that growth. The fact that everyone is so spread out can't help much. Clearly, though, there are some misplaced priorities. For example, when I see them paving roads in good condition I wonder why that money couldn't have been spent to widen 405?
Posted by: Boss Tweed on May 12, 2005 11:56 PMPersonally, I have no affections for child abusers of any degree, not just severe cases. But the question is what constitutes abuse.
substantial or multiple skin bruising
You highlighted the last two words but not the first two. The first two are key, because skin bruising can occur as the result of accidents and play. Unfortunately, this is all very inexact and nuanced, which makes it prone to error like you mentioned about with the families (presumably innocent) who were investigated for child abuse. Of course, that may be the price you have to pay as a society to prevent kids from having to get beaten up by their parents. That's not liberal or conservative, it's moral. I agree with you in that I think in a lot of places the pendulum has swung a little too far in the direction of paranoia, but that doesn't mean you stop being vigilant.
"A liberal mind takes that law and sees dollar signs and sees power over parental rights!"
I don't understand how you go about profiting from reporting child abuse. My understanding from the teachers I've interacted with about it is that it's a heartwrenching and not a particularly pleasant process.
"(and No - I never personally had to experience that ordeal - or I'm sure the law would have been changed or clarified by now..)"
How do you purport to have the ability to change this law at your whim? Your post seems to indicate that you feel powerless against the "liberal machine"
Making our state friendly to illegal immigrants has a lot to do with our *unanticipated* growth...Add to that the mass exodus of liberals from California to our state......Who knew?
"The fact that everyone is so spread out can't help much."
Damn those Americans with their *dream* of owning land and not wanting the sardine can of *density*! How in the heck are the liberals going to keep track of them and make their public utility money if they are all spread out and using well water and solar power? Oh Yeah! I forgot about the new CAO!
"For example, when I see them paving roads in good condition I wonder why that money couldn't have been spent to widen 405?"
Paving roads?? Where?
It must be in Ron Sims neighborhood.....
For the record:
Yes.
I don't know where you can find a list of all of them, but if you check the text of the bill the relevant section will be right at the top.
Posted by: Nathan Azinger on May 13, 2005 06:05 AMDidn't see anything worthy of a new transit agency. Bunch of ramps, some bus terminals. Wow, 3000 a day on the sounder....so 1500 round trips... how much is it costing us to pull 1500 people off another bus or maybe the freeway?
Still waiting for someting for us redmond folks..
Posted by: righton on May 13, 2005 07:46 AMSeems sort of counterintuitive, doesn't it? That's government for you, though.
Posted by: Nathan Azinger on May 13, 2005 07:48 AMI would suspect most of the influx of illegal immigrants would move into Eastern washington and work in agriculture, and though this would qualify as unanticipated, that's not where the traffic problems are.
I have never heard of a liberal exodus from California, though one would think the result would be a less liberal California. Despite Arnold, I don't think there's any evidence of that.
From 1980 to 2000, King Country grew by 467,285 people (a 26% increase.) reference. That's more in percentage and actual numbers than any other county. I would bet that a large percentage of that increase was on the East Side. Microsoft, Starbucks, Amazon, Nintendo, etc all play a big role in that and the success of these companies was not predictable in 1980. Seattle could very well have ended up like Flint, MI had the dice rolled differently a few times.
Damn those Americans with their *dream* of owning land and not wanting the sardine can of *density*! How in the heck are the liberals going to keep track of them and make their public utility money if they are all spread out and using well water and solar power? Oh Yeah! I forgot about the new CAO!
Everyone could dream to own a garbage heap as well; that's fine, just don't be suprised when the flies show up. These spread out people typically don't want to use solar power and well water (although if they do, more power to them.) They want access to sewers, city water, electricity, phone, fire and police protection, bike trails, highways, schools, etc. But the fact they live in unincorporated areas in addition to the extra cost per person just to get these services out there makes it an expensive proposition to cover the whole territory. The result is part and parcel of the collective irresponsibity and "I want it now and I'll pay for it later" attitude of King County and its residents. It looks like Snohomish and Pierce counties are going to start hitting similar problems in the next couple of decades as well.
