The old description of editorial writers as the people who ride onto a battlefield after the fighting is done, to shoot the wounded, may fit neatly today's Seattle Times editorial on the proposed expansion of NASCAR into Kitsap County.
The NASCAR proposal, which would set a region-scale track operation in a location with inadequate transportation capacity (meaning, the crowds of track-goers would swamp local highways and ferries) and incur massive public subsidies for the privilege, certainly has seen some skepticism in this spot for some months. (We see no problem with a NASCAR facility located in a more logical place, and which pays its own way.)
Over the last third or so of last year, public opposition to it, especially locally in Kitsap, seems to have solidified. By the time the legislature - which was being asked for legislation to allow it local and for money for its private backers - convened in January, it seemed to have been politically adjudged DOA. Nothing that's happened since seems to have changed that, as a string of newspaper headlines has made clear.
So the editorial about the current NASCAR legislation might have been great six months ago (before legislative introduction, true, but when its contours were known) rather than very good now. It still has some real muscle. The bill, it said, is "is a slick piece of work that is tougher to stomach with every turn of its 57 pages. . . . The outrageous number of exceptions and tax breaks should also give legislators pause. . . ." And it makes sound points about the hash it would make of important provisions of local planning law.
Sometimes the wounded do merit shooting.