The latest in our ongoing series of Dumb E-mails from Elected Officials.
 | This one is from Rep. Dawn Morrell (D-Puyallup). It's in response to a constituent's inquiry asking her to explain her vote on SB 6078 gutting I-601, the popular mandate to control revenue growth. Not only does Morrell not seem to understand the initiative process and its central place in the Washington State Constitution, but she appears to be so dumb that even in her second term in the legislature, she doesn't know how to spell the word "legislature". |
Initiatives aren't the primary means of creating laws in this state. The legislator [sic] creates the laws. They are, however, good indications of what the electorate wants. Unfortunately you often end up with competing initiatives or initiatives that are unconstitutional or create unintentional problems. It takes a 2/3 vote of the legislator [sic] to change initiatives during the 1st 2 years after they pass. After the first 2 years, it requires a simple majority vote. We recently had to change an initiative for the firefighters that required a 2/3 vote. The firefighters thought they had the perfect initiative for their pension plans. After the initiative passed, they found a fatal flaw that would have cost the individual firefighters a great deal of money to fund the pensions. They came to us and asked us to change the initiative. The problem with initiatives is that they aren't vetted through the legislative process, the code reviser [initiatives are vetted by the code reviser] and vigorous testimony and debate as well as a governor's signature.Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 14, 2005 11:18 AM | Email ThisInitiative 601 was passed in 1993. There is not a business in the state that would create the restraints placed on those planning for the state that this flawed imitative [sic] did. As a result it has been changed many times since its passage.. I am attaching the list of changes to 601 that have been made throughout the years by both Republicans and Democrats. 601 was changed by the Republicans to create a two way street - this effectively created other accounts so the cap of 601 was never reached because the money was diverted to the accounts. The bill we passed this year closed the two way street in 601 and indexed 601 to the income of the residents of the state of Washington. [what the heck does she mean by a "two way street"?] A much more workable and "open" way of accountability to the people of this state. [meaningless incomplete sentence] We also had to fund initiative 728 and 732 that were passed by the people [Suddenly she respects the initiatives that are passed by the people? ]- the only way we could fund these initiatives was to change 601 so we could raise taxes for smaller class rooms and keep children on healthcare [728 and 732 included promises not to raise taxes . They said nothing about keeping children on healthcare]. I had always intended to vote for this bill but accidentally pressed the no button. It created quite a furor as we needed 50 votes to pass. I realized my mistake and changed my vote. I felt better when about a week later Rep. Buck on the other side of the aisle accidentally voted for the budget. He had to stand up like I did and ask for a revote. Shows we are all humans.
Being a nurse, I have to do what is best for the state. Funding education, healthcare and creating a strong economy has to be at the top of the list and we have to do what we have to do to accomplish those goals.
Oops, I gave you the wrong injection! Oh well, we're all human!!
Posted by: Scott on June 14, 2005 11:31 AMI actually live in her district and she door-belled me last summer (I think it was last summer). She seemed a little loopy then. I thought it was just because it was a hot day. Guess I was wrong! Posted by: TimH on June 14, 2005 11:50 AM
Nice moral superiority, huh.
Posted by: jimg on June 14, 2005 11:51 AMSenator Kerry would be proud of his young pupil.
Posted by: T.J. on June 14, 2005 11:52 AMI like the "it's for the children" reference.
This is the kind of jackass we've entrusted to move this state out of its current lull?
Posted by: Jeffro on June 14, 2005 11:55 AMT.J. - GREAT JOKE!!!
I'm still laughing out loud over that one....
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on June 14, 2005 12:21 PMIt's a stuffy way to write, and I wouldn't have addressed my constituents that way, but it's not a spelling error.
It's like writing, "On the internet, the blogger fights with the mainstream media daily." Stuffy but not wrong.
***
I agree, though, that she rambles.
Hay, TJ, grate pointe! I bet Cenataur Kerrie is prowd of herr.
Posted by: SnoCo Voter on June 14, 2005 12:28 PMThe only one that replied was Joyce McDonald. In fact she called me and left her home phone number for me to return her call. The other two never reply. They live in denial that they are doing the will of the people and answering emails that question their actions would get in the way of there make believe view of the world.
Hopefully we will have a decent candidate to run against her next year.
Posted by: Frank on June 14, 2005 12:34 PMI to live in the 25th. We owe Joyce McDonald. She is down in Olympia doing the work of three for us in Puyallup.