As for the rest of the state, I have no idea, because I don't live there.
BTW, what is the CAO? I don't know what that stands for. County Accounting Office?
Paving roads?? Where?
It must be in Ron Sims neighborhood.....
That's possible. I am referring to Redmond, Bellevue, Kirkland, etc. I have yet to see a road in poor condition in Washington, although as I'm used to harsher winters I might have a different metric.
Posted by: Boss Tweed on May 13, 2005 09:28 AMWhere I live the trash private companies do the phone, trash, gas and electricity. The city provides water. Yes people expect these services because they pay for them. I do understand you thinking that it costs the government to provide services given the efficiency. Private companies manage to make money though.
I'm not sure where you expect a growing population to live? If they go outward you complain (per your post), if they go upward - being the only other choice - you have the same utility issues. A 1,000 amp service going down the street for the buildings will have to be replaced to support a higher population density at greater expense then in a new devekopment where nothing needs to be worked around. That is true for gas, water, sewage, and roads too.
CAO is Simms' confiscation of 65% of King County land from landowners with more than 5 acres. Confiscation in a loose way, but he basically completely restricted what can be done on 65% of the property.
Posted by: Fred on May 13, 2005 09:47 AMWhere I live private companies do the phone, trash, gas and electricity. The city provides water. Yes people expect these services because they pay for them. I do understand you thinking that it costs the government to provide services given the efficiency. Private companies manage to make money though.
I'm not sure where you expect a growing population to live? If they go outward you complain (per your post), if they go upward - being the only other choice - you have the same utility issues. A 1,000 amp service going down the street for the buildings will have to be replaced to support a higher population density at greater expense then in a new development where nothing needs to be worked around. That is true for gas, water, sewage, and roads too.
CAO is Simms' confiscation of 65% of King County land from landowners with more than 5 acres. Confiscation in a loose way, but he basically completely restricted what can be done on 65% of the property.
On average, private utilities charge more. (reference) Private utilities swear allegiance to shareholders, not customers. Which is fine if you're a shareholder, but not so great if you're a customer. And in the case of Enron, they weren't even loyal to their shareholders. That's not to say it's always bad -- in fact, i'm sure there are plenty of examples where private companies were cheaper than the public utilities, but there's really no incentive for the private company to reduce prices since they're always the only game in town, effectively a monopoly. Maybe a solution would be to make it so transmission and generation were separate and different companies could "rent" the lines, like the phone companies do with DSL. That would probably increase competition. Maybe there's something already like that?
I'm not sure where you expect a growing population to live? If they go outward you complain (per your post), if they go upward - being the only other choice - you have the same utility issues. A 1,000 amp service going down the street for the buildings will have to be replaced to support a higher population density at greater expense then in a new development where nothing needs to be worked around. That is true for gas, water, sewage, and roads too.
I think there are other choices here. For example, you can cluster commercial and residential areas to reduce commute times. Additionally, there are huge areas of the map that are unincorporated, but they're sometimes discontiguous, which causes problems trying to route stuff around unincorporated areas. That seems ineffecient. Reducing commute times has a lot of benefits in terms of how many roads need to be built and at what capacity. People in cars aren't spending money or producing goods and services, or spending time with their families and friends.
I disagree with the assertion that building up is as expensive as building out, although I'm sure it depends on which services you're talking about. Schools and emergency services become more expensive in sparsely populated areas because of the cost of transportation (gas, roads, vehicles.) Per-capita pump station capacity is going to be very geography-dependent and the more terrain you have to cover, the higher the cost of conveyance. Economies of scale are going to make it so that larger treatment plants are less costly per capita than smaller ones.
I think what you're talking about is initial redevelopment capital costs, and that would almost certainly be more expensive in an urban area, but from then after, the per unit cost of services is less.
Thanks for the info on CAO. I remember hearing about that. It seems like a bandaid for the fact that there are weak (or no) town planning and zoning commissions in King County. I can understand why that would irritate people though.
