Posts published in May 2006

Washington Senator Maria Cantwell has put some emphasis on her time as an upper-level type at RealNetworks, and there could be something relevatory in that. We have no particular insight into the management at Real, but many leading high-tech companies are led by people who are, to put it simply, difficult to work for or with. A description by a former staffer running in this week's Seattle Weekly suggests Cantwell picked up the industry's executive ethos in spades.

The piece was written by a former press staffer, Mike Seely (who has also been a staffer for the Weekly). Its basic point was that critics from the left who have blasted Cantwell for being insufficiently anti-war should bear in mind that the alternative in this year's election, Republican Mike McGavick, would likely be a loyal vote for Republican President Bush.

By way of establishing bona fides for his position, he makes clear that the reasons for his support for Cantwell - he calls her "a brilliant, driven public servant who rarely lets political expediency enter her sphere of consideration" - didn't result from personal charm.

"The seven months I spent in her charge felt like seven years," he wrote. "The campaign, larded with her RealNetworks stock windfall, spent more money on Red Vines than most candidates spend on direct mail. And conspicuous consumption during happy hour became all but a necessity, as it was invariably better to be half in the bag when Cantwell, a paranoid hellcat of a boss who rolls through staff like toilet paper, would make her daily sweep through the office, berating everyone in sight. On the trail, Cantwell often handled small groups of constituents in closed settings well. But she was not what you would call warm—a trait that should be preternatural for politicians of her stature. Her stump speeches were uninspiring and her grace with would-be donors flaccid at best. Most of the people who helped guide her to victory were motivated almost exclusively by their disdain for her opponent . . . Essentially, we worked for Maria in spite of Maria. Yet if you were to ask Cantwell, the only person responsible for her victory over [Slade] Gorton was the person who stared back at her in the bathroom mirror each morning. Her lack of gratitude and common human decency were simply repulsive."

This election, Cantwell still seems to be massively out-fundraising and spending McGavick and has loads of advantages in what looks like a solidly Democratic year, and yet has maintained only modest leads in the polls that have surfaced. Might Seely's portrait be touching on some reasons why?

Building projects that have to go through an environmental impact statement process, and more besides, presumably have a solid track record for safety in place before construction. That still doesn't mean something ugly can't slip through.

Put another way, if Washington state Representative Toby Nixon's concerns about the underway Brightwater sewage treatment plant are even close to on target, some important officials in King and Snohomish counties might one day wish they weren't in such a hurry to build.

Brightwater is a planned sewage plant planned for the Woodinville area, near the King-Snohomish county line - north of the line, in Snohomish - on the east side. This is fast-growing country, and you can get the concern about planning ahead for it. The plant is basically King's project, though a few weeks ago the Snohomish County governing board, after some controversy, agreed to a bilateral deal that eases the red tape in pressing forward. Ground was broken in April.

Getting to this point hasn't been an overnight thing. King county people started work on planning in 2000, and its proposal for siting happened in December 2003. Then there was the EIS and related research work, which as anyone familiar with the process knows is extensive. (The project people even have posted a library on line - that's their term, and when you see the roster of documents you'll think the description reasonable.) And there are, by the way, seismic and geologic studies in the pack.

That said, you can always still miss something. (more…)

You can never tell conclusively what has legs and what doesn't, but you get the growing impression that for major candidates and political leaders, immigration is increasingly looking like the obnoxious party guest you'd really rather went away.

For the moment at least, it remains a hot button. It was enough, in Idaho, to vault Canyon County Commissioner Robert Vasquez (it was his only substantial issue) into second place in a field of six; but it wasn't enough for a win. It was enough to interest the candidates for governor of Oregon a couple of months earlier, but the candidate who initially seemed to make the big splash with it - Republican Ron Saxton - used it but little toward the end, and it felt more like an unwanted appendix on the scene as election day drew near.

There's a constituency there, a group for whom illegal visitors to this country is topic A. But it is a piece of the electorate only, and too direct an appeal to that group - put another way, too blatant an assault against those here illegally - can put off and turn off larger groups of people. It's a delicate line. Saxton in Oregon and congressional primary winner Bill Sali in Idaho managed it, each probably picking up some support from that interested crowd without seeming cruel or bigoted.

Will Washington manage the challenge?

The delicate line was something party leadership clearly had in mind as it met for its convention and platform decisions, both this weekend. The issue is toughest for Republicans, because Republican President George W. Bush has proposed a relatively open program which could lead to citizenship, while a significant piece of that party is appalled by the idea. If Washington Republican Chair Diane Tebelius could dictate, she probalby would seek a party plank that smoothed over the differences, or tried to.

No go. The Washington Republicans passed a proposal calling for no citizenship for babies of illegal immigrants born within the United States (which, as state Attorney General Ron McKenna pointed out, runs counter to the federal constitutions). More significant than that was some of the debate, which got ugly in places. Consider this items from David Postman's blog:

When another delegate said it would be impractical to deport all those workers, the sponsor of the amendment said, "We let them take themselves back. They brought themselves in. If they want to be legal we let them do it the right way."

On babies, a Spokane delegate told the convention that in Southern California hospitals are "flooded with illegal aliens trying to have babies." She said the problem is spreading to Washington. "They are called anchor babies and once they are born they can get welfare and all sorts of stuff." She later said that people who are white are being denied benefits given "to people who are brown."

Some at the convention suggested none of this would hurt the party with key Hispanic voters. The guess here is that some of this, some of the quotes especially, may not go over very well.