Preview from the next Washington Weekly Digest:

A new proposed rule from the Washington Liquor Control Board highlights some of the ongoing aftermath of the conversion of the state liquor sales system from public to private hands.

Rule 12-24-089 said that “The passage of Initiative 1183 and the privatization of spirits theft and product loss is significant and increasing. This is contributing to increased underage access to alcohol. Rules are needed to clarify reporting requirements of product loss due to theft and internal shrinkage.”

A statistical rundown of presidential votes by congressional district has been completed – for the three Northwest states at least – on the Daily Kos site, and it offers some real perspective on just how Republican or Democratic the various districts in the states are.

This is least useful, probably, in Idaho, where the two congressional districts are very nearly each as Republican – very. It does show that the second district is incrementally less Republican than the first; In 2012 it went 33.1% for Barack Obama and 64.1% for Mitt Romney (in 2008, 37.1% for Obama and 60.5%) for John McCain). That compares with the first district’s 2012 of 32.2%/Obama and 64.9%/Romney (in 2008, Obama/35.1% and McCain/62.5%) – hardly a difference at all, when the overall margins are so large.

In Oregon’s five districts, which like Idaho’s didn’t change massively with redistricting, the numbers are a little more distinctive.

By far the most partisan-leaning district of the five was the Portland-centric 3rd, where in 2012 Obama took 72% (Romney/24.7%) and in 2008 won with 72.9% (McCain/24.3%) – a much more sweeping partisan dominance than even Republicans in Idaho. It was also much more sweeping than in the Republican-oriented Oregon 2nd district, where the Republican presidential nominees won but by less than landslide numbers (2012 Romney/56.8%, Obama/40.5%; 2008 McCain/53.8%, Obama 43.3%). In fact, the appropriate Oregon mirror image to the Republican 2nd now would be not the 3rd, which is much more blue than the 2nd is red, but rather the first district, where Obama both cycles won by about as much as his Republican opponents did in the 2nd (in the 1st: 2012 Obama/57.3% Romney/40%; 2008 Obama 59.6% McCain 37.7%).

The other two districts, roughly the southwestern quadrant of the state, are closely comparable, with clear but lesser Democratic leads. In the 4th (centered on Lane County but including much conservative territory), Obama won in 2012 by 51.7% to 45.0%; in 2008, by 54.2% to 42.7%. In the 5th, the numbers were not far off from that: Obama in 2012 by 50.5% to 47.1%, and in 2008 by 53% 44.2%.

The largest interest in these numbers, though, should be in Washington state.

Here we find a genuinely wide range of results. The single most partisan congressional district in the Northwest is here, in Seattle’s 7th district, where the Obama wins both cycles were enormous (79.2% to 18.1% in 2012, and 80.4% to 18.0% in 2008), significantly exceeding even the Oregon 3rd. The third most partisan CD in the region is immediately south of Seattle, the much-reconfigured 9th district, where Obama overwhelmed Republicans in both cycles (in 2012, by 68.3% to 29.6%, and in 2008 by 68.6% to 29.9%).

Of the 10 Washington districts, the Republicans won the presidentials both time in just two, the easternmost. Their strongest was the Tri-Cities-based 4th, where they nearly won landslides both times (2012 Obama 37.9% to Romney 59.7%, in 2008 Obama 39.2% to McCain 58.9%). They approached that in the 5th (2012 Obama 43.7% to Romney 53.5%; 2008 Obama 46.3% to McCain 51.2%). They are clearly Republican-leaning areas, but not overwhelmingly so by comparison with the districts around Seattle.

The 3rd district, now held by a Republican and commonly described as a Republican district, is more marginal than you might think. Romney did win it in 2012, but only narrowly (Obama/47.9%, Rommey 49.6%), and McCain lost it in 2008 (Obama/50.9%, McCain 47.1%). And while the new 8th district has been commonly described as a Republican gift to Republican Representative Davie Reichert, this may come as a shock: Obama won it in both cycles (20120 Obama/49.7%, Romney 48.1%; 2008 Obama 51.5%, McCain 46.8%). Democrats might want not to give up in the 8th.

When it was formed by redistricters, the new 1st district looked maybe a tad more Republican than Democratic, but in any event very close. But the presidential numbers show that new Democratic Representative Suzanne DelBene’s win there may be no fluke. Obama won in its contours 54.1%/43.3% in 2010, and by 56.3%/41.9% in 2008.