Posted by: Boss Tweed on May 13, 2005 01:46 PMThere are many people who volunteer at polling places who, I am sure, would also help "granny". The grannies in Iraq, I hear, were brought by friends and relatives....and they turned out in droves.
Posted by: Peggy U. on May 13, 2005 04:41 PMBoss? You aren't from around these parts...are ya?
Everyone could dream to own a garbage heap as well;"
Are you suggesting that the American Dream of success, freedom and land ownership is garbage??? Are you suggesting that most Americans are irresponsible home and land owners and require a Liberal Nanny to monitor every acre?? To dictate? To oppress? To steal? Oh lord......
"From 1980 to 2000, King Country grew by 467,285 people (a 26% increase.) reference. That's more in percentage and actual numbers than any other county. I would bet that a large percentage of that increase was on the East Side. Microsoft, Starbucks, Amazon, Nintendo, etc all play a big role in that and the success of these companies was not predictable in 1980. "
Are you aware that many of those who entered our state to work for Microsoft - were temporary workers from other countries? Their average maximum contracts did not exceed 4 years. I know.....I had to decline their loan applications daily due to their temporary residence and employment status....So - I wouldn't count on the tech boom of the 90's as a reason for our population growth. The tech industry basically went bust in 2000 - and with it went the neighborhood!
" I would suspect most of the influx of illegal immigrants would move into Eastern washington and work in agriculture, and though this would qualify as unanticipated, that's not where the traffic problems are."
Sigh....You really aren't from here.....
Obviously, you are not aware of Seattle's *friendly illegal alien* policy of the police department to NOT ask anyone about their immigration status! Yes! I know..this is absurd with our state's history of terrorist apprehension (Ressam)...but the liberal's simply don't want to offend any illegal aliens whom they may be paying tuition for at the U of W! The entire state is open to illegal immigrants and they no longer consider Yakima as their only safe hiding place!
That's it! I'm done with you Boss....
Nope. I moved here two years ago from Connecticut. I love it here, though I miss my family a lot.
Everyone could dream to own a garbage heap as well;"
Are you suggesting that the American Dream of success, freedom and land ownership is garbage??? Are you suggesting that most Americans are irresponsible home and land owners and require a Liberal Nanny to monitor every acre?? To dictate? To oppress? To steal? Oh lord......
No, I was making a clumsy analogy. The cynic in me wants to say that the American Dream was invented in 19th century dime novels but then again, I'm a homeowner (and technically a landowner -- I own a carport!) so I guess I'm a fool for it too. Interestingly, the American Dream is ultimately about egalitarianism; It is the American Dream itself with all its foibles and naivete that attracts all those illegal immigrants you seem to dislike so much. Why should they be denied the chance our ancestors were given?
You use strong language like "oppress," "ditate," "steal." However, there are many government edicts which are reasonable and necessary. Do you feel oppressed a stop sign? Are police chiefs dictating when they prohibit assualt and battery? Does the park ranger steal your money when they charge you ten bucks to camp out in a clean and safe National Park? So in the same way that a well-designed intersection will smooth traffic flow and a poorly signed and confusing intersection will lead to congestion and accidents, I think good growth management leads to a better situation all around for residents, both in terms of dollars and services. I don't think that people are individually irresponsible in this case, but I think they are collectively irresponsible. Government, if it's representing and represented by people well, can resolve this. It shouldn't be a nanny scolding children, it should be a waiter leading you to your table. That's why we pay them.
Are you aware that many of those who entered our state to work for Microsoft - were temporary workers from other countries? Their average maximum contracts did not exceed 4 years. I know.....I had to decline their loan applications daily due to their temporary residence and employment status....So - I wouldn't count on the tech boom of the 90's as a reason for our population growth. The tech industry basically went bust in 2000 - and with it went the neighborhood!
