Like her Democratic colleagues in the House, Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen (D-10) -- chair of the Transportation Committee -- refused to put any money for much-needed safety improvements for U.S. 2 into the budget. Haugen earmarked $95 million for her own district, including $82 million for Highway 532 (which leads from I-5, through Stanwood, to her home on Camano Island) and $13 million ($10 million more than the House and governor requested) for an Amtrak station (also in Stanwood).
Sen. Val Stevens (R-39) proposed an amendment to divert the $13 million for the Amtrak station to road widening on U.S. 2. Haugen, of course, led Democrats to vote it down.
I live right off 532. I know it needs improvements, and I welcome them. But I also know that U.S. 2 sees more traffic and more death and therefore is obviously more important. Just one month ago, Haugen seemed to agree, saying "safety must be the highest priority of our state transportation system."
Speaking of projects to improve U.S. 2, specifically, she said, "Everyone, including me, is in favor of getting these projects done. The catch is that no one I have spoken to can provide me with a realistic source for the $2 billion it would take to fund all of these projects at once. Until someone does, we'll have to prioritize how we allocate our limited transportation dollars between these projects, and similar projects all over the state."
By "between these projects, and similar projects all over the state," Haugen apparently meant "not any of these projects, but instead, nearly $100 million for transportation near my home."
She concluded: "I feel the frustration along with everyone else who gets stuck in traffic. My commute from Camano Island to Olympia during the legislative session takes me through some of the most congested miles of highway in our state -- in Everett, Seattle and Tacoma. I get stuck in traffic just like everyone else, and agree that we need to work toward reducing congestion on our highways -- but not at the risk of sacrificing safety."
Unfortunately, reducing congrestion at the risk of sacrificing safety is precisely what Haugen is doing.
Cross-posted on <pudge/*>.
Posted by pudge at February 27, 2008 10:31 PM | Email ThisIf "safety" meant anything to her and the democrats, the Alaska Way Viaduct would have been finished by now. After all the more rabid of the gas tax supporters (like Haugen) kept telling us how unsafe the viaduct is... and the world as we know would end if the gas tax didn't pass to replace it.
Well, safety doesn't mean didily to her and the rest of the left. After all, as I've pointed out, what's a little blood spilled in comparison to "more important" projects like 520, even though more blood, more often is spilled on 2?
2 has the unfortunate problem of not running thru King County. We'll all be dead before the problems killing us on 2 are addressed.
Posted by: Hinton on February 27, 2008 11:48 PMThere are a lot of people who like to say nice, pleasant things like, "Well, we may belong to different political parties, but we all want what's best for America." It's little political vignettes like the ones above that cause me to simply dismiss the possibility of any measurable cognitive abilities of oxygen-wasting imbeciles who make statements like that.
Why target a Stanwood project and not a project in Issaquah of Chehalis? I think that Stanwood rail project is also a safety project when it comes down to it.
Partisan haymaking over Highway 2 will not make the highway more safe. It will turn the highway into a political football.
There is virtually no way that the GOP will recpature control of the state Senate in 2008. So what happens in 2009 to transportation if Haugen loses?
It is obvious. A Senator from Spokane takes charge of transportation. Spokane has its own priorities. They do not include Highway 2 or ferries on Puget Sound.
If I were really interested in fixing Highway 2, I'd be concerned about that.
Posted by: redflag on February 28, 2008 07:15 AMSo, now that it is a football, how are you proposing to depoliticize it?
It is better politicized, in my opinion, than on the backburner in the legislature. My word, I know the R legislators have been trying to get the word out that this is a bad highway. By politicizing it, it now has a chance.
I am afraid you think that bodes poorly for the Ds in that district.
flag, how about getting the King County council on board for the real dangerous road between Sultan and Skykomish? Skykomish is in King County.
Posted by: swatter on February 28, 2008 07:30 AMNo. Haugen is the one who has made this a political issue, as swatter points out. She is the one who is the chair of the Transportation Committee. It is not about targetting her (as far as I know, there's no one running against her), it is about pointing out that she, leading the Democrats, is lying to the public and failing to do a damned thing to try to save some lives over there.
Why Hobbs jumped into the fray is one of life's great mysteries.
No, it's not: he is in the 44th and his constituents use U.S. 2 about as much as the 39th does.
I think that Stanwood rail project is also a safety project when it comes down to it.
Nope. That would be dishonest: by that standard, EVERY congestion project is a safety project, but Haugen explicitly drew a line between the two.
Partisan haymaking over Highway 2 will not make the highway more safe. It will turn the highway into a political football.