And the newly-redrawn Washington 6th and 10th look a little more Democratic, based on presidential numbers, than that – about in lines with expectations.

All of which may provide some guidance as political people plan out their races for the cycles ahead.

Coal transport is becoming a front burner issue in Oregon, but it already has made the leap in Washington. A port in Whatcom County, in the Bellingham area, is considering handling large-scale coal shipments to China, and protests have grown quickly, and grown large.

A hearing last night at Seattle drew about 2,300, most of the apparently in opposition.

Pushing past the solidly green political climate of the Cascades-west is going to be tough for the coal industry, which is why it has been hiring professional help. The green-oriented Sightline Daily has outlined some of the professional contours in a notable piece out Thursday.

Some of them, the article notes, are organizations with long histories of pro-green activities. An example: “A Portland-based economic consulting firm, ECONorthwest has a long history of work supporting conservation, so many were surprised to learn the firm took money from Ambre Energy to produce an economic impact analysis. ECONorthwest’s analysis has become a key piece of support for the Morrow Pacific Project, a complicated scheme to move as much as 8 million tons of coal annually in barges on the Columbia River for onward shipment to coal plants in Asia.”

There may be all sorts of fallout from the Washington Senate power-share arrangement.

There will be the overtly political, including re-elect races of Rodney Tom and Tim Sheldon, the two Democrats who crossed over to help Republicans gain control. (Any thoughts of a recall, though, probably are dismissable; Washington has tough recall laws that require either a legal or major ethical violation for a recall, and this kind of power change certainly doesn’t fall into that category.)

Some of the more interesting effects may be on the Republican side, where the party will be more or less ostensibly in control, but not in any absolute way. Presumably to get Tom and Sheldon ob board, they had to give up overall leadership of the chamber to those two, plus half of the committee chairs.

And today’s national Daily Kos report notes, “Republicans and Democrats will each chair one-half of the chamber’s committees, including some that will be co-chaired—although it’s worth noting that some of the most moderate first-term GOPers, Andy Hill and Steve Litzow, will head two of the most important committees, leapfrogging over much-more-senior conservative members. One other consequence that shouldn’t be overlooked: Seeing as how every vote needs to count in order to make the coup work, the Republicans were also forced to accept loose-cannonish (emotionally more so than ideologically) Pam Roach—whom they kicked out of the caucus—back into the fold.”

That point about needing every vote is critical. Let one senator on either side go south on you, and it’s a tough go. That’s one reason coalitions of this sort can be so unstable. – Randy Stapilus

The power grab announced. (photo/Secretary of State’s office)

Two years ago, Oregon Democrats and Republicans hit what might have been a tremendous problem. To the 60-seat House chamber, exactly 30 members of each party had been elected. how could control of the chamber be managed?

Carefully, it turned out. There was some chatter about someone in the caucuses splitting off and winning control for the other side, but that didn’t happen. Instead, the party leaders worked together and named co-chairs, who cautiously avoided land mines and worked through what became a productive term, in a professional way. It took a long series of compromises, good will and fair bargaining.

What has happened in the Washington Senate is unlikely to lead to so well-regarded an end result.

The November elections left the Washington Senate with a narrow majority, 26 to 23 Republicans, but a majority nonetheless. Preliminary organizational work began, including naming new committee chairs.

Then today, two of those Democrats, Rodney Tom and Tim Sheldon (who for many years has been a split-off vote among Democrats) said they would join the Republican caucus for organizational purposes, with Tom and Sheldon taking the top two leadership positions, and committee chairs split between the parties. (That latter part sounds more egalitarian than it is; most of the major chairs would be held by Republicans.)

The remaining Democrats have protested, but whether they have any options to stop the coalition is unclear.

Coalitions have run legislative chambers across the country from time to time, over the years. Alaska has had them in the not too distant past; going back a good deal further, so have Oregon and Idaho. they tend not to work very well, and by their nature are unstable.

Because there are questions of loyalty and advantage-taking, the emotional tenor of this session is likely to be strained to say the least. There will be fury in some quarters, and cooperation may be hard to find. The metaphorical long knives will be out, soon.

The challenge Washington will face this term – getting productive work out of its upper legislative chamber – is probably much greater than the challenge Oregon faced the last couple of split-control years.

