"52% of voters would scrub the monorail, new poll says"
With a note of caution for City Council candidates:
The most consistent voters are most likely to support a council member who tries to stop the monorail. The poll found 42 percent of those who have voted in all of the past four elections would be more likely to support a council member who votes to stop the project, compared to only 31 percent of those who have voted in one or none of the past elections.There's an opportunity for someone to step in and challenge Jan Drago and Nick Licata. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at July 10, 2005 11:59 PM | Email This
Richard...you are excellent at embarrassing King County. Just not quite as good at it as Ron Sims, Dean Logan, Bill Huennekens, Larry Phillips and the rest of the LEFTIST PINHEAD Misleadership.
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on July 11, 2005 06:31 AMOtherwise... the voters have spoken and it must go up.
The fact is that the voice of the voters must always be heeded... even when we don't happen to like what they say.
Posted by: Who.... me? on July 11, 2005 07:27 AMI prefer the voters being heeded. Deceit is fought by throwing them out, new votes, what ever other than big brother making up our mind for us.
Posted by: fred on July 11, 2005 08:31 AMIt would be ironic should a challenger unseat him via opposing the Monorail boondoggle, but in this town there can't be too much opposition to boondoggles, public or private. Mr. Licata may even find it therapeutic to rejuvenate his populist career by putting the Monorail out of its misery himself.
Posted by: Hank Bradley on July 11, 2005 08:45 AMThe voters can not stop it. That is because the state enabling statutes do not allow a normal citizen's petition process, nor do they allow the SMP to put its own ordinances before the voters to modify the 2002 petition, nor do they allow the City of Seattle to pass an ordinance that would modify the 2002 peition (even one that would have to be approved by voters). The handful of folks who set this legal framework up made it to a large extent impervious to changes by voters. With its appointed board, SMP lurches on as the antithesis of a democratic body.
Posted by: ringo on July 11, 2005 08:50 AMThen the voter has to get the system changed. It is a bad precident to allow big brother over rule the voters. Once that is done how do complain about CG doing it? I miss the consistency. It cannot be right for anything to be overridden in one case but not in another.
I think the monorail is absurd, waste of money, impractical. It may teach Seattlites to be more careful of big brother. Unlikely, but possible. They can vote to stop the funding, which will by default stop the project. There are actions the people can do without ceding more authority to big brother. The fact that we have let things get so bad that it makes it difficult is not a reason to had them more power to stop it.
Posted by: fred on July 11, 2005 09:07 AMHaving once worked at the city, I can tell you that the most consistent voters are extactly the onces that want councilmemebers to SUPPORT the monorail. You are too smart and savvy to get mislead by lazy Seattle media. The people who have voted 4 times for monorail are not going to be please to listen to anti-monorail messages. Particulary at the Neighborhood District and Party Council level.
Wish your were right Stefan. Maybe if Monorail was a Puget Sound plan, but alas it is not.
Do not kid people on Sound Politics into believeing there is a groudnswell of voters eager to track councilmembers bashing monorail.
Why do you suppose even those most recently critical on Council, during the 2002 election did not metion Monorail? NOTE: I am not talking about last city-wide election (2003).
Posted by: onceAT City on July 11, 2005 09:30 AMI guess that shows how far things have got out of control. If the people have handed the government so much control that voters can do nothing then it is our fault. We can take it back, but not by handing more power to the people that are screwing us in the first place.
If the voters cannot vote to cancel the car tax to fund the monorail, Seattle got what it deserved. I haven't looked into it, but I find it hard to imagine that anyone would be so stupid to vote for a tax that also waived their rights to ever vote on it again - forever!
Why is it good for government to override the voters here, but not on I601 and the gas tax? CG feels it was important for the state, just as the city feels it is good for Seattle. Why is one true and the other not? Why do we need to vote again on no taxes (I912)? The pro-monorail group must feel the same frustration on why they need to keep telling the city they want the monorail and they have had four elections to back them up. The citizens spoke, it is about time the government listens, even if we disagree with what our fellow citizens have said. We are allowed to educate people about what is going on and coordinate initiatives to change things, but it NEEDS to be the people's will, not the government's.
Posted by: fred on July 11, 2005 09:37 AMThere is a contingent of urban dwellers that will continue to support this albatross because they have no personal interest.
What needs to happen is to spread the pain around a bit more evenly. Tax the shiite out of all Seattle residents - tax 'em til they squeal!
Then up the tax again.
Sane people will revolt. The rest will inherit the mess that they deserve.
The no-no-rail will never "fly". (But their goose is cooked).....
Posted by: alphabet soup on July 11, 2005 09:41 AMThe best example of a typical Seattleites’ reaction to the Monorail silliness
was Cristin Pullman, 22, who lives in Belltown, who said "This is something
above the traffic." The amount of money troubles her, "but it's been voted
on so many times I'm pretty positive voters are for it."
Exquisite reasoning. Hang the cost, hey Ma, I want a pony!