Shrug. The Democrats can make the issue go away. All they have to do is -- duh -- fund safety fixes for U.S. 2.
So what happens in 2009 to transportation if Haugen loses? ... A Senator from Spokane takes charge of transportation. Spokane has its own priorities. They do not include Highway 2 or ferries on Puget Sound. If I were really interested in fixing Highway 2, I'd be concerned about that.
Please. We are not idiots; don't treat us like idiots. Even if the goal was to beat Haugen, HAUGEN'S priorities do not include U.S. 2; so how would this be any worse for those of us who want U.S. 2 fixed?
In order for this argument to have any validity whatsoever, Haugen would have to show SOME interest in getting U.S. 2 fixed. Apart from writing guest commentaries giving lip service to the issue, she has never done so.
redflag, you are doing everything you can to avoid the obvious: Haugen could simply follow through on HER WORD and fund safety improvements for U.S. 2. That would make all this go away. And a good place to start is the nearly $100 million she earmarked for obviously less important -- by her own stated standards -- projects in her own district.
Posted by: pudge on February 28, 2008 08:34 AMThe worst thing would be for Sound Transit to be expanded into a superagency next year with power to spend - or not spend - money on roads. The entrenched culture there hates roads. Even more Snohomish County money would end up getting poured into King County light rail.
Posted by: mulch on February 28, 2008 09:21 AMWhat's that I hear coming out of Olympia?: Let them eat cake.
Posted by: G Jiggy on February 28, 2008 10:34 AMThe new I-5 parts are great. I think whatever widening job they did helped a lot.
The real problem is still the intersections. 169 becomes a nightmare, BUT only because it can't feed traffic fast enough to 405.
405 is a real tragedy. Instead of a new 520 bridge, they could spend 1/5th the money for an extra lane in either direction (or two lanes). That alone would draw enough traffic away from the bridges to make 520 unnecessary.
Same with the I-90. In the little space on the Northbound I-5 between the 90 on ramp and the 90 off ramp, the traffic whizzes by! It's all the stupid kludges, impossible exits (how are you supposed to get from the left lane to Olive ?!) and "express lanes" that screw it up!
We need a double decker express lane, open all the time, in either direction, that completely by passes Seattle downtown. The express lanes should start way before Seattle, not near Seneca...by then it's too late!
Seattle downtown is completely overbuilt. It should decentralize itself to the same level as Bellevue, Renton, Lynwood. There is no need to pump that many people in and out of downtown, and for those who just want to get past it, we need express lanes.
The people in Olympia need to work with reality and not create 2B starter projects like the 520 that we all know will bloom into 20B and more.
The only thing that matters is preserving entrenched Democrat power, and abusing the legislature for local pork and even personal interests.
As long as citizens continue to vote Democrat in majority, they get what they deserve. More congestion, bankruptcy of the government, more unions, higher taxes, higher prices, more wetlands nuisance regulations, useless mass transit folly, plastic bag bogeymen, carbon trading schemes, etc.
Eventually, it will get bad enough for change, until then, just sit back and watch as Progressocrats destroy the state.
Posted by: Jeff B. on February 28, 2008 11:27 AMYup. And both Sen. Haugen and even the Governor have come out here to get him on TV in preparation for his campaign. But actually help fix anything? Of course not. Because that would take away their top candidate's top issue.
Instead, they must maintain the illusion that our local GOP team isn't effective and that a Democrat in the seat would be able to deliver.
So this has a lot to do with Senator Haugen, but even MORE to do with partisan politics.
And seeing US2 become a political football is exactly what I want to see happen. In any contest, it's the ball that is the focus of all our attention.
Posted by: Chad Minnick on February 28, 2008 12:26 PMIf we can get it fixed by playing "football," that's fine by me, as long as we are honest about the facts, as long as we follow through on our word, and so on. And as you say: it is the Democrats who started this game in the first place, by accusing the Republicans for U.S. 2 not getting fixed, even though the Democrats are the ones who have been stonewalling it.
I don't even care if the Democrats cave to pressure and finally fix U.S. 2. My goal is to fix the problems. If we can do that as a minority by putting pressure on the majority, I am happy with that. Unfortunately, for the Democrats, it doesn't appear as though they are willing to fix problems to preserve their seats.
Posted by: pudge on February 28, 2008 12:33 PMThe county seat is sparsely populated Hilo on the east coast. The population and resorts are concentrated on the west coast of the Island. County officials have blocked funding for road improvements for years. Their corruption is mind boggling. Of course, those responsible are Democrats, who have ruled at all levels of government, local, county and state, for 70+ years.
