Waiting For the Storm To Hit

Tomorrow morning the Governor will reveal her budget proposal. The Governor is constitutionally obligated to submit a balanced budget -- based on existing revenues -- prior to the Legislative Session. With revenues plunging, we are all going to see what almost $3 billion in cuts looks like -- and it's going to be bad.

The problem is exacerbated because most of the state budget is "off limits." That means certain unprotected areas of the budget are going to have to bear the cuts. Fortunately, our friends at the WA St Budget & Policy Center are here to give us an idea of what this really means:

"Primarily as a result of the recession, Washington State, like most states, is now facing a large deficit ($2.6 billion). As we pointed out in our recent slideshow on the state economic and fiscal outlook, most of the budget is off-limits to cuts. This means that an all-cuts budget would require elimination of entire programs and services.

A new presentation by the Senate Ways and Means Committee staff provides more detail on this issue. They estimate that only $7.7 billion of the state budget is vulnerable to cuts in the coming session, with programs that provide economic security for lower income Washingtonians being especially exposed.

They break down the $7.7 billion into three categories: 1) timing (nearly $10 billion will already be spent by the time the new budget is signed), 2) legal restrictions such as state constitutional requirements, federal law, and debt and pension obligations, and 3) strings attached to the federal recovery funds."


"The graph below breaks down the vulnerable part of the budget into program areas:"


"They also provide a possible scenario (see table below) to illustrate what $2.6 billion in cuts could mean. It includes elimination of financial aid, the Basic Health Plan, in-home services for clients with long-term care needs or developmental disabilities, and money that is used to equalize school funding between rich and poor districts."

We will all see first-hand tomorrow morning why an all-cuts approach is both unrealistic and irresponsible. After that it will be up to us to fight for what is right.

-- Dennis

Understanding the State's Fiscal Crisis

Last week's announcement that the state budget deficit facing lawmakers in January had grown to $2.6 billion is staggering. It's hard to even comprehend the magnitude of the deficit, let along how and why we got here.

Fortunately, the good folks at the WA St Budget & Policy Center have put together a 12-minute slide show, complete with audio, to explain it all for us.

[Note: Click on the green “play” button on the bottom to begin the narrated slide show. The large black arrow on the right-hand side just skips forward to the second slide.]

A Balanced Approach

View more presentations from Remy Trupin.

-- Dennis

Labor vs. the Democrats?!?!?

A recent article in the Seattle Times raised, once again, the issue of the labor movement's unhappiness with the Democrats in Olympia. The Times then followed up with an editorial criticizing labor's "kamikaze effort."

As you might imagine, I have a number of strong opinions about this topic. Yet there is nothing I could compose that would be as articulate or effective as what our old friend David Groves at the WA St Labor Council had to say. Here is what Dave wrote:

"...[A Seattle Times] editorial was written regarding last week's Times story reporting that unions are not contributing to Democratic campaign funds because of unhappiness over the party leaders' agenda and performance in Olympia. The editorial suggests this 'is a kamikaze effort that works against the interests of the Democratic Party and the workers of Washington.' It goes on to point out that labor's legislative agenda -- from restoring unemployment benefits cut in 2003 to the passage of the Worker Privacy Act -- are misguided. That the conservative Seattle Times editorial board opposes labor's legislative agenda is nothing new. What is new here is the Times' concern about the Democrats' re-election prospects. As blogger David Goldstein points out, 'nobody is a bigger supporter of the Democratic Party than the Bush/Rossi/McGavick/ Reichert/Hutchison endorsing Times.'

Feel free to disagree with the WSLC's new political strategy -- which, as outlined here, is essentially to support legislators who support labor, as opposed to party organizations. Feel free to disagree with delegates representing WSLC's affiliated unions, who unanimously approved a convention resolution for the WSLC to make no campaign contributions in 2009 to anyone. Feel free to disagree that labor has a right to be upset after what happened in the last legislative session. But ask yourself this: to what extent is the Democratic Party entitled to labor contributions? We're talking about the withholding of contributions -- not a political attack or the funding of opponents -- the withholding of money. And it is being described as a 'kamikaze effort' that one former party chairman calls a 'strategy of self-destruction.' Who is threatening who here?

