In an article at Crosscut discussing Greg Nickels' declining odds for running for statewide office (when were they ever much above zero to begin with?), Knute Berger asks this:
If Seattle, with all the advantages (save the ball and chain of rural Washington), can't make itself happy, why is that? With Democrats in full control of the city, much of Pugetopolis, both houses of the Legislature, most statewide elected offices, the governor's mansion, six of nine congressional seats, and both U.S. Senate seats, why are Seattle and Puget Sound having so much trouble? Are urban problems really so intractable that they defy every level of state and local political leadership? Is it really an issue of government structure? Are the problems of Pugetopolis the fault of wheat ranchers and whistlepunks? Or, just maybe, is our leadership problem a problem with our actual leaders?
Yep. And Puget Sound area voters have only one obvious option on their ballot to shake-up that status quo establishment. His name is Dino Rossi. You might have heard of him.
Posted by Eric Earling at May 07, 2008 09:33 PM | Email ThisIt's OK if the fruitcakes of Seattle get stiffed for stadiums whose owners rake in the sports dough, and light rail whose unions fork over some of their construction takings to Nichols & Co. in hopes of more projects. But those who work for a living in Forks or Walla Walla won't take kindly to pungling up for some bloated caricature of a politician's monument to himself, way off in some other corner of the state.
Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on May 7, 2008 10:09 PMCompetition produces a better product and that is true in politics as well.
Posted by: WVH on May 7, 2008 10:10 PM1.LONG ISLAND OPINION; THE REAL THREAT: ONE-PARTY RULE
Published: June 28, 1987
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0DE6DC103BF93BA15755C0A961948260
2. Ohio is an example of republican corruption:
"....Take Ohio. Republicans have practiced one-party rule in the state since 1994--more than enough time to lose one's principles. Former Gov. George Voinovich set the standard in 1992 by breaking his word and signing tax hikes. His successor, Bob Taft, with the help of the GOP legislature, in 2003 broke pledges not to raise taxes without voter permission. Some $3 billion in tax increases later, Ohio jumped to fourth place in the rankings for state and local tax burdens. (It was 23rd in 1994, when the GOP took over.) Over their first 10 years in power, Republicans increased Ohio's general operating budget by 71%--the highest increase in the nation.
The Taft and Spend strategy socked it to the Ohio economy. Its gross state product grew a measly 1% between 2004 and 2005, while Ohio lost 150,000 jobs between 2000 and 2005. Unemployment levels have hovered above the national average. If corruption is the product of big, unconstrained government, it was no surprise to watch the GOP engulfed by scandals that swept up everyone from Mr. Taft to Congressman Bob Ney. By November of last year, Mr. Taft's approval rating was 6.5%; if anyone had been keeping track, the legislature may have scored even lower.
Mr. Blackwell didn't sign onto any of this. While the rest of his party was riding down the big-government river, the secretary of state was pushing a voter initiative to create a constitutional limit on spending. He's been running this year on tax cuts, charter schools and privatizing the Ohio Turnpike. He hasn't been touched by the scandals...."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/10/florida_vs_ohio_a_tale_of_two.html
Power corrupt and absolute power correupts absolutely, no matter the party or ideology.
I agree that one-party rule is inefficient and undesirable. The difference between your Ohio example and Washington's present situation, though, is that in Ohio, the Republican's have drifted from their platform of smaller government, while the Democrats in Washington, especially Seattle, are largely sticking to their party platform. So ideology DOES matter. It's just that competition keeps it focused.
Posted by: CM on May 8, 2008 06:07 AMUnfortunately, the peasants seem to be quite content in their malaise so why bother to change it?
Even though the two parties supposedly stand for certain values, neither side has produced many politicians that are remotely true to those values.
Posted by: russell garrard on May 8, 2008 07:21 AM1. Republicans control the House with a substantial majority. That way, we can hopefully control spending and taxes. (But we still need to wind-down the Iraq mess.)
2. Democrats control the Senate with a substantial majority. That way, maybe we'll stop with the crazy foreign adventures.
3. A weak president from either party.
Those 3 steps are the recipe for a perfet US government: one that doesn't tax too much, spend too much, get involved in foreign adventures, or have president looking for a fight.
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on May 8, 2008 07:50 AMYeah, that really worked for us prior to entering WW2 didn't it?
Happy VE (Victory in Europe to the uninformed) day by the way.
