 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Contents this page were published in the September/October, 1997 edition of the Washington Free Press.
WFP, 1463 E. Republican #178, Seattle, WA -USA, 98112. -- [email protected]
Copyright � 1997 WFP Collective, Inc.
WFP's Picks and Pans for Vote '97
Who is enthusiastic about politics these days? Voting is too often a civic duty engaged in only to prevent even worse things from happening. In King County and Seattle this year, things are different. In fact, you'll even have the opportunity to agonize over which good candidate to vote for in some races. We're focusing on Seattle and King County races because the chance for a major shakeup there is about as good as anywhere in the state. Here are our recommendations in some of the more interesting races.
Ron Sims for King County Executive
No Endorsement for Mayor of Seattle
The WFP doesn't like either of the main candidates for leader of Seattle. However, it is necessary to point out that Chong may be a better pick... he'll be a lot easier to dislodge than Schell, who has all the makings of a boss for life once he gets into that sinecure.
Richard Conlin For City Council Position #2
Conlin will help provide a vision that has been absent given the City's current leadership. Conlin helped organize Sustainable Seattle, a forum for developing indicators for measuring the region's movement toward environmental and social health. More recently, he was publisher of In Context (now Yes!) magazine, a leading national voice on socially and environmentally-sustainable communities.
Conlin can get down to nuts and bolts, too. While on a citizens' oversight board of Seattle City Light, Conlin helped to save rate payers millions of dollars in unnecessary rate increases. Conlin wants to use needed projects, such as rapid transit, to ensure the City creates enough family-wage jobs. Conlin calls for a city that is "...a model for the world of environmental quality, economic health, and social justice." Why should we accept anything less?
For Position #3, Vote Peter Steinbrueck
Peter Steinbrueck has been involved on the right side of issues most of his life, learning progressive urban politics from his father Victor, who designed the Space Needle and organized the successful effort to save the Pike Place Market from "redevelopment." Steinbrueck Jr. has been in the thick of things during most struggles to save the soul and character of the city. He was a major player in the successful late 80's battle to control the downtown building boom. When weird financial shenanigans threatened to leave the Pike Place Market in the control of New York investors, Steinbrueck led the battle to retain public control. Architect Steinbrueck has also pledged to focus on solving the low-income and affordable housing crunch. With Steinbrueck on the Council, progressives can stop fighting rearguard actions against downtown glitz and corporate welfare, and begin creating a more humane and livable city.
City Council Position #4: No Endorsement
City Council Position #6: Ya Gotta Licata
Among the City Council candidates, Nick Licata has the most substantial record of public service. When it came time to organize against sports-welfare, Licata quickly stepped up to the plate by co-directing Citizens for More Important Things. As President of 911 Media Arts, Licata worked to open media and arts production facilities open to average citizens. Licata organized Friends of Westlake Park which engaged in an epic (losing) battle for a downtown park instead of a shopping mall. When the City planned to lease a parking garage with the potential for $1 million annual revenue to the Convention Center for one dollar, Licata was the one blowing the whistle.
Whether it's stumping for low-income housing, or advocating for open government, Licata has never wavered from his vision of a democratic, humane city. He is running an energetic, grassroots campaign that has also been very effective in racking up major endorsements. Most recently, Licata picked up the support of both the King County Labor Council, and the King County Women's Political Caucus. Licata will ask the hard questions of the City bureaucracy and his Council colleagues, and has the demonstrated experience to get things done.
Seattle City Attorney
Mark Sidran is running unopposed, so we advise writing in Anne C. Dederer as a protest vote. She is a welfare rights attorney, works for the Fremont Public Association representing low income and homeless people. She previously worked 5 years as a public defender with the Society of Counsel Representing Accused Persons. Your local voting booth attendants can assist you with write in specifics.
Ortman for Port Watchdog
The Seattle Port Commission has a way of eating citizen activists and spitting out corporate free-traders. Port politics is high politics, where establishment politicos make multibillion dollar decisions affecting things as diverse as the direction of waterfront development, the flow of trade in and out of the Northwest, and the development of Sea-Tac Airport. If there is anyone with the integrity to stand up to this pressure, it is former Northwest Director of Friends of the Earth David Ortman. Ortman is running against Jack Block for Position Number 1 in the county-wide race with calls for regional cooperation, political openness at the Port, and environmental responsibility.