Meanwhile, we can't wait to read The Seattle Times exposés on the Sierra Club only contributing to pro-environment candidates or NARAL only supporting pro-choice candidates."

The Seattle Times' patronizing editorial aside, this isn't exactly a new story. The Puget Sound Buiness Journal reported back in May that labor was outraged with actions taken by the Legislature during the 2009 session. "Labor and other groups knew this session would be rough," wrote Deirdre Gregg, "given the scale of the budget shortfall. One thing that particularly frustrated labor was that bills with no price tag to the state — such as labor-friendly changes to unemployment insurance — also stumbled."

State workers, in particular, took a pounding this past session -- both in the budget as well as on policy issues. On one hand we understand elected officials have a right -- even a responsibility -- to do what they think is best regardless of whether or not WFSE members agree with their decision. On the other hand, we look pretty foolish if we continue to support elected officials that clearly have a different set of values than we do. [Note: Seven months later, as state revenues fall further into the red, some powerful voices in the Democratic caucuses are content to continue an all-cuts budget approach into the future.]

Naturaly, the rift between labor and legislative Democrats has incited some debate out in the blogosphere. The Northwest Progressive Institute argued "this change in support is a good object lesson for Washington's elected officials: If you take your supporters for granted, you may pay the price come election time." Meanwhile, the Washington Technology Industry Association thinks "the unions are the biggest bullies around" and "it is well known that you have to suck up to labor to get their endorsements and money and they will lord it over you if you are not with them 100% of the time."

Of course, the most provacative response is from Piper Scott at the Evergreen Freedom Foundation: "Well, all I can say to this effort by WSLC is PA-LEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZE do it! And the sooner the better...Pa-leeeezzze, pa-leeeeeze, pa-leeeeze, pa-leeeze, pa-leeze! What a great way for them to marginalize their influence and free many in the Legislature from being under labor's domineering thumb!"

For the record, WFSE supports what the WA St Labor Council is doing. We have contributed to DIME PAC. And the WFSE Executive Board also adopted a resolution withholding support and contributions from any candidates or candidate committees for the time being.

The Seattle Times, the high tech industry, the EFF, and the other anti-union voices out there are all missing the real point. Labor is adapting and modernizing its political program: We are refocusing to ensure our endorsement and support is based on issues, not parties -- and that our support is more meaningful than ever. Certainly no strategy is flawless. But I think the labor movement is headed in the right direction.

-- Dennis

Get Your Ballots In Today!

It's election day. Whether you vote by mail or vote at a poll site, today is the day to get 'er done. Remember: Only you can stop Tim Eyman.


-- Dennis

Stephen Colbert Tackles the Tough Issues Raised By R71

I get all my news from the Comedy Channel. It's more accurate and more balanced than the garbage the networks churn out.

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Word - Don't Ask Don't Tell
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Religion

-- Dennis

Approve R71 -- It's the Patriotic Thing To Do

America is built on the idea that "all men are created equal" yet some still want to draw lines between us. The good news is we all have an opportunity to strike a blow against hate and division. We can vote to approve R71. It's the patriotic thing to do. -- Dennis

Attention King County Voters!

There is a lot of confusion over the unfortunate placement of I-1033 on King County vote by mail ballots. It would be a shame if folks didn't get a chance to vote "No" on the latest knuckle-headed tomfoolery from professional demagogue Tim Eyman just because they didn't notice the appropriate box in the lower left-hand corner.



Tell your ma. Tell your pa. Vote No on I-1033!

Trick Or Vote 2009

From our friends at the Washington Bus:

"The Last Halloween, 300 of our closest friends knocked on over 6,500 doors to get out the vote and we're doing it big again this Halloween.

The Bus is looking for organizations to sign on as co-sponsors and for individuals to sign up as captains. All you need is a costume and a love for democracy. Sign up here and get all you need to know to be in the know for the hottest GOTV party...EVER.

WHO: You and 300 of your closest friends. ALL AGES!

WHERE: Super secret location in Georgetown

WHEN: Saturday, October 31st, 1pm – 9pm (canvassing from 2-7)

WHY: GOTV and YES on R-71 and NO on 1033.

You may be too old to trick or treat, but you’re never too old to Trick or Vote!"

