Thursday, October 28, 2010

A Conservative Nov 2010 Ballot Review for Snohomish County / Northshore WA


A Conservative Nov 2010 Ballot Review for Snohomish County / Northshore WA

Ballot Snohomish County Washington November 2010
Review by Arthur Hu Oct 2010, Bothell, WA
Summary: If you are conservative, you can follow me. If you are Democrat/ progressive, you can vote the opposite. If you are happy with the "hope and change" leadership of Obama / Reid / Pelosi or are afraid of the "Tea Party" movement, vote for Democrats. If you want to repeal Obamacare and stop out of control state/federal spending giving your money away, vote for Republicans.

1053 discourage tax increases: yes
1082 industrial insurance: yes
1088 state income tax on rich: heck no
1100 stop liquor monopoly: yes
1105 stop liquor monopoly: yes
1107 repeal food bev sales taxes: yes
52: bonds and water sales tax for energy saving: no
8225: increase state debt limit: no
4220: expanding denying bail: yes
Senator: Rossi
State Rep 1st pos 1: Dennis Richter
State Rep 1st pos 2: Heidi Munson
State Supreme Court pos 6: Richard B Sanders

Online Voters Pamphlet 
Democrat positions: http://www.wa-democrats.org/content/ballot-measures
Progressive (democrat/left) guide: http://progressivevotersguide.com/2010/washington/general/?src=primary


Initiative Measure No. 1053 - (Eymann) make it harder to raise taxes - YES (Democrats - NO, harder to fund "important programs" like schools, etc)
Initiative Measure No. 1082 - allow private industrial insurance  - YES, saves industry money and jobs.
NO: (Washington State Democrats) Who’s behind it: The Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW), a longtime conservative political player. Who benefits: Big insurance companies, the BIAW, and the conservative candidates funded by the BIAW’s warchest. Who loses: Businesses who have to pay more in premiums; workers who are injured on the job.

Initiative Measure no. 1098 - State Income Tax on the Rich



NO - Sneaky way to bring in state income tax and sell it as a "middle class tax cut", which gives WA advantage over states like California and Massachusetts, and voters always turn down when legislators want to increase taxes so they can spend more. Most money is from unions that will benefit from more state money going their way. If you do income tax, tax everybody. This is promoted for tax fairness, but it's not fair to target just one unpopular part of the population, especially the ones that generate more jobs since many are small business owners.
Endorsements – Yes (Washington State Democrats) Who’s behind it: Bill Gates Sr., Washington Education Association. Who benefits: Kids, seniors, public schools, health care services, businesses, property owners, lower and middle class families would all benefit from better schools and better quality healthcare, small business benefit from elimination of the B&O tax, and property owners benefit from a property tax cut.
Who loses: Wealthy people who make over $200,000/year would pay a limited income tax on income above that threshold.

 
Initiative Measure no. 1100, 1105 - close state liquor stores - YES (not the state's job to sell liquor, and some people would rather buy liquor at Costco instead of overpriced state stores, endorsed conservatives, GOP did not endorse )
NO  if you want to restrict liquor, if you think it raises money and taxes, Seattle Times thinks it's a net revenue generator. Opposed by beer industry competition for hard liquor, and of course the people that would lose their jobs at these stores. Wash Democrats: No Who’s behind them: Wal-Mart, big grocery chains, out of state liquor distributors. Who benefits: [and Costco, but they favor democrats!] Wal-Mart, big grocery chains, big liquor distributors, binge drinkers and underage kids. Who loses: City, county and state services would lose $700 million over 5 years; local craft brewers and Washington wineries would get pushed off the shelves; [state evidently features local products]and alcohol-related crimes like drunk driving would increase.

Initiative 1107 - end "silly sales taxes" on "sweet" and "out of state" food and beverages - YES (If you don't tax food and beverages, don't tax any of them or tax all of them, don't use government to pass judgement on what is  "good" or "bad" food)
NO: Democrats: Who’s behind it: The American Beverage Association, national lobbyist for the big soda companies. Who benefits: Soda pop companies. Who loses: loses: Kids, seniors, public schools and health care services would lose $100 million each year.

Ref Bill 52 - sales tax on bottled water and bonds for energy efficiency school projects - 
I'll vote no. If it saves money, then it should come out of regular education budget. This is one for the "green" religion, feel good about saving the earth no matter how much it costs.
Yes: Who's against schools and being green? Here's democrat page: Yes (Washington State Democrats)
Who’s behind it: Representative Hans Dunshee (D-44) wants to make public schools a healthier place for children, so he referred this measure to the people.
Who benefits: Kids and teachers benefit from a healthier place to learn and work; construction workers benefit from new jobs; public schools benefit from saved energy costs.
Who loses: No one

SJR 8225 - Increase state debt limits since the Federal Government pays to offset some of this debt.
NO (Conservatives think this will only encourage more spending, we pay for the feds too)
(Yes WA Democrats did not endorse, but they would like to take advantage of federal subsidies to increase debt limit, but we pay for the federal money too)

Substitute House Joint Resolution 4220 - deny bail
Me: Yes 
No? Liberals were not sure how to vote on this, they are worried about unfairly denying bail, which adversely affects groups with higher incidents of being accused of crime. 

Vote YES to Expand When Judges Can Deny Bail

Vote NO to Work Within Existing System and Avoid More Bias

There is not a clear progressive recommendation on this measure. HJR 4220 expands the circumstances under which judges may deny bail. This amendment allows judges to deny bail in cases punishable by life in prison where there is convincing evidence that the accused has a propensity for violence and is a danger to others or the community. Currently judges can deny bail only in death penalty cases, but can set bail higher in cases where an individual is dangerous or a flight risk. The ACLU is opposed, believing that judges already have the discretion they need to set higher bail amounts and keep the public safe, and that proven racial disparities in the current bail system will be made worse by this change.

