Ed Murray's primary virtue wasn't where he stood on various issues - anyone representing the 43rd is going to be a solid progressive - it's been his effective leadership on said issues to get them passed. The gay rights and the transportation bills are the best examples of this.

What do you want to accomplish the most in the next session and more importantly, *how* will you accomplish it?

Ron Sims has just proposed an increase in the Sales Tax in King County to buy more buses and to increase hours of operation. Currently METRO hours are allocated around the County in a 40-40-20% split with Seattle getting the 20%.
Would you support this ballot measure in November? Please explain your reasoning.
Thank you.

Hi Bill,

That's a pretty vague intro statement. Perhaps some more detail:

-In addition to the question above about transportation, could you explain exactly what role you think the state should have in responding to the viaduct question, and what policy it should promote? Could you also explain why you did not mention transportation in your initial statement?

-As a prosecutory, what do you think about the the war on drugs and the death penalty?

-Also, could you be more specific about education: your stand on the WASL, on recent teacher pay and classroom size ballot intitiatives, on how the legislature responded to those initiatives, what you think about the lawsuit that the Seattle Public Schools have considered filing against the state, and what you think of the state's relationship to community colleges and public universities?

Extra credit: While at Wes, what did you enjoy most about Zonker Harris and Uncle Duke Days?

Alexia - You're absolutely right, Ed Murray's effectiveness has been due to extraordinary legislative skills. But don't discount the importance of focus. Ed's been effective also because he chose specific issues that matter to his district and bore down on those issues relentlessly, with an ability to build majorities.

That's why my focus on environmental protection, public schools, and protecting people will make me effective. I'll use the same skills that helped forge agreement between the Coast Guard and EPA when I was writing oil spill regulations, and the same persistence I brought to cutting red tape between the Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, and other conservation agencies on the US-Mexico border. In the last two legislative sessions, the environmental community has shown extraordinary focus and discipline, and as a result has accomplished a tremendous amount. You can look to me for the same strategy.

Mr. M. - Ron Sims' bus plan makes good sense because it recognizes that reliability, consistency, and convenience are key to getting people to use public transit. If I miss my No. 76 bus to downtown, I might be waiting for a pretty long time for the next one. That deters a lot of people from using transit, especially when they have to transfer between lines. Even though I dislike the sales tax because it's regressive, this will help get more people out of their cars, and that should be our goal.

Trevor - I'll approach transportation issues with three basic principles: First, we need to build what we'll need for the next 50 years, not what has been needed for the last 50 years. That means, in most cases, making sure that transit and other choices are central. Second, we need to pay close attention to the impacts on affected neighborhoods - communities in the 43rd have been hammered time and time again by major transportation projects, and have lost out on promised mitigation. Third, I want to look closely at the environmental impacts of any project, and ask what kind of behavior we're subsidizing. I think the state has a big role in the successor to the Viaduct and 520, and we should make sure we're moving on both projects with full information.

As a prosecutor, I'm much more interested in effectiveness than ideology. I am against the death penalty, and I'd urge the governor to place a moratorium on executions. I think the drug war is about as successful as the Iraq War, and that if we truly want to fight drugs, we should start looking at addiction as a public health issue.

On education, I am deeply concerned about the WASL as a single high-stakes graduation requirement. I think that kids learn differently and demonstrate that learning differently, and that the Legislature took a step in the right direction by allowing students to use multiple measures to demonstrate proficiency. But the WASL can be useful for what it can tell us about schools - in particular, how one school is changing over time. For example, the data on the achievement gap can be helpful in determining what approaches will be most effective in closing that gap.


I voted for both initiatives, and I think the Legislature is failing the state's paramount duty under our Constitution - to provide a public education. We should not be 42nd out of 50 states in per student funding. We should not have an allocation formula that fails to recognize the particular challenges of huge school districts like Seattle's. We should not have a supermajority requirement for levies. We should raise the levy lid to allow Seattle to raise the revenue it needs.


I'm glad you brought up higher education. In the last two sessions, the Legislature has made some real progress in increasing funding for community colleges, and I'd like to see that continue. I will also fight to invest more heavily in UW, which is in the 43rd. It is the single largest economic engine in the state, and it has started to fall far behind its peer institutions in compensation and retention. We need to make sure that UW is producing highly educated, highly skilled graduates who want to stay here in the Puget Sound area, incubating nonprofits and small businesses, and attracting and retaining employers who want to hire them.