Certainly the tech boom was not the only cause of growth, but it played a big role. Consider than Microsoft today has over 60,000 employees and is still growing. Over the last two decades, many of the employees have settled here and reproduced. If the tech boom had really dissipated population in the manner you suggest, you would expect to see a population drop in Washington from 2000 to 2003. Instead there was 4.0% growth from 2000 to 2003 of around 230,000 people. Reference. Of the 11 million estimated non-citizen immigrants nationally, which includes legal immigrants (Reference), it seems unlikely that ~25% would have landed in King County. So an increase of foreign-born people doesn't adequately explain the level of population growth in King County.
The drive against illegal immigration has always impressed me as being at odds with our supposed commitment to the free market, especially considering that in many ways, illegal immigrants are good for the economy. Reference.
That's it! I'm done with you Boss....
I didn't mean to frustrate you, I apologize if I did. :-)
The Soviet Union on the other hand, strived for material egalitarianism, and that now-defunct idea proved to be folly. But for what it's worth, I think the main opposition from within and outside of Communism was not so much the economic ideology, but the totalitarian state that was necessary to acheive it.
At their extremes, communism and capitalism share a fundamental similarity: the lack of social mobility.
Posted by: Boss Tweed on May 14, 2005 04:32 PMI think the key word in your statement is Illegal.
And the influx of Californians whom migrated here picked up where the Tech Industry fell off. The folks from down south sold in the "boom" and could relocate and live here quite nicely. But their expectations remained "Californian".
Just a few observations from your comments, and living in this state my entire life.
Back to Topic.....Bring back corporal punishment, and hand me the "paddle".....Let the Spankings Begin.
With due respect, I think that you misapprehend the denotation of the word "egalitarian."
The American Heritage Dictionary, P.610 (2nd College ed.1982) defines the word in pertinent part –“ an adherent of the doctrine of equal political, economic, and legal rights for all human beings. This unequivocally defines comprehensive or complete equality rather than limited or contextual equality.
America was not founded on the basis of providing equal political, economic, and legal rights for all human beings. It was founded on the basis that we are equal in the eyes of God and possess unalienable rights, and we are free from the restrictions of government to pursue our own aims in life. There is a stark difference between the two models. Freedom in itself is the denial of equality in favor of individuality, and because of the inexorable tension between these conceptions, freedom prevails and equality acts only as a procedural tool.
Political, economic, and legal rights in themselves are all the denials of equality in favor of influence, individual entrepreneurship and initiative, and the ability to defend one’s-self in court. We may have the opportunity to be heard and to vote (Procedural Democracy) but no two people can ever be equal in ability to influence events. Our Representative–Republic comes as close as possible to representing our individual interests, but it was never intended to effectuate equal political rights. To the contrary, majority rules, and individuals act in lieu of our will.
We may have similar governmental opportunities to acquire and retain wealth as others but we will never be equal in our ability to acquire wealth – nor thankfully – should we be. There is no indication anywhere in the constitution of any provision to effectuate equal economic rights. In fact they specifically –and intentionally – left the whole question alone. We may have the opportunity to be heard in court but the 4th amendment “right to be heard,” and the 14th amendment “equal protection clause” didn’t make our legal system equal, only accessible for all citizens. This is contextual equality, not comprehensive equality or egalitarianism. O.J. Simpson was guilty as hell and he was acquitted – any questions?
On earth, individuals will never be equal in their ability gain power, wealth, or justice, but they are offered at least the hope of equality of opportunity. The founders of America clearly understood this and had no interest in purporting equality of anything but opportunity, and even that is tenuous at best. No where in our founding documents can a reference be found supporting wide ranging political equality, economic equality, or legal equality.
Our system attempts to strive for equality of opportunity– true – but egalitarianism literally means the doctrine of equality or equality of outcomes, and that is pure socialistic Marxist-Leninist communism. Rather than protecting individual freedom of “the pursuit of happiness,” these political/social systems form to make use of the controlling and restrictive powers of government to effectuate equality of outcomes—egalitarianism.
Incidentally, I believe misplaced egalitarian political theory is the heart of the liberal agenda that will intimately break the party. At least – it would be amusing for me if that happened.
Thanks for the comments.