I have news for you guys: One hell of a lot of liberal Democrats around here, including me, agree with Nick.
Posted by: Ivan on July 11, 2005 10:04 AMI think you mean, "but there SPRUCE goose is cooked"
Posted by: BananaLand(aka Iguana) on July 11, 2005 10:27 AMThe Public absolutly must consider information of this sort. But, Seattle agencies withhold it and the press refuses to opine in these regards, both preferring to focus instead on financial matters. "Do we have enough money to pay for this half-baked, disgracefully under-performing monorail line?" said the talking head on TV, with a toothy grin.
By refusing to consider these questions and build accordingly, the finished line will likely increase traffic congestion!
I repeat, monorail technology is viable and applicable, but Greenline designers and engineers are abominably incompetent. Greenline management and the Seattle press, who are obligated to serve and inform us citizenry, are corrupt; like the Bush Administration, also practicing secrecy to cover incompetence and corruption. Oh yes. There's no better way to undermine a transit system than by working from the inside; failure by design.
Posted by: Agravahnt on July 11, 2005 11:58 AMYou folks are all hot and bothered about the gas tax increase, and you demand the right to address it at the polls...
But you refuse to extend that same right to the people who have, as I understand it, four times voted FOR the monorail system?
Let me get this straight: You want government to come in and ignore the four-times expressed will of the people on this issue because you don't like it?
And then you blow a gasket when government does EXACTLY the same thing with the gas tax?
Sorry. I don't get it.
If government is to do anything here, it is to re-refer this issue back to the voters.
If we are to accept the will of the people as expressed at the polls on the gas tax, then we must accept the will of the people as expressed at the polls on the monorail. Anything else is blatant hypocrisy.
That does not mean that the monorail people should not be held accountable for their actions... they should. But we cannot engage in a double standard merely because we happen to agree with the outcome. And unless the people vote this thing out, then it MUST GO UP... no matter HOW much it sucks.
That is the expressed will of the people... and that will far exceeds any effort to silence it or ignore it.
Posted by: Who.... me? on July 11, 2005 12:23 PMSo is the Death Star, if you're willing to pony up the necessary cash.
Oh, and nice job interjecting a (lame-ass) Bush insult!
Posted by: alphabet soup on July 11, 2005 12:26 PMGold Star for you. You're catching on.
If you continue to apply at least half-measures of common sense eventually you may become indistinguishable from a conservative. I won’t hold my breath though.
Ivan, why not show a little more moral courage and sensible people will follow your example. Why not look at the Greater Seattle transportation system in total and promulgate criteria based on a comprehensive rational plan instead of an emotional one covering for corruption?
Be honest, safety (re Alaskan Way Viaduct) is an illusion. As a Geologist and Engineer, I have recently examined the bridge structure and understand the conditions and looming forces imminent there that motivate SO-CALLED safety concerns. No highway of any kind can be built to replace the Alaskan Way viaduct that would make commuters safe from seismic activities in that area. Anyone who says other wise is a major league scam artist. Such hysteria is simply "boob bait for the Bubbas."
While it amuses me that anyone would play as fast and loose with the facts as to suggest a tunnel in that area, it doesn’t surprise me. Take one look at the persisting Monorail silliness and tell me about the Seattle area’s *transportation* priorities. Liberals don’t like facts especially when they get in the way of pet liberal projects. Call the current priorities “transportation projects” if you like, but they are still nevertheless pork barrel plans to exploit the public’s ignorance of realities that will do little if anything to solve critical transportation problems or stabilize our economy. While it may be sensible to observe the need for an alternative to the viaduct, from a simple logistical perspective alone, any PRIMARY plans to change the Alaskan Way corridor are ill advised.
That said, Seattle’s economy can benefit to an extent that would promote more growth, and greater sustained revenues by improving the Interstate Highway system. ANY project undertaken in our area MUST utilize the Interstate Highway infrastructure, and any sensible person knows that Production Capacity, pre-cedes and effectuates Production. Further and more importantly, the Interstate system supports commerce through which revenues flow that will pay for improvements to other lower revenue generating infrastructures like the viaduct without tax increases. Finally, Federal Funds are available to assist in improvements to the Interstate system. Why ignore this reality?
FIX THE REAL PROBLEMS BEFORE YOU CREATE NEW ONES
If your constituency wants to inhabit an area that is livable, offer them real solutions, and tell them to grow up. Socio/environmental engineering concerns are choking the life out of a city whose region is gridlocked.
Widen I-5 and I-405, scrap Regional hub plans in favor of multi use lanes on both I-5 and I-405, and eliminate/severely limit HOV lanes. The data used to prove the efficacy of these silly measures are analogous with pseudo-scientific justifications backing global warming theory as interconnected to human activity. They are mythical, manipulative, and wholly destructive. They amount to a reverse continuum of the scientific method to achieve political ends where the desired outcomes are established and the evidence is tailored to justify them. The unintended consequences of such hardened indifference to practicality are manifested as a nearly broken system wanting for real solutions rather than hype.
