Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« Pot Addled Motherfuckers | Why Don't We Put on a Show? »

Friday, April 21, 2006

The Race for the 43rd: Lynne Dodson

Posted by on April 21 at 8:00 AM

Today is the last day of our week-long look at candidates who want to be the next state representative from Seattle’s 43rd District. So far we’ve heard from Dick Kelley, Bill Sherman, Jim Street, and Stephanie Pure. Today we hear from Lynne Dodson.

(There is also a sixth candidate, Jamie Pedersen, whom I wrote about in The Stranger two weeks ago.)

It’s been made clear, over the last four days, that the Slog has some pretty serious policy geeks among its readership. Which is great. You guys have done a fantastic job of peppering (and in some cases pestering) the candidates with your (mostly) sharp questions. In a race where the major difficulty for voters is going to be differentiating among six good liberals, you’ve helped highlight some interesting differences among the contenders.

I’ll be doing a post on Monday to see who you liked best, but for now, one more to go… Y’all know the drill:

Got something you want to ask Dodson? Post it in the comments. She’ll check in periodically throughout the day to answer questions. (Don’t understand what any of this is about? Click here.)


Lynne Dodson

Money Raised: $30,446

www.LynneToWin.org

All of the candidates in this race talk about public education. I am the only candidate who has worked in and for public education my entire career. I’m not running because I’ve always wanted to be a politician. I’m a teacher and an activist who is tired of seeing our state’s future shortchanged.

My website (www.LynneToWin.org) has detailed positions on a broad range of issues, so I will briefly outline my background and priorities here.

I’m a graduate of the University of Washington (Ph.D., Social Welfare), a teacher at Seattle Central, the mother of two Seattle public school graduates, president of the faculty union for the Seattle community colleges and an education activist. I know the issues facing our schools.

Pre-K, K-12, community colleges, and the four-year college system compete for scarce funding. Washington State is 42nd in the nation in per-student funding and 46th in class size. We face threats like attacks on the education trust fund, charter schools and rapidly increasing tuition costs.

We need to prioritize public education and fund it, not just talk about its importance while diverting funds and shifting costs onto families and students.

We need more teachers — people who confront the consequences of inadequate funding — in the legislature to be directly involved in policy and decision making to create a seamless pre-K through higher education system, and to address the unstable and unfair tax system that prevents our state from adequately funding education.

I’ve been effective in working for change as an elected union leader and a legislative and community activist. I’ve helped build coalitions among labor and education constituents to fight for educational initiatives at all levels. I’ve worked to keep tuition low and eliminate I-200 restrictions to increase access and opportunity in our four-year colleges.

My roots and my passion have been in fighting for social justice: developing programs to reduce institutional racism in job training programs, policy work on welfare and teen parent programs, educating about the effects of trade policies. I’ve walked the picket line for workers’ rights and helped organize two of the largest anti-war rallies in our state’s history. I’m effective because I know when to hit the pen and paper and when to hit the streets.

I brought hundreds of faculty and students to Olympia to lobby for education, tax reform, health care, unemployment, civil rights, and worker safety. I’ve testified at committee hearings and drafted proposed legislation. I’ve built coalitions to ensure social services, labor issues and education are not being pitted against one another for scarce resources (while funds for corporate welfare seem inexhaustible).

We need to approach our state’s opportunities and challenges in new ways. We must get away from our “can’t do” timidity and fight for our principles and values. I’m an agent for change. I’ve learned we can create the world — and the state — we want. We need to have the vision to see it, and the leadership, creativity and energy to work for it. I do and I will.


CommentsRSS icon

The word on the street on your past Green Party affiliations is troubling. Do you have the respect of the active and loyal Democrats in the day-to-day trenches of party organizing?
Please explain your choices in the 2000 and 2004 election cycles and where and how you threw your support.
Thank you.

BB - your question points more towards why the Democratic party is becoming irrelevant to progressives more than anything else. What are you, the liberal voter mafia? Any cult would love to have you keep their members in check I'm sure.

Glad you asked – maybe we can dispense with this early and talk about relevant issues to this race!

I’ve been a democrat since 1972 (when I was 11 – to answer those age questions!) when McGovern/Shriver posters papered my bedroom wall. I’ve had the same core values ever since – a yearning for social justice, peace, an end to racism and poverty, a strong belief that a wealthy, powerful country should focus on eradicating hunger and homelessness and build public education and democracy.

Remember 1999? Many democrats actually thought we could move the party closer to its progressive base. We thought fair trade, people over corporate power, debt forgiveness for poor countries, eradicating international poverty were possible and worth fighting for. We also thought Bush was a dope who didn’t stand a chance of winning.