And for the extra credit: I remember wandering in the WestCo tunnels with a can of spray paint, sadly realizing that all the good graffitti had already been done.

Mr. Sherman, I'm curious as to where your distrust of Mr. McKenna is placed and why. Aside from being a Republican, his brief record to my knowledge has been free of gay-bashing and he was supported by the state Log Cabin in 2004. This was the sole part of the statement I did not understand, otherwise, thank you for giving us insight into your policy ideals.

Thanks for the response. A prosecutor who doesn't believe in the death penalty and opposes the drug war (though in terms that weren't totally clear about whether decriminalization should accompany treatment) is a rare breed. I hope your record reflects those beliefs.

Also: too bad the tunnels were locked up years ago...

What's your view about tunnel vs. viaduct vs nothing?

Bill,

Thanks for participating in these discussions. The more we do to get the views of the candidates known widely, the better will be the decisionmaking process for the Democratic voters in the 43rd.


I want to raise a couple of issues:

a) Although Washington does permit former felons to regain their voting rights, the state makes it extremely difficult -- requiring completion of all probation and payment of all fines (with interest). As a prosecutor, what are your thoughts on easing or streamlining that process? Would you support including a voter registration form as part of an "exit interview" when prisoners are released?

b) It is apparent from your PDC filings that the great majority of your financial backing comes from outside Seattle, outside King County, indeed outside the state of Washington. Please comment.

TMW - As a prosecutor, I can tell you that the deepest responsibility I have, or the AG has, is in the exercise of discretion within the law. I hope you're right about McKenna, but I promise that as a legislator I will make sure that his discretion is exercised on the side of vigorous enforcement.


Ari - I don't think we have enough facts yet to make a decision on the successor to the viaduct. To many critical questions (how wide would a viaduct be? Where would the exit to a tunnel be? How bad would deisel smog be from a surface boulevard?) have either just been answered or are still unsettled. I think the no-build option deserves a thorough look. With the info we have now, I like the tunnel idea - if we can only find a way to pay for it. And it seems like that's a big "if."


Neal - As you know, I've spoken out in favor of reforming our felon disenfranchisement laws before the 43rd District Democrats.


With regard to support: I'm proud that I'm supported by a former chair, ten current and former board members of the 43rd District Democrats, Seattle environmental leaders and education advocates. It's true that many of my Clinton Administration colleagues who fought with me for environmental protection, who live all over the country, are supporting me.


And it's true that my mom, who lives in Ohio, and my sister, who lives in Bellingham, are supporters. One more difference between me and David Irons!

I want to add to the response to Alexia's question about effectiveness. I've seen Bill Sherman discussing issues with an array of different audiences and he is a rare breed of candidate: he is obviously smart and "gets" the complexities of the issues, but he is also an amazing connector person who listens well to others and draws them. I think those communication and collaboration skills will make him a fantastic leader down in Olympia. So much of being an effective leader is sticking to what you know is right AND working with others to build support for your ideas.

Bill -- I'm glad you think the war on drugs ineffective and are willing to consider drug use a public health issue. But, I hope that if you are elected you would be willing to push the envelope a little bit further and think of drug use in a more civil libertarian fashion.

There is really good work being done locally to craft a war on prohibition. The King County Bar Association has done incredible work on drug policy reform and has gotten buy off on some of its proposals from the state medical association, the state bar and the state pharmacy association. ACLU has been very active. And the citizens of Seattle voted in I-75, making marijuana the lowest enforecement priority.

Unfortunately, state law trumps local law and the state remains mired in the logic of the war on drug users. I'm not posing this as a question, cause I'm not sure what the question would. But the 43rd is a very progressive district, and I would love it if we had a rep who was ready to be proactive on the drug reform issue.

Bill,

I've seen you in action in a few public meetings and applaud your focus on environmental issues. A lot of folks pay lip service to environmental issues, but you actually have a track record. Your legal background also gives me some real hope that you will not just be a vote in favor of environmental issues, but a strong advocate and leader (much like Representative Murray has been on transportation and civil rights).