It doesn’t seem so awfully difficult west of the Cascades.

Federal conditional approval came in today for the Oregon and Washington health insurance exchange proposals. That means some details remain, but the outlines have been approved. Washington and Oregon were two of the first six states to get approval.

From a release description of the Oregon proposal:

Cover Oregon is a central online marketplace where individuals and small businesses can shop for and compare health coverage options and access financial assistance, starting in October 2013. Coverage for plans purchased through Cover Oregon will be effective January 1, 2014.

Through Cover Oregon, individuals and families will be able to easily compare plans, see quality grades for carriers and plans, and access financial assistance to help pay for premiums. Oregonians can find out if they may qualify for financial help by visiting the calculator on the Cover Oregon website, at http://www.coveroregon.com/calculator.php.

Small businesses will be able to offer more options to their employees through Cover Oregon, and some will qualify for tax credits to help pay to cover their employees.

From here, it really doesn’t sound a lot like tyranny. – Randy Stapilus

NW Reading

From a note to editors by the Washington State Patrol, concerning new state law on marijuana going into effect tomorrow …

However, it is unlikely that we will have much to report tomorrow regarding immediate effects of the new marijuana law. In particular, there will be no way to tell how many people troopers might have contacted with less than an ounce of marijuana and who were NOT arrested. It’s fundamental that we don’t keep tabs on people engaged in legal conduct.

It will take a month to six weeks to have completed trooper time sheets that might indicate a change in the number of arrests for possession. However, trooper timesheets only indicate “drug arrests,” they do not indicate the type of drug involved. So even this might not be definitive.

With respect to impaired driving, we hope you’ve all heard our mantra by now: We’ve always arrested impaired drivers regardless of the drug involved. It has always been a crime to drive while impaired by drugs whether they be illegal, legal or even medically prescribed. This new law does not change how troopers will determine impairment at the side of the road.

The THC level in a suspect’s blood will not be known for days or weeks after the roadside contact. That will be an issue for prosecutors and defense attorneys not troopers.

Washington has been getting national notice for its long-running stretch of Democratic governorships, with 32 years now passing since the last time a Republican (John Spellman, a King County executive, in 1980) – the longest unbroken run by Democrats for that office in the country. (That’s eight elections; by comparison, the GOP in much more Republican Idaho stand at five.)

But what does that really indicate about Washington – or Oregon, which is close behind at seven consecutive Democratic gubernatorial wins?

Both a little less and a little than meets the eye. Republican John Carlson, who himself was one of those losing Republican nominees for the office (in 2000), has out on Crosscut an excellent recap of those races from 1984 to present, running through explanations of why those races turned out as they did. It’s a highly recommended read as a fine recent overview of Washington politics.

Allowing for some quibbles and a small slice of partisan view, Carlson’s take here seems fair and reasonable. He writes, “Washington is more liberal today than it was during the Reagan era, but of those eight races, one was essentially a tie, one was squandered, one was blown in the primary, two were lost at the national level, and two others were unwinnable.”

The two unwinnables (quibble: no race is totally unwinnable, but these were surely extremely difficult for a challenger) were the re-election campaigns for Democrats Booth Gardner and Gary Locke. “Essentially a tie” was the Chris Gregoire win in 2004 (a fair description) – the Republican there (Dino Rossi) was a coin flip from winning. And the others? They were a combination of poor Republican choices, either of nominee or of specific campaign tactics, and of the national political environment, especially presidential races. Washington’s gubernatorial elections run in the same cycles with presidentials, so the national picture is apt to have some significant impact. In 1980 and 1984, when Ronald Reagan won Washington, that may have helped Republican candidates a bit (though 1984 was when the Democratic streak began, owing partly to a bum economy at the time). But since then, the state has voted Democratic for president, more and more strongly, and that must have been one of the factors boosting Democrat Jay Inslee this year.

Also worth noting: Many of these races have been close. This year’s was roughly a 52-48 race; so (roughly) was 2008; 2004 was a near-tie; and 1992 was another 52-48. That level – fairly close, albeit with a Democratic edge – seems to have emerged as a norm, barring a governor who is personally either very popular or unpopular.

So what of Oregon, where the governors are elected on the off years? Is there a shorthand for those races?

