1) Part of the curious nature of this whole affair is how close this is to business as normal, implied political consequences being pretty common fare. It was the technicality of turning that into explicit, written (thus traceable) language that appears to have ultimately landed the State Labor Council in hot water.
That said, this isn't the first time state Democrats have ended up involved in a mess with strong implications of "pay to play." A kind reader sends along an article involving a deplorable solicitation in 2004 that raised enough overt ethical concerns for the P-I's editorial board to chastise their ideological brethren.
2) Heartache: Goldy comes close to saying Washington state Democrats are dead to him for their handling of the matter.
3) Speaking of Goldy, he and your truly are quoted in the P-I's tardy coverage on the matter. Yes, that organization's staff has had other things on their plate recently, but they just got around to covering the story well over 24 hours after almost every other online news outlet in the state was all over it.
More importantly, their eventual coverage relies on links to the Times & the TNT, plus aforementioned bloggers. Just more indication of the transformation in style of coverage about to take place in an online only P-I.
Yes, there will be some original reporting. But, one can also expect lots of aggregation, links, and reader driven content to fill things out.
Posted by Eric Earling at March 12, 2009 07:41 PM | Email ThisWhen did the Times get the e-mail?
Did they talk to Gregoire, Brown or Chopp BEFORE they published it??
I'd love to see the timeline on this.
Also, WHO is the mystery person who ratted out Bender? That person better watch their back.
Bender is vicious.
This SHOULD only be the beginning of this story.
Do any of you really believe this is the first time Pay-To-Play has been played by the Unions in Washington??
It was the 1st time they were stupid enough to put it in writing in an e-mail to someone with a conscience!!
Keep on it Eric.
There should be an investigation not only on this incident...put a thorough investigation of PAST Union practices as well.
Get a subpeona!!
Get their computers!!
The truth shall set us free.
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on March 12, 2009 08:16 PMAs has been said, this really does read like politics as usual. I can't imagine a Times reporter reading that email and going, "My God! This is a scandal that will rock Olympia!"
Posted by: Ryan on March 12, 2009 08:35 PMIt seems like you are saying that Gregoire, Brown & Chopp's actions somehow caused the Times to seek out the e-mail. Giving them (The Times) a lot of credit, aren't you? I don't buy it.
Perhaps the Times can address this controversy for us?? Don't hold your breath Ryan.
My understanding is that they took action prior to the Times tracking down the email. That latter step seems to have occurred after Gregoire, Chopp, & Brown announced they were shutting down the bill for legal reasons. That happened 1st thing in the morning, the Times didn't have the email online until late in the afternoon.
Posted by: Eric Earling on March 12, 2009 09:56 PMKeep digging Eric. This is important. I think Inside Olympia has it right in general...they KNEW it was outside of their small circle.
We need to prove that.
I'm speculating that they also knew the Times had it....hopefully the Times will set the record straight on precisely WHEN they received this e-mail. Why wouldn't they??? If the Times had gone to Gregoire, Brown & Chopp much earlier allowing them to seek political cover....inadvertently or on purpose.
When did the Times receive the e-mail or information related to the e-mail??
I'm not asking for their source...just when.
Readers have a right to know.
You must have missed the dozens of ads last campaign linking Gregoire to the tribe payoffs. It doesn't get much more blatant pay to play than that, and the voters still ignored it in the Obama malaise.
Posted by: Palouse on March 13, 2009 10:06 AMhttp://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/edcetera/2009/03/12/a_hole_in_state_pensions.html
Please read this and get educated!!
It makes the $8.3 BILLION Budget Deficit pale in comparison.
Sure. Whatever you say.
Labor just lost one of its top priorities for the session because a certain union goon lobbyist crossed the line. But it's much ado about nothing.
Posted by: jimg on March 14, 2009 09:05 AMHey, be more polite, these aren't cockroaches, they are people!!!
That said, I'm no longer the big defender of unions that I once was--or at least not all unions.
I remember getting a job here as a temp laborer for the city back in 1979. I soon got a letter addressed to me from my new union. I opened it with pride.
You have to understand, I was raised almost as a red-carriage baby (my mom never joined, just sympathized) and I was full of romanticism about the just struggles of the workers led by the unions in the thirties and before.
(And by the way, I haven't revised all of those views. I don't believe striking steel mill workers in Pennsylvania deserved bullets in the head from private goons while the gov't looked on approvingly in the Homestead strike, for instance.)
So you can imagine my surprise when I opened the letter from my new union. I was expecting to be welcomed with pride, invited to a meeting to meet my co-workers, told about a proud history etc.etc.
Instead the letter, which I wish I had kept but didn't so I can only quote the jist of it from memory, went something like this:
We know you've been hired. You now owe us dues. This is codified in law. Sign this letter so we can have the dues taken from your wages. If you don't, we will have you fired in no time and we will be really motivated about doing this, and we're extremely capable of doing it and have taken such measures successfully in the past.
I don't remember how they signed off, but they might have been so kind as to use the word "Sincerely."
It was one of the little steps on the road to my becoming a New Left Conservative.
Best all,
New Left Conservative # 1