Posted by: T.J. on June 14, 2005 12:40 PMI don't get it.
Posted by: appalled on June 14, 2005 12:42 PMSorry. Nope. Won't fly. She uses the term twice. The first time *might* fit your explanation (though I don't think it does, based on the way the sentence is constructed). But there's no question that she meant "legislature" when she wrote: "It takes a 2/3 vote of the legislator..."
Actually, she probably didn't write it at all - probably had an intern out of school for the summer do it for her (who relied on spell check), and didn't proofread it before she signed it. Still, it doesn't show much regard or concern for her work product. Not to mention the fact that the response is all over the map....
Posted by: Patrick on June 14, 2005 12:42 PMLast week, he sent out a newsletter, citing his accomplishments his session. Funny that his vote on HB 6078 wasn't mentioned as one of his major accomplishment since his vote was the one that pushed it to the 50 needed for passage. I responded by asking if he just wasn't proud of "doing the right thing" as he put it, or if he's just hoping that if he doesn't mention it, voters in his district will forget.
He hasn't responded yet. If he does, I might just have another Dumb E-mail from Elected Officals for you. =)
Posted by: Darth Dogbert on June 14, 2005 12:44 PM
>Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 18:26:55 -0800
>
>Thank you for contacting my office regarding the governor's race. I
>have been collecting information because what we are being asked to do
>is very serious and requires serious discussion for me to decide and
>then carry through what I perceive my duty to be.
>
>The Republicans are not calling for a revote but they will ask on
>January 11 to delay the acceptance of the certification of the statewide
>election results. I don't understand the deferral because I believe it
>would be more beneficial if the Republicans make their case now. The
>courts are the place to make these arguments, not the legislature.
>Partisan parties should not make a rash decision on incomplete facts.
>
>64 years ago, the Legislature found itself in the same situation we face
>today. The House and Senate - both controlled by Democrats - met on the
>second day of session in 1941 to confirm the election of the Governor.
>Arthur Langley, a Republican, received the most votes in the election.
>Some Democrats challenged the decision based on allegations of fraud.
>
>You might assume that the Democrats in control would honor the challenge
>to put their candidate in the Governor's office. But that didn't
>happen. After much debate, the Legislature as a whole did the right
>thing. They confirmed Arthur Langley as Governor for the simple reason
>that he received the most votes.
>
>Lawyers from both sides are arguing to see if we can even have a revote.
>Basically, what I plan to do is to accept the certification by the
>Secretary of State Sam Reed. We don't certify the election, we just
>accept the certification and record it. The rest will play out in
>court. If fraud indeed happened then the courts can order a
>re-election.
>
>No election will ever be perfect but we do need election reform to make
>sure that the inconsistencies are taken care of the best we can. I am
>already working with other legislators on such legislation.
>
>Thanks again,
>
>Dawn
I stand corrected. You read it more carefully than I did.
Appalled,
When Democrats say things like, ""Being a nurse, I have to do what is best for the state," it means that they're reminding you of their good intentions, because good intentions are the only thing that matters.
Yeah right.
Posted by: Bostonian on June 14, 2005 01:07 PMLOL. That is one pathetic e-mail...
Posted by: Dan on June 14, 2005 01:08 PMYou get what you pay for. You get what you vote for. (IF you even show up at the polls.) Wake up, people!
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on June 14, 2005 02:07 PMMax Posted by: max on June 14, 2005 02:18 PM
That, in a nutshell, betrays the command-and-control mentality of the modern liberal. They cannot comprehend the central lesson of the 20th century, in which humanity learned that strong economies cannot be *created,* no matter how smart and well-intentioned the would-be creators may be.
So busy doin' the people's business that she can't locate the spell check. Or maybe she's using a touch screen.
Note to party officials: Please give us some candidates that can oust these loons.
Jeeeze...the same district that gave us Joyce, Randy, Grant, Dave, and Casada has all but Joyce on the outs. Lord help us.
Posted by: scott158 on June 14, 2005 02:26 PM
WHAT DO THESE PEOPLE KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT BUSINESS???????????
My state 'senator' is an absentee landlord. Parades out near election time with that same ####-eating grin. Otherwise invisible. Lame, self-serving newsletter.
Responds to e-mails like molasses if at all. What a shame. Take what comes with the job--serving constituents--or step aside. Your gentle smile makes good pictures--not good law.
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on June 14, 2005 02:35 PMMy theory still remains that the only reason she won in 2002 is that she ran against Dave Morell (one R), and people got confused.