Vote Yes if your top priority is making sure that judges have expanded ability to deny bail to people accused of serious crimes who appear to be dangerous. Vote No if your top priority is addressing racial bias in the criminal justice system.

Yes on 4220: Endorsements include: Washington Coalition of Crime Victims Advocate, WA Fraternal Order of Police, Washington State Council of Fire Fighters, Washington Council of Police and Sheriffs, Washington State Patrol Troopers Association, Lakewood Police Independent Guild, The Stranger.

No on 4220: Opponents include: ACLU of Washington, Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Washington Defender Association


U.S. Senators

X Dino Rossi. Republican. Popular with conservatives still upset over the squeaker governer's vote.  I'm voting for a Republican who will control the Obama / Reid / Pelosi agenda of spending as much of our money as possible for their pet agendas. 

? Patty Murray. Democrat She's got clout for the state, she's from Bothell, she's popular with folks who don't fear Democrats. She makes a point of Boeing getting the Tanker contract and helping veterans, which hardly makes her Henry Jackson. Rossi doesn't mention about Boeing and veterans, though it's usually Republicans who are best on defence, and she's made some awful comments on terrorism such as Osama bin Laden building schools and doing other nice things. 

U.S. Representative Dist 1

X James Watkins is a fairly conservative Republican who opposes cap and trade, stimulus, Obama care, but relatively unknown. Former bank manager, now at microsoft. 
? Jay Inslee. Well established hard-to-beat Democrat for a long time, he's got clout. He not particularly unpopular in a county that's nearly as liberal as King County, but the Democrats and Obama's gang are considerably less popular than in 2008. If you're OK with Democrats, you'd vote for this guy, if you're upset with how Democrats are running things, vote for Watkins who has the general GOP strategy going. 


1st District State Rep Pos 1 

x Dennis Richter: I'm voting for the Republican Boeing engineer. He ran for similar position a few years ago. Active in church, against increased state spending. He's the real conservative. 
? Derek Stanford:  1999 phd in statistics consulting now at telecommunications company. Statement sounds like stealth democrat in conservative clothing, stands for "basics" "small business"  "living wage jobs", "sustainable budget" Seattle Times  endorsed. "who holds a Ph.D. in statistics from the University of Washington. Stanford is a business-oriented candidate, who adds an analyst's demand for data to the pursuit of balance and stability in public policy."

1st District State Rep Pos 2 
x Heidi Munson: I'm voting for the Republican here, seems a nice enough person. Worked at various positions, now runs house cleaning business. Big statement that she hasn't been elected vs blank for Moscoso.  Seattle Times endorsed: "a self-employed house cleaner. She likewise has no direct political experience, and makes that a point of pride. She pledges to fight for leaner government — an appropriate view for the Legislature's daunting challenges. She is endorsed in part because the Republican Party has no political bench, and needs to develop a credible reserve of office seekers and officeholders.Munson's capacity to learn quickly and keep the best interests of her district in the forefront will be watched closely. She certainly has the energy to succeed."? Luis Moscoso: Democrat Community Transit bus driver, to his credit he's been to graduate school, been on all kinds of professional positions like Washington Public Employees Association, and all kids of boards that are good for people seeking office. He also talks like a conservative for a "balanced budget" while "working families need a strong voice" the usual Democratic line. Seems like a fine choice for people who like Democrats.

State Supreme Court Court Pos 6


X Richard B Sanders - He's quite popular with conservative and libertarians, and not afraid to take controversial views against liberal initiatives which shock some liberals. 


? Charlie Wiggins - Popular with democrats and progressives. Progressive voters guide: Charlie Wiggins has worked in Washington as both an attorney and judge for more than 30 years. A former judge with Division II of the Court of Appeals, Wiggins frequently sits as a pro-tem judge in Jefferson County. Wiggins' opponent, Justice Richard Sanders, is an anti-choice social conservative who has consistently ruled against LGBT civil rights and the environment. Sanders' time on the court has been marked by political and ethical controversies as well as philosophical opposition to progressive causes.
Seattle switched endorsements because Sanders wasn't afraid to state that some groups have higher crime rates than others and not blame all justice disparities on racism:
In its endorsement, the Times said: “Justice Richard Sanders should be re-elected to the Washington Supreme Court. The court's most fundamental job is to push back against the other two branches of government — the executive and the legislative — when they step on the rights of the people. No member of the court does that more consistently, and with greater gusto, than Sanders.”
But in the wake of controversial comments Justice Sanders made about racial disparities in the criminal justice system, the Times has taken a self-admitted “unusual step” of withdrawing its endorsement of Sanders. “The Seattle Times now supports lawyer Charlie Wiggins, who was a close call in our primary endorsement. We said then that Wiggins was fully qualified to serve on the bench and be a strong voice pushing back against government.”


PUD District 1 Commissiner District 3 (Snohomish County)

X Tanya (Toni) Olson did not jump on the bandwagon to require getting a fixed quota of energy from fashionable, but expensive "alternative" sources. Challenger Brian McMahan wants to press even harder to push the "green" bandwagon and increase the number of board members from 3 to 5, which increases government
? Brian McMahan: If you want to be as green as possible and increase government to do it, vote for this guy. 






2 comments:

Christine said...

Thank you SOOOOO much! You made my job of voting immensely easier. I really appreciate your taking the time to do this. And I am on your side!

Best regards,
Christine

BlArthurHu said...

thanks, that made it worth my time to do the extra 2 hours to write it up on top of filling in the ballot. Tell your friends.