Taking advantage of an obscure ordinance allowing citizens to petition to change the name of the Port, Ortman along with a group called King County Citizens for a Responsible Port presented petitions in early September to change its name to the Port of King County, emphasizing regionalism over city-centrism. Ortman will work to eliminate the property tax subsidy for the Port, which too often funds boondoggles, and will help mitigate the effects of Sea-Tac expansion. Putting Ortman on the Port is the best way to bring a gale of fresh air to Port operations.
Medicinal Marijuana (I-685)
The Free Press is actually split on this Initiative, mainly on civil rights grounds. There are good arguments for and against the proposed bill.
Argument FOR: By failing to set up a nationalized system or state-run system (as exists in most of the industrialized world) the government has opted OUT of health care. On this basis alone, doctors should be allowed to make medical decisions without governmental interference... especially if a doctor and a patient agree that a substance, particularly marijuana, is making a positive contribution to the elimination of suffering. This initiative unties the hands of doctors allowing them to conduct, as they see fit, the business of healing. At the same time, it will unclog the courts and jails of the non-violent drug-related offenders who have become political prisoners of the failed "War" on drugs, not to mention state tax burdens. This is the first marijuana related Initiative in recent memory to make it to an actual vote. Thus, it is a chance to prove that in WA State, zero tolerance itself is intolerable.
Argument AGAINST: The main problem with the bill is the part where it whacks violent offenders upside the head. If you are caught doing a violent crime while having a controlled substance in your system, they get to lock you up and throw away the key. Especially given the fact that some drugs make people violent, I don't see the logic in throwing the book at some criminals (like somebody high on PCP who gets surly with the arresting cop) while classifying others as medical cases. This bill does a lot more than legalize marijuana for medical use, alas. I think it is kind of shameful that its supporters aren't totally up-front about it, and hide their sweeping (and in many ways supportable) agenda behind the suffering of cancer and glaucoma victims. We would have been much better served by a simple, straightforward bill truly (and solely) aimed at "medical marijuana" or even legalizing pot in general.
YES on Handgun Safety (I-676)
The constitutionally protected right to own and fire deadly weapons made sense when bears and cougars roamed our backyards. The apparent war zone American society has become since frontier times is no doubt due to the gun industry's constant churning out of every caliber weapon imaginable. Gangs aren't making these guns. The handgun industry inadvertantly feeds the black market just as surely as it provides legitimate gun owners with their weapons. A little handgun regulation here and there is a godsend at best, a necessary evil at worst.
Admittedly, this Initiative deals only with legitimate gun owners. The trigger locks that would be required on stored and transported weapons may keep two or three kids a year from blowing each other's heads off on accident when they stumble across Daddy's gun in the closet. I-676 is worth voting for on this point alone. The additional safety classes required of gun owners may seem like a hassle to NRA members, but how can someone be too educated on gun safety? Gun owners argue that, were this to pass, there is a potential for the licensing of their weapons (how else would police enforce this law?). They feel this would be an unconstitutional invasion of their privacy. Ironically, this may be a moot point: They've already voluntarily announced their gun ownership (to neighbors and to the world) by placing multiple "No on 676" signs in their front yards and stickers on their cars. (Before the election, spot these signs around your neighborhood... now you know whose houses your kids shouldn't play at... until the trigger locks are in place, that is.)
YES on Sexual Preference Protection (I-677)
Simply put, under this law, an employer or landlord would no longer be allowed to use sexual preference as a reason for firing or evicting a person. It's not a special protection... it's just official equalization of existing protections.
Seattle MonoRail
VOTE YES!! It'll be 50 years before they do these routes with the RTA system, and after reading Scigliano's article in the Seattle Weekly (October 22, '97), it doesn't sound so hare-brained after all. If nothing else, this is the coolest protest vote in town!
|
|
|
|
|