Posted by: gop_jeff on June 14, 2005 02:52 PMWe get the government we deserve...
Posted by: Bivouac Ponzetti on June 14, 2005 03:00 PMSo grab your ankles. This won't hurt a bit....
Posted by: Dogbert on June 14, 2005 03:06 PMDawn Morrell won her first House race by about 400 votes. She won her re-election race by closer to 4,000 votes. You have as much chance of beating her in the next election as you do of beating Jeannie Darneille -- which is ZERO!
Why do I say this? Because the Republicans in the 25th District are so bedrock STUPID that they can't even get together on a candidate to run against Dawn.
They had this little guy Wally Nash, who sells pots and pans on TV, who filed for election. Then Joyce McDonald, one of the least productive bottom-feeders in the House, didn't like Wally, so she put up her aide, Michele Smith, to run against Wally in the primary. Smith won, and Dawn trounced her in the general.
As for Kastama, you tried to smear him, too by putting out mailers claiming he had "taken $75,000 from the party bosses to scuttle Washington's open primary."
Forget that Republicans also had sued to overturn the blanket primary. Forget that the $75,000 was money from the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee, which ALL Democratic Candidates got. Forget that the GOP gives money like that to all ITS Senate candidates.
Kastama shoved that stupid campaign right up you-know-where and cruised to victory due to GOP STUPIDITY.
You can't gloss over the facts by just calling people names, Stefan. I'll stack Dawn Morrell's knowledge of the issues against yours any day. The gullible damn Joyce McDonald-loving fools who swallow your BS can believe whatever they want, and scream LIBERAL PINHEAD at me till they turn blue. They have as much chance of beating Dawn Morrell as they do of flapping their arms and flying to the moon.
Posted by: ivan on June 14, 2005 03:11 PMRuth Kagi
Marilyn Chase
Diane Fairley
What's her name now on the KC Council from Shoreline.
The last time I communicated with Fairley, illegal aliens were "undocumented workers". She adamently refused to acknowledge they had done anything wrong. Have you ever noticed how Democrats refer to people who are not self-empolyeed? Universally they are WORKERS. Just as all servents of their Communist masters are workers.
Posted by: JC Bob on June 14, 2005 03:34 PMKen
Posted by: Ken Sharp on June 14, 2005 03:49 PMHow their election reform is going to make things better (even though nothing is wrong).
How they are going to make health care better
How wonderful, wonderful, wonderful the death tax is
How wonderful, wonderful, wonderful the gas tax is
How wonderful, wonderful, wonderful the California emissions regs are
How they are providing defense lawyers for the "indigent"
How they are going to provide funding for the Le May car museum
How they desperately need more money because so many needs go unmet
Etc., etc.
*Puke*
Posted by: Dogbert on June 14, 2005 03:56 PMWhat the heck is it with Dems that all the women they elect look alike... think (or not, in Sen Murray's case) alike... act alike.... dress alike?
Have the Dems already instituted politician cloning?
Posted by: Cheryl on June 14, 2005 03:59 PMI actually live in her district and she door-belled me last summer (I think it was last summer). She seemed a little loopy then. I thought it was just because it was a hot day. Guess I was wrong!"
Ah Tim,
Maybe it's still hot where she's at.
My God! I could just isolate any statement she makes in this letter and roll on the floor laughing!
Here's my favorite! :
"Shows we are all humans."
Humans instead of Human?.... Wow! She must be a nurse! snicker....
Posted by: Deborah on June 14, 2005 11:02 PMAgree 100%; Shaul-Berke caught my wrath on some recent anti-American dribble positions. But--to "command" you not to write is the height of arrogance and power abuse. Dump her, voters. Why do you tolerate arrogance?
Soldier, yes! Seems the legislature cares more about illegal aliens than it does with WA citizens who pay into the system. Talk is fine, but watch what they actually pass as law--discount tuition for illegals, Mexican-authored high school e-classes and family planning funds for illegal aliens. In the same breath we hear, "Budget crisis--we have no money for roads, parks, mental health, seniors and other LEGAL citizens!" Follow the money. Follow the votes.
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on June 15, 2005 10:06 AM
Money given to State Senate candidates by the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, through their respective Senate Campaign committees, is not illegal. Either back up what you say with facts or stop making stuff up.
Posted by: ivan on June 15, 2005 04:05 PMBoom--"What-Me Worry?!!"
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on June 15, 2005 08:45 PM