Ivan, I agree with your elevated platform preference. Nevertheless, I am confident that nothing else I say here will be heeded in any way, because it makes too damned much sense.
Posted by: Amused by liberals on July 11, 2005 12:45 PMMy opinions are mine & mine alone (well, except for the little voices in my head ;'} so I won't speak for anyone else. I do not live within the confines of the loony bin AKA Seattle, so what y'all do won't DIRECTLY affect me & mine. I care because I was born and raised here, and rue the liberal toilet that Seattle has become. More directly, I have grave reservations of what Seattle will do to me (think Titanic racing towards the ice).
There is a huge difference between the gas tax (which was done to us and the no-no-rail, which you did to yourselves. Nowhere have I stated that you people must, or should, or even could be saved from yourselves. To the contrary, reread my post. If Seattleites had a lick of sense, they'd shove their billfolds deep in their pockets and walk, no run away from this albatross. If they had even a hint of sense, they'd at least cook up a new finance plan that would spread the "pleasure of ownership" (read: taxes) around a bit more uniformly.
We've had trolls that post here that, "OH boy! We gots us a monerale comin and I don't gotta pay nuthin!" There's going to be tons of goombas that feeeeeel that way because they're demo's and irresponsibility is their middle name. To them the no-no-rail is just more "manna from heaven" that they get to pee on, but not pay for.
The no-no-rail is, was, and always will be a loser proposition. Half-baked, it is a turd with a high gloss shine. Promoted by classic flim-flam men, y'all got sold a bill of goods (Brooklyn Bridge? Ice-box for an Eskimo? - your choice). You’re already paying for it and not a single blade of ground has been turned. Even if you kill it now, you'll be paying for the mismanagement for several years!
So that's my take on your no-no-rail.
Personally, I think you should "build" several more!
Posted by: alphabet soup on July 11, 2005 04:07 PMI am relieved that the monorail project will soon be abandoned. Still, it's surprised that Old School nerds like Amused by Liberals are unable to respond to my complaints about Greenline engineering, and suggests instead scrapping Regional Hub plans and widening I-5. Freeways should function with no more 3 lanes in both directions. I-5 through downtown Seattle has 4 lanes in both directions. Widening solves nothing. This is a New School theorem that Amused by Liberals flunkys cannot understand.
Posted by: Agravahnt on July 11, 2005 08:19 PMWhere I called you out for your imbecilic insult of Bush? My point was & is that the no-no-rail plan is half-assed and underfinanced, and the predictable result when you let liberals be in charge of anything.
Beyond that, if you want to build it, or ten of it, go ahead moron.
Your head-up-your-butt assertion regarding freeways shows your ignorance.
But please, don't let that stop you! Tell us another one....and make it a really big one this time!
Posted by: alphabet soup on July 12, 2005 11:31 AMPlacing more multiple use lanes on the Interstates will not help relieve traffic congestion? You are abused of liberal fantasies rather than practical realities. HOV lanes were originally designated with the rationale that it would somehow cause more people to carpool. Then it became a rationale for coercing people out of their cars and onto buses. By any rational measurement neither scheme has been successful in any measurable way. The vast majority of so-called carpoolers are people (families) who already “carpooled” as a matter of course. During each of the major daily commutes, each traffic corridor is gridlocked while the carpool lanes are light to moderate. If carpool lanes worked genius, why not make all lanes carpool? How utterly foolish can you get?
Adding lanes, so long as they are not multi-use helps but multi use lanes would not? Most Interstate bound buses are at a very low rider-ship and they are not gaining favor. The only way a regional hub system would ever work is if liberal socialists manage to force us out of our cars. In the meantime they expect to collect and spend huge tax dollars placing new traffic lanes that will only be used by buses. Creating a massive bus system for people who will not use buses is like building airports for pigs on the assumption that pigs will fly. That is unless the alternative rationale is that liberal planners intend to design ways to arbitrarily force people out of their cars. You call that intelligent economic planning? Move to France.
I recognize that liberals like to impose their fantasies on the rest of us, but that nevertheless doesn’t change the fact that they are fantasies. The so-called periodic “regional transportation studies” conducted by the state conspicuously ignore many important facts about transportation because they are biased towards one solution regardless of its huge drawbacks. The result is traffic congestion that will not go away without more open traffic lanes.
Aggravant, don’t be any more stupid than you are required to be by your liberal religion. Placing more multiple use lanes on the Interstates will certainly help relieve traffic congestion, and no sincere intelligent person would pretend otherwise. The underlying infrastructure of the proposed regional hub system belies tha fact tha liberals know it would. You notice that I said will certainly help, not would. You bozos are not going to be in charge much longer, and your obviously limited reasoning abilities are an indication of the reason why.
that traffic isn't really "happy" unless it is all close~n~cozy ;'}
Posted by: alphabet soup on July 12, 2005 11:58 AM