Well, daily for this week at least.
Joel Connelly lays into Christine Gregoire something fierce in his column today, along with his usual dose of BIAW bashing. The bigger issue with Connelly's lament is our campaign finance laws that end up funneling special interest resources into other entities rather than allowing them to flow with greater size and transparency into the coffers of the actual candidates.
Connelly is correct to be appalled at the Governor's claim of know nothingness about the campaign contributions:
Gregoire claimed that she knew of no contributions to her re-election campaign by casino-owning tribes beyond the legally permissible limit of $3,200.Huh? We are to believe the governor knows nothing -- nothing -- of any connection between the $600,000 that tribes have given the state Democratic Party, and the $511,000 that the party has contributed to her campaign in the past two months.
She would apparently be equally ignorant of a just-formed Democratic front called Evergreen Progress, which has received $250,000 from the Democratic Governors Association and $495,000 from the Service Employees International Union.
Whatever the merits of the issue, her response doesn't pass the smell test. I'll actually give her a pass on the PAC, candidates don't actually know about those in many respects beyond what they might read in the paper (if they even have the time). Claiming similar ignorance about contributions to the state party when one's own race is the premier campaign of the election year is much, much, much harder to believe.
More importantly, it seems clear this issue isn't going away. This blogger caught John Carlson & Ken Schram hashing out the topic with state Democratic talker Kelly Steele on the radio yesterday. Steele actually did an admirable, stand-up job of playing a forced, high stakes game of poker with a pretty weak hand. Ultimately, however, he was still stuck holding a small pocket pair in the face of a set of aces and a flush. Translation: the end wasn't pretty.
The ultimate question, which Steele couldn't answer was this: the Governor nixed a deal that included a large increase in gambling and significant revenue sharing. What the state got instead was a still substantial increase in gambling with no revenue sharing. Why couldn't the deal have been a modest increase in gambling with a modest level of revenue sharing?
Steele, working off the best talking points he had, tried to explain it all away, but it doesn't wash. Out of 23 states in the tribal gambling business, Washington is somehow, miraculously, the only one that doesn't have revenue sharing to benefit the state itself. The Democratic response sounds like the sum of their excuses on a host of other issues at the state level, ranging from transportation, to public safety, to education, to state spending: "It's too difficult because..."
That's not leadership. Aside from the ugly ethical optics of this issue, at its core the policy topic at hand comes down to a state not being able to figure out a better solution, even when common sense dictates otherwise. It's a recurring theme with state government, and why Dino Rossi has the chance he does this November.
Posted by Eric Earling at June 18, 2008 08:19 AM | Email ThisIt's disheartening to see the Repbuclicans bash Gregoire here for the same stuff that the Democrats bash Rossi for on HA.
By doing so, it makes it worse for both sides---further dividing the people that both sides serve.
Sad, really.
Posted by: However on June 18, 2008 08:42 AMWhy should she care when even Stephan doesn't care.
Posted by: Don on June 18, 2008 08:42 AMIt seems Kelly Steele is justifying the compact for Gregoire by saying that the compact slowly increased the size of gambling in the State while the tribes wanted a whole lot of gambling. So, Kelly says, Gregoire, in essence, stood up against the tribes and signed a miniscule increase package.
In the heat of the moment, Carlson couldn't come up with the "other shoe"- if the compact is not so good and one the tribes didn't like, why are they donating so much money now to Gregoire who stared down the tribes (according to Kelly Steele) and forced them to take an unsatisfactory deal?
Sorry, Kelly, it doesn't pass the sanity test.
Posted by: swatter on June 18, 2008 08:58 AMBIAW has not and will not get a mega-bucks payoff like the Tribes ended up with on their gambling operations; while we the taxpayers got the shaft from the current Gov.
And for ANYBODY in high state government office to claim that they have ''held back'' increases in gambing is chutzpah in the extremem, given WA's wholesale jump into the state lottery, instant payoff games, etcetera.
Posted by: Methow Ken on June 18, 2008 09:11 AMWhat's the difference between a governor working for the SEIU and the Tribes and one working for the BIAW and the Developers?
An honest person would say there is no substantive difference! Just the flavor of the owners/elected changes...but in essence bought and paid for on either side.
Posted by: However on June 18, 2008 09:20 AMI look at the BIAW as the common sensers as compared to the ivory towner of the Democrats in this State.
So, if there is no difference in good jobs versus tribal gambling and other foreign entity bennies, then However, you lost me.
Posted by: swatter on June 18, 2008 09:32 AMOne spawns people who expect government and companies to be their nanny. The other spawns people that can actually think and operate independently. Compare the areas hit by Katrina, and flooding in the midwest.
Posted by: Al on June 18, 2008 09:34 AM"if the compact is not so good and one the tribes didn't like, why are they donating so much money now to Gregoire who stared down the tribes (according to Kelly Steele) and forced them to take an unsatisfactory deal?"
--
Tell me, Swatter, what have the Republicans ever done for the tribes that the tribes should support them?