Posted by: Rick D. on May 8, 2008 08:23 AMReally? That must come as welcome news to this Ohio Democrat
Ohio's attorney general faces impeachment
Risking impeachment, Ohio's attorney general Monday refused demands from the governor and other fellow Democrats that he resign over a sexual-harassment scandal in his office and an affair with a subordinate.
Gov. Ted Strickland said Democrats will begin drafting an impeachment resolution against Attorney General Marc Dann right away. Republican House Speaker Jon Husted said Monday his chamber - which takes the first step in any impeachment - was already reviewing the process.
A sexual-harassment investigation uncovered an atmosphere in Dann's office rife with inappropriate staff-subordinate relationships, heavy drinking, and harassing and threatening behavior by a supervisor. On Friday, Dann admitted to an extramarital affair.
Posted by: jimg on May 8, 2008 09:06 AMAll of your people run this state. So let's DO ask---where's the beef??
Posted by: Michele on May 8, 2008 09:55 AMDemocrats set the bar so low (McDermott, Jefferson) that it is simply impossible for their adherents to apply the same standards to themselves that they apply to Republicans. Thus, WVH's all-too-typical inability to be introspective while failing to acknowledge democrat corruption... as if it didn't exist.
Posted by: Hinton on May 8, 2008 11:11 AMHe and the Gov. have backed Obama from the beginning. If BO gets the nod, watch for Hizonner to head up Global Warming intitatives in DC.
Ironic too this is the same Mayor that did away with the climate group at Seattle and the very next year became a global warming expert when he fell into the Kyoto role.
For all his faults, he is the luckiest SOB, in politics.
Posted by: tg on May 8, 2008 12:55 PMSince one-party rule is a big problem, I'll expect you to voting for Rossi in November. Ooops, you're really voting (D) again? Shaddup.
Posted by: FreedomLover on May 8, 2008 01:45 PMYou are clueless as usual. I vote for the best candidate regardless of party. My vote goes to Governor Gregoire. You have no clue what my views are other than I don't drink the koolaide like you and while I find Ms. Rand interesting, she is not my goddess.
Posted by: WVH on May 8, 2008 05:03 PMThis is from an interesting paper by Walden about how Ms. Rand, that very, very, very interesting lady liked to label those who did not drink the Rand Koolaide:
"....In addition to using personal invective against their opponents, Rand and her followers frequently resort to accusing them of many views to which they clearly do not subscribe. Then these objectivist writers enthusiastically proceed to knock down the strawmen they have constructedwhile deluding themselves that they have actually demolished their opponents' views...."
[PDF] Chapter 9 Ayn Rand's Intolerance of Opposing PhilosophiesFile Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat www.walden3.org/Chapter%209.pdf -
Your moniker is "freedomlover."
A true "freedomlover" would interested in and capable of debate and discussion would not utter comments like:
" Shaddup.
Posted by FreedomLover at May 8, 2008 01:45 PM"
Oh, wait, I am referring to a Rand clone, they are too bereft of intellectual wattage, so they have to BAN people, label, or attack under anonymous monikers.
MEMO TO: Senator Rossi
SUBJECT: Better class of supporters
Getting a better class of supporters should be a primary objective.
Posted by: WVH on May 8, 2008 09:08 PMThey all chant the party line on Global Warming and environmental issues. They all have the same garbage fetish and want you to paw through your trash seperating it into ever finer classifications. They think they are your nanny and constantly fret about your health even to the point of telling restaurants what sort of cooking oil to use. They worry that women's purses and children's backpacks are too heavy. They nag, nag, nag you about leaving your politically incorrect car behind and taking public transportation. Etc., etc. ad infinitum, ad nauseam.
In short these politicians haven't an independent thought in their empty skulls. Nickels is a prime example.
Posted by: Bill K. on May 8, 2008 09:14 PMI stand by what I said: a divided government is best in the current environment and going forward. The Democrats and Republicans are both bad for the country, so inaction from government is actually better than either party's agenda.
A weak divided government can do less harm.
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on May 9, 2008 03:16 AMGawd I love it when people mis-use a cliche'. To "drink kool aid" means to follow the status quo, to do as everyone else does. So using that do describe Rossi voters is really incorrect, considering the servers of the Kool Aid in this state are Gregoire, Nichols, the entire legislature, and most of the county seat holders in King, Pierce, Thurston, and Snohomish counties. Drink up WVH!
Posted by: Scott on May 9, 2008 03:06 PM