Mainstream Republicans oppose I 1033

No matter how you look at it, 1033 is a bad idea with bad timing and a insidious agenda. Here is a story that tells us that the word is finally getting out about this wrecking ball of an initiative.

http://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2009/10/mainstream-republicans-of-washington.html

This is what they had to say directly from the MSR blog page:

Mainstream Republicans urges voters to vote “No” on I-1033. Although Mainstream acknowledges that legislatures have failed to control the growth in spending, we believe that I-1033’s meat axe approach to revenue/appropriations reform is irresponsible. The remedy proposed by I-1033 is worse than the problem it purports to fix.

Vote no on 1033 and drag your neighbors along with you.

z<

Why We Need a Public Option -- In 30 Seconds!

The latest TV commercial from Health Care For America Now! explains, in simple terms, why a public option is a critical component to any health care reform legislation.



-- Dennis

I-1033: The Colorado Experience

Tim Eyman's I-1033 is actually an old idea -- known as TABOR -- that has been on the ballot in numerous other states over the years. I-1033 would put a restrictive and arbitrary cap on all state, county and city government spending -- with the current recessionary budget levels as the baseline. In 2009, TABOR is on the ballot in two states: Washington and Maine. [Note: I'm not sure if Maine also has an unemployed watch salesman who makes a living by qualifying crazy ballot measures. If not, we'll be glad to send Eyman there.]

Only once has TABOR actually been implemented: in Colorado. And the results there were horrific. At last week's WFSE convention, we were treated to an extremely compelling video on the harm TABOR caused in Colorado. Since not everyone was able to attend, I thought it would be helpful to post that video here. Feel free to pass it along!



Of course, just because we know Eyman is a demagogue peddling yet another destructive scheme from the lunatic fringe doesn't mean we can take the outcome of this election for granted. The No on I-1033 campaign is running phone banks in Federal Way, Seattle, Bellevue, Everett, Spokane, Tacoma, Olympia, Vancouver, and Bellingham -- and they need volunteers. Unless we want Washington state to be the Alabama of the West, we need to step up to the plate and lend a hand.

To get plugged in, send an e-mail to April or give her a call at 1-800-562-6002, or visit the No on I-1033 website. Thanks in advance for your support. -- Dennis

Yours truly visits Eastern Washington

I just got back from a 4-day tour of Eastern Washington last week. While there I had the pleasure of visiting some of our folks at Pine Lodge, Lakeland Village and Ahtanum View Correctional Center. All three of these facilities are being considered for closure or vast down sizing in this year’s legislative session.

The “meat saw”, designed by last years legislature to tear apart institutional care within our state, came to us in the form of a budget proviso. Not only did that proviso not provide public hearing regarding the expenditure of $500,000.00 to fund a study, the proviso language was also crafted in such a way as to limited the full range of options that the consultants could consider. Top that with the fact the both the consultants hired are former executives at DOC and DDD. It could leave one believing the outcomes were set before the study was conducted. The proviso also attempts to limit the choices of the legislature once it receives the consultant’s recommendations. The proviso mandates cutting 1500+ beds from DOC, 250 beds from RHCs and 235 beds from The Juvenile Rehabilitation Administration. Telling the legislature what they can and can't do should fly like a lead balloon with them. As always, they do have the choice of not choosing any of the consultants recommendations and proceeding as they see fit. They have done that before, I am told.

The folks I talked to at the three facilities were worried. Of course they were worried about the impact this consultants report could have on their jobs and their families. But not surprisingly, they were just as worried about the impact such closures could have on their neighbors and community. The issue of diminished public safety and protection of our most vulnerable came up time and time again. Who better to know how dangerous or fragile the folks these state employees work with are than them? Who better to forecast the gaps in service and security if their job or facility went away than them?

The message was clear in each place I visited. “We are ready to educate anyone who will listen about the importance of the service we provide. We are ready to fight for safety and a responsible level of service to our communities, the clients we serve and our families.”

I was very clear in describing the up hill battle we faced with the budget and the seeming agendas of some of our legislators. For the folks I talked to at Pine Lodge Correctional Facility, Lakeland Village and Ahtanum View Correctional Center, their response was clear, their tone was strong and their stare unblinking.

“Bring it”, they said.

This will be an interesting session.
z