--
Swatter @ 10 says:
"The BIAW represents laborers, carpenters, electricians and several other trades besides the developers in the private sector in this State."
--
BWAHAAAHAAAHAAA! That's the laugh of the day. Suppose you ask those laborers, carpenters, electricians, and the "several other trades" who represents them.
Bring your A game man, and don't try to pawn off your lousy rhetoric as being from a real tribe member.
Posted by: swatter on June 18, 2008 10:30 AMThe money came from about a dozen tribes that benefited when, in 2005, Gregoire killed a gambling compact potentially worth more than $140 million a year to the state. The bulk of the tribal campaign contributions came from tribes opposed to that original compact, including the Swinomish and Tulalips.
Gregoire's spokesman, Pearse Edwards, said the governor backed away from the 2005 agreement that included revenue sharing with the state in an attempt to keep gambling from expanding too quickly and after listening to concerns from a wide range of groups, including other tribes.
And your evidence that Rossi would give away the farm to the BIAW is what? Until you provide something of substance, your rhetoric means as much as NativeSon's.
where have the R's been?
Since the governor negotiates these pacts, and there hasn't been a Republican governor since Spellman in the early 80's when gambling in this state wasn't prevalent, I'm not sure what your point is, if you have one.
Posted by: Palouse on June 18, 2008 10:54 AMThe evidence is in his voting record during his tenure as State Senator. From the Seattle Weekly (October 13, 2004): "The BIAW says Rossi backed its legislation an astounding 99 percent of the time in his seven years in the state Senate."
Now that you have evidence, I presume you'll agree that both sides have special interest groups that influence elected politicians. And the republicans are just as guilty of this as the democrats. At all levels.
Only partisan democrats and republicans who sacrifice the truth for their political objectives (e.g. folks here and on HA) refuse to admit it. They claim it's the other side only. Hah. It's both.
Posted by: However on June 18, 2008 11:07 AMNope, didn't miss anything. 1 compact was being negotiated. 26 previous ones had no revenue sharing. Now 27 don't. Looks like status quo, not quid pro quo.
Posted by: jtolympia on June 18, 2008 11:23 AMExcept for that pesky $600,000 to the ruling party AND the pesky $511,000 to the queen... nah I can't even imagine quid pro quo. [/sarcasm]
The queen and her flying monkeys are looking more like distanr relatives of Huey Long and Richard Daly.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on June 18, 2008 11:51 AMAnd even usual conservative, Palouse, lets the anti-BIAW rhetoric get to him.
It is too bad that some can't see the difference between a sovereign nation doing lobbying and providing payback, and a special interest that wants clean government.
Posted by: swatter on June 18, 2008 12:17 PM1 compact was being negotiated. 26 previous ones had no revenue sharing.
Yeah, except that one had revenue sharing, alot of it. And she gave it up in exchange for campaign donations. Quid. Pro. Quo.
And if those previous ones had no revenue sharing in it, then that just furthers the proof of incompetence and/or political payoffs to tribes by those previous Democrats.
Posted by: Palouse on June 18, 2008 12:24 PMAdmit it..you like yoiur special interests dictating results and you don't like theirs. That's the first step. Then your opinions would have much more value.
It's ok to like BIAW's positions...just be honest with the fact they are as much a special interest/legislation writing (have you seen their hordes of lobbyists in Olympia??? what on earth do you think they are doing there)..... as the SEIU are. It's all the same. IT's just you like one's positions and not the other.
Posted by: However on June 18, 2008 12:28 PMIt was a give away, no matter what she and her minions call it.
Posted by: Clean House on June 18, 2008 12:31 PMIt was a give away, no matter what she and her minions call it.
Posted by: Clean House on June 18, 2008 12:32 PMIn 2005, John (You scratch my back and I will scratch yours) Ladenburg renegotiated the pack so the tribe could move to a new in Fife along I-5 (Which is what the Tribe wanted). This gave the tribe THREE locations, (the tribe promised to close one location) which broke RCW & WAC rule as well as Treaty it's self. As part of this deal, we gave the tribe what they wanted, a prime location, and The City of Tacoma, Pierce County and the Port of Tacoma pitched in and paid for the LOSS of all revenue and the move to the new location. The tribe said it would be minimal cost, as best anyone can guess taxpayers have shelled out 2 to 3 mil. Not only that, the tribe failed to close their third Casino / Bingo Hall for 18 months...
Please, will somebody set up and help me expose Gov, Gergforhire, and Sen. Prentice with their control of the Gaming Commission...they have what can only be called a slush fund set up by the Gaming Commission Director, for "EMERGENCY" use by the Gov. & Sen. Prentice!!!
Posted by: Pacific Grove Phlash on June 18, 2008 12:34 PMUntil you do, I'll ignore your "everyone else does it too" arguments.
Posted by: Palouse on June 18, 2008 12:36 PMYesterday someone asked, "Who are these people?" The "Mission" Tribe in So. California at the time they became a recognized tribe by the U.S. Gov., there were only 12 (Endangered Tribe) members in the tribe. Most were in prison, members of a well-known street gang.