So, yes – early in 2000, I did support Ralph Nader and his message of global economic justice. Later, I became disenchanted with his positions (or failure to be strong) on racial justice, women, and GLBT issues. It also became more clear that Bush was not an obvious loser. As a labor leader, I worked on the Gore campaign. I walked precincts, handed out thousands of flyers at work to faculty and students, spent hours calling to turn out the vote – I did a lot more as a lukewarm supporter than most people did as full-out, no dissent allowed democrats. And I still want the Dems to get back to our values.

In 2004 I liked Kucinich (then Dean) in the primary. I worked my butt off for Kerry – mostly through good old fashioned grass roots campaigning – registering hundreds of voters, holding the Debate Watch with hundreds of participants at the college, sponsoring parties, doorbelling, sign-waving, leafleting and phone calling. I swore if Kerry lost it wouldn't be because of a lack of effort on my, or my union's/friends/neighbors part!

Now, can we move on?

Lynne, I'm not sure we can just "move on" - I'm concerned by what your having been taken in by that snake oil peddler, Nader, has to say about your judgment, even if it was only a few months' flirtation with his candidacy. How do we know that in the future, you won't again substitute your own idealism for the cold political reality that we all live with in this politically divided state? We need to know that your frustrations with your own party's lack of "leftiness" on the issues you care about most won't cause you to simply bolt when the going gets tough.

Well, I haven't bolted yet - just worked really diligently and effectively - in Olympia, and in Seattle for education, for labor, and for democrats!

Currently, I have nearly 400 contributors to my campaign - more small contributors than any other candidate, and more contributors over all as of the latest updates to the PDC. Sure, some Greens, lots of Democrats, Independents, even a couple of Republicans. I'm good at bringing people in and together - and good at building coalitions to get things done.

Jeff and Anais, I created a little forum for you party line Dems over in the Stranger's forum section. Have at it and let the normal intelligent discussion that has been happening in the Slog with the candidates continue. Invite some of your cultish Dem party insiders to participate. Should be fun.

Great anwers Lynn, excited to read more about your positions.

Jim Street - just took my vote.

Sorry, Lynne, many of us have long been left in the Democratic party.

And we saw the slimy plot of Nader to throw the election early on. Remember - the pat and banal slogan, there is no difference between the parties? God, what damage to America that phony and cynical mantra caused.

Nader has never fessed up to how much the Greens paid him as their hired celebrity candidate.

And he took money from Bushies to get on the ballots in Calif. and Michigan. What a sorry spectacle of betrayal of the American left per se.

Even the Euro Greens we yelling as loud as they could it was a bitter strategy to help elect a THREAT to the enviroment while pretending to be pro enivronment.

When George Bush lauches nukes, and I fear it will happen somewhere, I will curse Ralph Nader one more time.

Wow, what an amazing coincidence! Alison and Anais independently sent in identical emails! I guess the campaign they're fronting for screwed up and gave the same assignment to two committee members. If a campaign wants to attack other candidates on this blog, why doesn't the candidate send the email himself or herself, instead of asking committee members to forward something obviously written by someone else?

Wow, what an amazing coincidence! Alison and Anais independently sent in identical emails! I guess the campaign they're fronting for screwed up and gave the same assignment to two committee members. If a campaign wants to attack other candidates on this blog, why doesn't the candidate send the email himself or herself, instead of asking committee members to forward something obviously written by someone else?

OK clearly some people can't move on though I'd suggest that Lynne only answer the Nader-hater question once.

Lynne, I have a question.

Very few candidates in the blogs so far have said anything about the state's economy or about the need for family wage jobs. I don't want to pigeonhole you as only a labor person, because you're clearly more than that, but can you say what difference your labor background and connections might make in this race, and in particular on what issues?

I appreciate your extra effort to create a forum for me, Dave, but I think I'll stay right in this discussion. For me (I can't speak for Anais) the question is not about towing the party line. The question is about whether the candidate recognizes that we have a de facto two-party system in this state, and if yes, then is she willing to work within that system (having announced her candidacy for one of the two parties' nominations)? Or will she - for the sake of "global economic justice" or some other passion of hers - occasionally play foolish, dangerous games with electoral politics, furthering the interests of the Republican party in the process? That's what I'd like to know before we hand her a platform like a state House seat.

I for one am pleased to see a woman running for this seat, and feel it is important that the Washington state legislature continue to set standards for forward looking legislation on matters such as sex trafficking and mail order brides. I'm interested to learn more about your thoughts and experience on progressive feminist issues.

Jeff, Allison, Anais, N, et al: Making the same point over and over is subterfuge, not Q&A.

I can't believe Lynne is getting attacked on spurious issues. The same post four times!

Looks like someone is very nervous about the Dodson campaign.

Maybe that's because she is running the strongest campaign, and has a track record of getting things done. Or because she won't be a status quo "Seattle Democrat" and people know she will get it done.

