April 06, 2007
"Incompetence was the problem at the King County Elections Division"

I agree with Eric, go read Knute Berger's nice profile of Toby Nixon. Also note George Howland's comment asserting that the problem at King County Elections is "incompetence" (as opposed to, say, inevitable random errors that occur even in competently-run elections).

The incompetence at King County Elections is a result of the current governance structure, where nobody is really accountable for their performance. This is exactly why anybody who believes in elections should support I-25, the King County initiative to make the Elections Director a separately elected non-partisan office.

The best solution to incompetence in government is to take the responsibility away from the incompetents and give it to somebody else.

The most important thing YOU can do TODAY to improve competence in the elections office is make a donation to help get I-25 on the ballot.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at April 06, 2007 12:14 PM | Email This
Comments
1. i gotta think that between local seattle/washington politics and the general support for the shrub administration witnessed on this blog and in posts, most readers here are familiar with the term "incompetence" as it applies to a wide variety of govt. actions.

Posted by: dinesh on April 6, 2007 12:32 PM
2. I'd say it's even more fundamental.

Collectivism/ Progressivism / Marxism/ Socialism / Core Leftist Thinking is that no one is really accountable for anything. That's the whole philosophy in a nutshell. It fundamentally distrusts people as individuals capable of making their own choices. Instead, it seeks to be the ultimate Nanny for everything. It's no surprise that such a backwards philosophy would trickle down into every aspect of a large leftist county like King County. And it's gotten so bad, that it pervades every aspect of government, at every level, regardless of party.

For the left, Incompetence is not a problem, it's a virtue. And it pays many dividends to those who hold such a philosophy.

Posted by: Jeff B. on April 6, 2007 01:17 PM
3. jeff: you gotta a lotta nerve trying to suggest that incompetence only plagues 1 political party---either that, or a really big blind spot.

Posted by: dinesh on April 6, 2007 01:19 PM
4. dinesh, either your reading skills are incompetent, or you've got one big blind spot, because I wrote above:

And it's gotten so bad, that it pervades every aspect of government, at every level, regardless of party.

The problem is indeed not Democrats, it's the ideas of the 19th century German philosophers on which today's Progressive ideas and "incompetence worship" are based. All Democrats are not Progressives and/or adherents of the Extreme Left. But the ones who are, firmly support philosophies and ideas that promote incompetence and create classes and then pit them against each other.

Posted by: Jeff B. on April 6, 2007 03:55 PM
5. What Howland really said:

He seems to be against making the director of elections an elective office:

"Now Nixon is still trying to re-run the gubernatorial election of 2004 in the form of a terrible initiative that would make our auditor an elected position. Republicans have never gotten over their paranoia about Ron Sims' election department producing enough votes to secure victory for Gov. Christine Gregoire. From my examination of that election, incompetence was the problem at the King County Elections Division, **not conspiracy**. That incompetence will not be helped by politicizing the office of auditor further."

Posted by: chew2 on April 6, 2007 04:16 PM
6. Chew, congratulations, you figured out how to follow a link and copy-and-paste. What would we do without your value-added services?

Howland was correct to point out that King County Elections has a problem of incompetence. But what's the solution for incompetence? Howland didn't suggest one. But I think that any reasonable person would agree that more of the same incompetence will not lead to less incompetence.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on April 6, 2007 04:52 PM
7. Unfortunately, electing an elections director does not guarrentee a competent official. (Ask around to other counties and they will tell you that it can happen). It does mean that you have to wait four (or whatever is left of the term of office) years to get rid of the person. At least an appointed director can be fired on the spot. And you do elect the person who hires and can fire that person.

Posted by: Bob . on April 7, 2007 10:47 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?