Bill Sherman seems like a very decent guy. But he's being a little disingenuous about the compostition of his campaign contributions. His PDC filings show a total of $29,830 - with only $6,420, or a little over 20%, coming from Seattle (which includes a lot of folks outside the district). Even assuming that every penny of his small contributions (for which he doesn't need to show individuals) is from Seattle, that would still leave 75% of his money coming from out of town - only 50 of his 176 contributors live in Seattle. I'm glad he's got rich friends from college who still like him, but shouldn't a candidate have a little bit more of a base than 50 people in Seattle?

Walrus,
I think your complaint is a bit disingenious. This is the beginning of a campaign. Who can fault anyone from asking for money from friends and family--wherever they are--to get things started? Bill appears to be in the middle of the pack in terms of fundraising, I don't know how this translates into a bunch of rich friends. You seems to be stretching to make something out of nothing. Issues like who will do a better job protecting our environment is more important than whether a candidate has friends who--heaven forbid--live in Washington DC.

The first list you call through is usually called your "family and friends list", and when you've been as worldly as Mr. Sherman, your first group of donors is bound to look something like this. I'm sure that as his campaign gains traction that you'll start to see more local donors.

Anais and Willis point out that Bill Sherman is starting with the folks who know him to support his campaign. That's my point. Lynne Dodson has a long record of leadership in the community as a labor leader, a leader of the peace movement and a strong advocate for civil rights; Dick Kelley has a good record as a community leader on neighborhood issues and social causes. That's why each of them has hundreds of contributions from folks here in Seattle - because they've provided leadership in the community. If you look through the lists of their contributors, you'll see that almost all of their contributions are in-state, reflecting the constituencies that they've built up through their activity here in Seattle.

I'm a little suspicious about the emptiness of Sherman's initial statement. Kelley laid it out on the table in the beginning with where he stood on key issues. Sherman didn't as much, leaving things a little bit as a kind of go fish game.

WF - you're kidding right? What was Kelley specific about in the beginning. Sherman has better and more directly answered every question. I didn't consider Sherman to be one of the leaders in this campaign but now he is in my top three.

Most candidates are pretty vague on the issues. Lynne Dodson's website - www.lynnetowin.org - has some of the most specific issues statements that I've seen in a while from a candidate. She takes specific stands on a broad range of issues: education, environmental issues, gun control, health care, labor, LGBT concerns, reproductive rights and tax fairness. Go to the "issues" link. It's pretty impressive.

Nothing against Kelley, but Jake is right. Kelley was even less specific than Sherman until folks started asking specific questions. Frankly, I expect all of the candidates to vote the right way on the issues. I think the election should ultimately come back to who will be our best leader and advocate. One vote for a progressive tax system or to clean the Sound isn't worth anything unless you can convince 49 colleagues. Murray was a master at this and leaves big shoes to fill. I think Sherman shows the most promise of any candidate so far.

Bill-

If you're still reading these... Do you think you'd be able to work with very conservative Republicans on issues that are important to folks statewide?

Also, can you give a list of three Seattle legislators that you admire?

Sure, I'm still reading - this is entertaining stuff! Will, it can be pretty difficult to work with people who are diametrically opposed to you. But working as a prosecutor, you develop a pretty tough hide, you don't take much personally, and you always look for windows of agreement to open.


One way to make progress with the other side is to work hard at coming up with new ways to look at old problems. I've seen new creativity and energy, in particular, in the environmental movement and in organized labor in the last few years. The Apollo Alliance for energy independence or the biofuels push, for example, gives us a chance to put together a coalition of labor, environmentalists, farmers, tech, manufacturing, and national security advocates to accomplish something pretty remarkable (and very progressive). It's a good model to follow on other issues that cross the Cascade (or ideological) divide.

For your second question: I most admire Ed Murray's legislative ability and perseverence; Sharon Tomiko Santos's work giving voice to those often left out of the legislative process; and, though he's outside of Seattle, Hans Dunshee's commitment to environmental protection and issues of importance to working families.

Needless to say Frank Chopp is more of a state figure, but he has done an incredible job, especially in the last two sessions.

"Most candidates are pretty vague on the issues. Lynne Dodson's website - www.lynnetowin.org - has some of the most specific issues statements that I've seen in a while from a candidate." - Walrus

For her lack of media attention, I too have found Dodson to be rather impressive. I'm quite looking forward to her interview on Friday, moreso than Street or Pure, at least.