What a load of crap. Any politician that claims they need to protect us from "evil gambling" expansion is full of it. Same excuse they gave for criminalizing online poker. If that was true, there would be no gambling in this state at all - no tribal casinos, scratch tickets, pull tabs, race tracks, lotto, nothing.
Posted by: Palouse on June 18, 2008 02:45 PM
You ask me for evidence. I provide it. You then say since I didn't list enough specifics, you will ignore me. Here, I'll list the spcifric leglisation (and even though BIAW/Rossi supported them, does NOT mean they became law). After this, you are free to ask me more questions -- but doing so, you just show that you have a warped sense of Rossi being that unique politician that isn't shaped and influenced by special interests....like all other Dems and Reps. You can feel that way. Doing so, shows your blind ignorance that is so common among partisans, from both sides of the aisle.
All that said, here are some bills and measures. Either face reality, or go on in your fantasy world:
SB5 372
SB 6718
Referendum 48
The other bills you'll need to provide a legislative session in which they were proposed. SB 6718 comes up as a document fee bill, nothing to do with BIAW or Rossi or giveaways.
I'll await your response. And if you have an original thought as to why each of those examples are actually BIAW giveaways, on par or anywhere close to this tribe giveaway, please feel free to include that, if you can.
Posted by: Palouse on June 18, 2008 02:56 PMYou'll need to do better than that.
Posted by: Palouse on June 18, 2008 03:08 PMso now we see clearly how disingenuous Rats are....not wanting to hurt their gambling Indian contributors even if it meant big money for the state coffers, yet enabling the Indian casinos to not only be the only people allowed to have gambling but to not have to pay any tax revenue on it...
preposterous....obscene.....
Demoncrats are the most phoney baloney money grabbing, power swindling party ......
I hope Idaho allows Coeur Da lene to establish gambling at the resort......somebody has to put an end to this unlawful monopoly by the Indian casino mob and their RAt cohorts.
Posted by: lee on June 18, 2008 03:25 PMSort of on this subject. does snyone else remember during the initiative a couple of years ago to allow non-tribal gambling. Tne tribes made a pretty effective commercial showing kids looking in the window at people gambling with a caption or message that you just don't want this in your neighborhood. You don't want to expose your kids to it.
I thought the message odd, because in a way they were pretty much saying that they didn't mind exposing their own kids to it. Just a thought.
WHAT???
Posted by: Dan the Man in Diego on June 18, 2008 04:04 PMIt was I - 892 that the tribes spent a little over $6.2 mil., and another $3.3 mil. to the Stop Smoking I-850 along with other Stop Smoking efforts.
Who do you work for, Baby?
And does it work for you lately?
This is the impetus I needed to donate to Dino.
Posted by: T.J. on June 18, 2008 07:10 PMGregoire knows nothing about Lisa Brown challenging a pair of initiatives that say tax increases need to get supermajority approval from the Washington legislature.
Yeh... Right
Amazing, she is more than willing to tax the crap out of us, while giving a 140 Million tax holiday to the Indians.
Talk about a monopoly that could more than afford to put some $$$ int state pockets...
Gregoire knows nothing about anything that feeds her massive tax machine.....
Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil
That's the Gregoire Machine!
Posted by: GS on June 18, 2008 08:50 PMIf Dino Rossi got in office with BIAW's help and then gave them a complete tax exemption worth $140 million and then next election the BIAW laundered $600,000 to the WSRP who then gave most of it back to Dino, THAT would be like what this situation is.
And to answer your question, NO, Republicans DO NOT DO THAT. :)
Posted by: AD on June 18, 2008 10:25 PMwhen was the last touted "we contribute to the community" project they built for non-tribes? state of art kids hospital? hi-tech research park? sewer plant? charter or other innovative school?
in this liberal death taxes, "excess profits tax" and "share the wealth"-oriented mindset state, it's funny the tribes are never expected to pony-up for the "common good;" why? good for goose, good for gander;
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on June 19, 2008 06:24 AMhttp://washingtonvotes.org/2006-SB-6613
One tribe, the Swinomish in Skagit County, are pumping about 800,000 gallons per month. Their monthly subsidy from the state amounts to $216,000! Yeah, thats right, the state is paying our tribes 27 cents per gallon to pump gas!
George Bush is arguably the worst president this country has ever had. Christine Gregoire occupies the same claim to fame in WA State. The difference is that Bush is only incompetent not dishonest. Gregoire is both!
Posted by: Nonpartisan on June 20, 2008 05:20 PMOne tribe, the Swinomish in Skagit County, are pumping about 800,000 gallons per month. Their monthly subsidy from the state amounts to $216,000! Yeah, thats right, the state is paying our tribes 27 cents per gallon to pump gas!
George Bush is arguably the worst president this country has ever had. Christine Gregoire occupies the same claim to fame in WA State. The difference is that Bush is only incompetent not dishonest. Gregoire is both!
Posted by: Nonpartisan on June 20, 2008 05:23 PM