Indeed, power does corrupt. Some of our most powerful legislators are abusing their power for their own benefit rather than to protect the public.
Posted by: Paddy on February 28, 2008 12:39 PMAnybody else in Wahsington may as well not exist.
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on February 28, 2008 02:01 PMI would also argue that those legislators who budget in-district pork over life-saving highway improvements are choosing political interests over life.
Why aren't we calling them killers? If you watch a person die while you have the ability to help, are you not culpable for their death?
Posted by: Chad Minnick on February 28, 2008 02:29 PMFirst, this is the 3rd time that highway 532 will have been worked on in the same stretch of the highway over the last 6 years. First it was on the island, then the road through Stanwood and last summer the road leading to Stanwood.
The difference now is a new bridge being built to replace the only bridge going onto the island. And here's a familiar catch... Although they are widening the highway and expecting more growth on the island, the bridge is to remain as a 2-lane version that carries the same capacity as today.
Lastly, as for the Amtrak station, the train doesn't stop in Stanwood and when this proposal was brought forth over a year ago, Amtrak said that even if the station was built it still wouldn't stop there.
So here's your waste of money again.
Posted by: Ken on February 28, 2008 03:04 PMShe has to go, and I will donate to anyone that can retire her to a limited income on that island.
The reason they wouldn't put money into US 2 is because that area has continually voted against all their massive BS tax increases. So they think they are teaching them a lesson.
They'd rather hire 6600 new state workers to count all the new fees and taxes they are cramming down our throats than fix an emergency.
Posted by: GS on February 28, 2008 03:38 PM(Knock Knock) Honey Quick hide the 100 watt light bulbs, hide the 3rd and 4th kid. (We want to talk with you about your global warming reduction garden) (Knock Knock) Hide the bible! Mommy why does Isabel go into the closet? Johnny be quiet! (Knock Knock) (Ms. Jones we know you are home; this is the mandatory non travel day for the J through L's of this collective building and the utilities are active on this day for your flat as well.) (Knock Knock!!!!) Patty what do we tell them if they figure out from the garbage weight we have extra diapers? Jim just lie and tell them you dropped it in the sink and got it wet on accident. It worked when Isaac was little. Ok Ok ya ya....Isabel and Isaac quiet!!! The door Opens...and we have saved the planet!
Folks the coup is complete. You are better to die than to live if it means politics in Olympia.
So fire the whole ST board and lets go for a train ride folks!
Tie Duffman to the tracks! The state budget can handle an accident!
Posted by: GS on February 28, 2008 04:23 PMWow! What did I do to deserve THAT?
Posted by: Duffman on February 28, 2008 05:50 PM
Just Asking?
Don't do as I do, do as I say! Typical Olympia
I drive to Camano as I have had a place there for 30 years, and I have never ever been stuck in any dangerous or even moderately congested traffic getting to or off of Camano Island.
Who is an Amtrack stop in Stannwood going to service? Amtrack is not a commuter train.
Posted by: GS on February 28, 2008 10:12 PMWherever widening cannot be achieved and/or until it can be achieved I support lowering the speed limit. This can be done immediately and if enforced will save lives.
It will also move more traffic, as a road moves the maximum amount of cars at 45 mph so any speed you pick below the current speed limit (as long as it's not below 45) will increase the "throughput" of vehicles.
The DoT has an unholy alliance with the pavers, so they don't like to push this idea, not to mention it's unpopular with a lot of folks who like to drive fast--I bet some of them even post on Sound Politics!
Thanks all, new left conservative #1
Yep, I think that says it all.
Any word on if she has an opponent this time around?
Posted by: stewart_street on February 28, 2008 11:49 PMA slower speed limit isn't going to stop the tired driver or the new driver who really doesn't know how to drive yet from crossing over the lines.
It isn't going to stop drivers from crowding the centerlines when they go through the narrow bridges.
Good try.
Posted by: swatter on February 29, 2008 02:00 PMThe same accidents happen, but they don't kill.
Slower speeds exponentially decrease fatalities. Driving 10 mph over the speed limit compared to driving the speed limit is proportionally as dangerous as driving legally drunk as compared to driving sober. (The info comes from the book Traffic Safety by Leonard Evans). Speed Kills, and the DoT doesn't like to lower speed limits because they want to build political pressure to increase their revenue stream and spend massive amounts of money on huge concrete-laying projects that let us drive fast more-or-less safely.
Thanks all, new left conservative # 1