The last Republican to win in Oregon (twice) was Vic Atiyah, in 1978 and 1982. From 1986 to present, it’s been all Democrats. What lessons can be drawn from those elections? Continue Reading »

NW Reading

This may be the most readable police statement you’ve ever read. It’s going viral around the net, and it’s not even a video.

It comes from the Seattle Police Department, and its subject is, well, what about marijuana, now that voters in the state (albeit not the federal government) have legalized it? It’s quite a read.

While cautioning about the federal provisions, Seattle police say they won’t be enforcing them. Excerpts:

Can I legally carry around an ounce of marijuana?
According to the recently passed initiative, beginning December 6th, adults over the age of 21 will be able to carry up to an ounce of marijuana for personal use. Please note that the initiative says it “is unlawful to open a package containing marijuana…in view of the general public,” so there’s that. Also, you probably shouldn’t bring pot with you to the federal courthouse (or any other federal property).

Well, where can I legally buy pot, then?
The Washington State Liquor Control Board is working to establish guidelines for the sale and distribution of marijuana. The WSLCB has until December 1, 2013 to finalize those rules. In the meantime, production and distribution of non-medical marijuana remains illegal. …

Can I smoke pot outside my home? Like at a park, magic show, or the Bite of Seattle?
Much like having an open container of alcohol in public, doing so could result in a civil infraction—like a ticket—but not arrest. You can certainly use marijuana in the privacy of your own home. Additionally, if smoking a cigarette isn’t allowed where you are (say, inside an apartment building or flammable chemical factory), smoking marijuana isn’t allowed there either.

Will police officers be able to smoke marijuana?
As of right now, no. This is still a very complicated issue. …

What happens if I get pulled over and an officer thinks I’ve been smoking pot?
If an officer believes you’re driving under the influence of anything, they will conduct a field sobriety test and may consult with a drug recognition expert. If officers establish probable cause, they will bring you to a precinct and ask your permission to draw your blood for testing. If officers have reason to believe you’re under the influence of something, they can get a warrant for a blood draw from a judge. If you’re in a serious accident, then a blood draw will be mandatory.

What happens if I get pulled over and I’m sober, but an officer or his K9 buddy smells the ounce of Super Skunk I’ve got in my trunk?
Under state law, officers have to develop probable cause to search a closed or locked container. Each case stands on its own, but the smell of pot alone will not be reason to search a vehicle. If officers have information that you’re trafficking, producing or delivering marijuana in violation of state law, they can get a warrant to search your vehicle.

SPD seized a bunch of my marijuana before I-502 passed. Can I have it back?
No.

NW Reading

An item in the Seattle Slog notes the serious reversals Hewlett Packard Company has endured in the last year. Not small reversals, either. There was the approaching $8.8 billion in charges, much of that inuring to HP, for its associated British software company Autonomy. And the close to $11 billion in writedowns just in the last quarter for the EDS services division.

The piece by Goldy goes to note the impact on the top executives behind these moves and others: “Former HP CEO Leo Apotheker, who initiated the acquisition, earned $30.4 million last year. Current CEO Meg Whitman, who closed the deal, and who approved the deal as a board member, earned $16.5 million last year for just a few months work. Chairman of the board Ray Lane, who hired and quickly fired Apotheker, and who has presided over a string of disastrous acquisitions, earned $10.6 million last year in exchange for his shrewd business insight.”

The format change at Portland’s KPOJ-AM eliminating liberal talk radio in that city is not an aberration. This out today:

On January 2nd, CBS (which used to be known as Viacom before it spun off several of its business units as a separate company called Viacom) plans to convert KFNQ, formerly KPTK, to the sports radio format, along with many other stations around the country. The apparent objective is to create a stronger network of sports radio stations so that CBS can better compete for national sports programming contracts.
Seattle, of course, already has plenty of stations offering sports talk. These include KRKO (broadcasting as Fox Sports Radio 1380), KIRO (broadcasting as 710 ESPN Seattle) and KJR (broadcasting as Sports Radio 950).
But CBS executives don’t care. As far as they’re concerned, AM 1090′s current format isn’t making enough money – so they’re going to completely trash it, just like Clear Channel did with AM 620 in Portland.

This site has been in favor, for many years, of a return to the Fairness Doctrine. Reiterating the call for it …

The question is going to be asked this year: Are Washington and Oregon one-party states? Actually, it’s already being asked; a David Brewster piece in Crosscut already asks it (and wrestles with but doesn’t totally pin it).

