July 11, 2012
Cheryl Pflug Looks Completely Nuts to Me
Long story short: Cheryl Pflug, Republican State Senator in WA, was bought off by Democrat governor Christine Gregoire: virtually the moment filing for office closed, Gregoire offered Pflug a cushy state job, and she accepted, leaving that previously safe seat up for grabs between Issaquah councilman and Mark Mullet (D), and businessman Brad Toft (R). She says she wasn't bought off, but literally everyone knows she was. How else to explain the timing?
Dino Rossi left that seat to run for governor in 2003, and Pflug was appointed to fill the vacant seat, then won election the next time around. So while he can't run on the ballot for the next term, Rossi was a good candidate to finish out the current term, so he was appointed to do so, and Toft (the only Republican in the race) is being backed to replace her this fall. Pflug blasted this for some reason ... but I can't figure out why. She says Rossi and the state party are playing Godfather. So, they shouldn't appoint someone to fill her vacant seat, using the same process that got her the same job from a vacancy by the same man? They shouldn't back the only Republican in the race?
Can anyone tell me what the heck she's talking about and how it makes any sense?
Posted by pudge at July 11, 2012
06:13 PM | Email This
It doesn't make sense. That's the thing.
Sometimes you just have to sit back and wonder.
She crossed party lines and voted for homosexual marriage, knew that she wouldn't be re-elected, and has recently endorsed the loon from Issaquah city council that fathered the recent city ordinance banning single-use plastic shopping bags.
If I ever see that woman in person, I'm going to thank her for dropping out of public service. She's a babbling train wreck that had one of the worst voting records last year. Good riddance.
3. Still don't really get why she's so upset about Dino filling his old seat again. Most republicans are thrilled about it! I was honored to be represented by him for 7 years.
Amazingly, I have to agree with Pudge on this one. Pflug should have taken the appointment to the hearings board prior to filing week, and never filed for re-election at all. To withdraw AFTER filing week was closed is disgraceful.
And then Pflug complains about the quality of the Republican candidate? Maybe Toft is too right-wing for the district, and mainly ran because Pflug voted for same-sex marriage. But if Pflug really wanted a more moderate Republican candidate, she shouldn't have filed again in the first place, and given someone else the opportunity to run for the position!
5. 'Can anyone tell me what the heck she's talking about and how it makes any sense?'
Have you tried asking her? Will she not respond to you. Who else would know exactly what's in her mind and why she says things. :)
6. Duffman, I dunno, she's had her chances to talk about it, and has been incomprehensible. She has the ear of the media if she wants to further explain herself. And now she's going to be a state official. Yay for our state.
I have some issues with the Growth Management Hearings Board itself. Evidently, the members of the board get pretty decent full-time salaries, so it is a plum political appointment. There isn't any requirement that the board members be lawyers, so someone like Pflug can get appointed.
By contrast, practically any other matter in this state requiring a hearing, you will get a court judge or an administrative judge who is a lawyer. Even a hearing over food stamp benefits or a day care license, you get an administrative law judge (ALJ) from the Office of Administrative Hearings who is a lawyer. Not only that, but the ALJ's are selected under some sort of merit system, as opposed to simply appointing some political hack.
Another thing, if you appeal a GMHB decision to the superior court, the decision is treated with the same dignity as something done by a professional judge, and reviewed on the record, as opposed to getting a new trial before a real judge in superior court. By contrast, Washington used to have non-lawyer judges in many district and municipal courts, and when that was the case, someone tried by a non-lawyer had the right to a new trial on appeal to superior court, rather than just an appellate review of the record generated in the lower court.
Another interesting thing is that the law requires the GMHB to be appointed by political party, with no more than four members from the same party. In theory, this could mean four Democrats and three Socialist Workers, but in practice, the other three members are Republicans (at least in name only, if even that, since Pflug most recently filed as "Prefers Independent Gop Party").
Now why should any quasi-judicial body be appointed on the basis of party or politics? It is nice for something to be politically balanced, but they shouldn't be appointing political hacks in the first place. If I am a Socialist or Libertarian, and don't like the R's or the D's very much at all, why should my land use decisions be judged by a panel of political hacks from the R and D parties -- regardless of whether you have 4 R's and 3 D's, or 3 R's and 4 D's?
And the fiasco involving Pflug shows just how ridiculous having politically based appointments is in practice. You take an entrenched incumbent R senator, with a strong D challenger, and a weak somewhat extreme intraparty R "primary" opponent. And a D governor appoints Pflug as a nominal R member of the board AFTER filing closes, so the strong D challenger gets a tremendous advantage when the only other filer was a relatively weak and extremely conservative R. And to add insult to injury, Pflug then publicly endorses the D!
8. Totally agreed with Richard Pope @7.
9. To answer your question: No.
10. If Pflug were to make sense it is doubtful she could be a Washington State qualified candidate for state government. The politics as constituted in the state practically demand the candidates, incumbent or not, make no sense to a majority of voters outside of the Seattle/King County bubble.
11. Every year she spent as a state leg. will count as three years in the state retirement system. Of course her pension will be based on the highest two years of pay, so that why she wants to jump to a state job.
12. Folks, the real story here is not the appointment. Its the triumvirate of Mullet, Pflug and Gregiore involved in a bribe to get the seat to the Democrats. Mark Mullet worked with the Democratic leadership to bribe Senator Pflug. Several people have overheard Cheryl say prior to FILING WEEK, "You are going to love working with Mark."
13. Pieter, well, we can't verify all of that, but yes, it's entirely obvious that this was a plot to get Pflug out of the way for the Democrats.
14. With Dino's recent track record, I'm skeptical as to whether the Democratics won't get this seat, especially with a guy named Mullet.
If anyone took the time, you would find that Gregorie has placed her entire skunk vomit buddies in all state agencies with top pay jobs-Including Kathern Drew at state parks, and the entire commisison is made up of political hack loosers.. No wonder state parks is broke..
Fish and wildlife and DNR are the same filld with Gregorie drippings.
16. Go ahead and call Cheryl a traitor - she has become misguided. Menopause will do that to you. I question the fact that she hasn't been taking the meds that she should be.
17. Toft hasn't helped himself by supporting Simpson for School Board last time around. He joined David ( Crazy) Spring in supporting Simpson who lead no vote campaigns against school bonds three times, sued the District and wanted Snoqualmie to separate from the rest of the district, forming it's own district. All driven by Developer money and the Snoqualmie mayor and council. Mr. Toft, where does the rest of the District go to get it's $750,000 back? Is this an indication of how you would behave if elected? Will growth ever pay for growth per GMA if you are elected?