Let’s define some terms.

A one-party state is where one party is in near-total dominance, and the other is reduced to virtual non-competitive status. Look at Idaho, where statewide Republican candidates nearly always win in landslides or near-landslides, and where the legislature is upwards of 80% Republican. That’s a one-party Republican state.

Not so far from that is California, at least after last week’s election. There, Democrats dominate among the statewides and will hold two-thirds of the state’s legislative seats. Such gaudy margins may or may not hold, but that has the look – for now anyway – of a one-party Democratic state.

Washington and Oregon are something else.

Democrats do have a definite advantage in them; these states are closer to blue than to red.

They have all the partisan statewide offices in Oregon, and all but one in Washington. They have both U.S. Senate seats. They have control (after this year’s election) of both legislative chambers in each state.

But we can’t really use the same kind of overwhelming language to describe them.

In Oregon, Democratic Governor John Kitzhaber just barely won in 2010. Republicans do have a U.S. House seat (one of five). The Democratic majority in the Senate amounts to a seat seat above tie, and in the House, which just emerged from a tie, Democrats have a fragile four-seat advantage, which could melt away again as swiftly as it returned this year.

In Washington, Republicans hold four of the 10 U.S. House seats, a point often forgotten after the loss of three open-seat races this time (two of those in districts where the Democratic voter edge is strong anyway). And while they remain a legislative majority, the margins are close enough to put Democratic control in regular jeopardy – and may be in the next session amid semi-revolt from a couple of the caucus members.

Put Washington and Oregon in a different cetegory – Democratic-leaning, but not one-party.

Washington now has – and I take this from a couple of online sources – the highest-ranking women in the U.S. Senate and House majorities.

That has been the case for a while now in the Senate, where Senator Pattty Murray has been majority conference secretary, 4th-ranking in the caucus, since 2007.

Today, 5th District Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers also became 4th-ranking in leadership, in the House majority caucus (as chair of the House Republican Conference).

Washington hasn’t quite yet returned to the heavy impactful days of the 70s and 80s, but it seems to be getting there. – Randy Stapilus

When the Oregon House went 30-30 in the last election cycle – it reverts back to Democratic control after this year’s election – there was concern about just how that would be made to work, with the two parties equally in charge, in a time of hyperpartisanship. The answer turned out to be: Not bad at all. Productive, even.

But one of the elements of that was clarity. Aside from brief mutterings about someone maybe flipping parties (which didn’t happen), everyone knew the score.

That’s the problem right now in the Washington Senate – no one conclusively knows the score, and various people are playing various games. In theory, there’s a Democratic majority. But one Senate seat in Clark County is at the moment totally up for grabs and evidently headed toward a recount. And two other Democratic senators are talking about power-sharing.

From Crosscut: “Sens. Tim Sheldon of Potlatch and Rodney Tom of Bellevue are demanding that committee chairmanships not be decided by the majority party and that the leader of the Senate could be from the minority. (Tom is so conflicted/confused that he formerly served as a Republican representative. Despite his antics, there’s no sign of a reconversion so far. Or a name change to run next time as Tom Rodney/Prefers Various Parties).”

The Crosscut piece is a good, quick overview of an evolving slice of uncertainty. – Randy Stapilus

If you added up the population of the six most populous counties in Idaho, you have just over a million people – about two-thirds of all the people in Idaho. Those people cast just about 250,000 votes for Republican Mitt Romney for president.

The single largest county in Washington, King (anchored by Seattle), cast more votes for Romney than those six counties in Idaho did: 252,090 votes, by today’s count. And the people who cast them are in a far more concentrated geographical location than those Idahoans.

But how different the psychology. Those Idaho Republican voters certainly don’t (generally at least) feel isolated; they know they’re in a large community of like-minded people.

So, this, in the Seattle Times today: “Oh, the loneliness of being a Seattle Tea Party Patriot, especially after this last election. All around you: Liberals. Democrats. Obama supporters. People who think Dan Savage is really cool. ‘It’s getting harder and harder for me. I was at Trader Joe’s, and I was glaring at everyone around me,’ says Keli Carender, 33, co-organizer of the local group. Carender’s glaring took place at the Trader Joe’s in the University District, a neighborhood that, for sure, is a bastion of libs.”

In society, a lot of things are relative. – Randy Stapilus