We know Lynne is the candidate to beat in this race but it would probably serve the voters if we focused on who will be the best legislator.

Lynne did an excellent job of outlining her priorities in Olympia. I'm sure she will keep running hard. Thanks to everyone who is proving she is the front runner in this race!!

I've worked with Lynne for quite some years. Clearly, there are a number of good, solid progressive candidates for the 43rd District seat. But I think there are several things that distinguish Lynne.

First, Lynne has strong experience representing a broad constituency as an elected leader, as President of the teachers' union local at Seattle Community Colleges and as Vice President of the statewide American Federation of Teachers - as well as having been active in both the central labor council and the State labor council. That means she's learned to listen to diverse viewpoints, and help to build consensus. And it also means that she's been responsible to a membership with a range of views.

Second, as Co-Chair of Washington State Jobs with Justice, a coalition of over 140 labor, faith, community and student organizations, Lynne has helped to build solidarity among groups with diverse interests and viewpoints. It's not enough to represent the progressive 43rd; the Rep. also has to be able to work with and win over folks with very different viewpoints. JwJ has united Department of Defense workers with faith-based peace activists, and timber-reliant labor unions with forest activists.

Third, Lynne has a successful record on winning support for community colleges and her union's goals in the legislature; but she also knows how to get people out on the streets, and she's not afraid to do that when it's necessary. I'm frankly tired of public officials who claim that they're on our side, but are afraid to be seen at a rally or a picket line. Lynne's shown that she can win over legislators through persuasion, and she's also been there fighting on every front for peace, social justice, LGBT rights, immigrant rights and, of course, the interests of working families.

I don't see why we should bother Lynne with questions about her Nader actions, it's not like the last six years of H311 are because there actually _was_ a difference between Bush and Gore ...

However, to the issues at hand, what EXACTLY is your position on the Viaduct replacement? Should we spend lots of money on an underwater tunnel for billionaires or take the state money to build a replacement elevated Viaduct, since the state won't let us spend it on a Transit Plus Surface option?

And, followup, exactly how do you see your exact role in fixing our transit and transportation problems if elected to the state legislature?

Oh, and what's your position on gay marriage?

Jim Street? who's he? wasn't he like some guy who worked at Boeing? is he in this race? I thought he was dead ...


Sure, Trevor – thanks for asking.

I’m proud to be a part of the labor movement because we are representing workers’ voices on the issues that affect our everyday working lives. As a labor union leader and member, I’ve spent a lot of time in Olympia working on issues such as unemployment benefits, health care, workplace safety, the right to organize, apprenticeship programs, and of course – public education funding and public employee salaries.

In general, for the best decisions on our most pressing issues (education, transportation, health care, environment, economic justice) we need to be sure that representatives from labor are included in discussions.

The issues I think are most pressing, given my background in labor are:

Education – the best way to ensure a strong business climate, provide retraining, apprenticeships, and a well trained, responsive, workforce is to ensure we have the best educational system in the country. Dollars spent on early childhood education, K-12, our two and four year colleges return incredible dividends to the state.

Health care – too many people are uninsured or underinsured in this state. In nearly every contract negotiation over the last few years – one of the biggest issues is increasing costs and declining benefits (and that’s for those fortunate enough to have coverage). We have to address this issue.

Tax fairness – we can’t have the kind of educational system, health care, social service network we need without changes to our current tax structure. We have the most regressive tax system in the country and it is very unstable. It’s regressive for individuals, and it’s regressive for small business (where many workers, work!). We have to address this - the state legislature can wrest this issue from the permanently offensive Eyman and take the lead in creating a fairer and more stable system.

Contracting out – in many of our major industries (eg: aerospace, technology) contracting out has become very popular in order to reduce employment costs. Recently, Boeing won a contract to build 787’s. Tax incentives helped them win this bid. Yet, they’ve subcontracted out much of the work to non-union, low wage companies. This happens again and again. We have to ensure tax incentives are used for the purposes for which they are intended – increasing employment and wages in Washington. This also links directly to our need to ensure prevailing wage standards are met, and workers in low wage industries are free to organize.

I could go on and on – there are so many pressing issues! We have to defend and protect immigrant worker rights, civil rights on the job for women, people of color, and LGBT community, and forging labor/environmental alliances to promote both jobs and environmental stewardship. We need family leave policies, and to protect unemployment, worker’s compensation, and minimum wage laws. While about 20% of the non-agricultural workers in this state are organized, that means most workers are not. We need to increase the ability of workers to practice their fundamental right to organize.

I believe solutions to these issues lie in strong alliances and collaboration. My work in the labor movement builds this!


Great questions!

On progressive feminist issues: I would like to add my voice in the legislature to the good, nationally recognized work of Velma Veloria and Jeanne Kohl-Welles on curtailing sex trafficking. I am a pro-choice feminist who does and will continue to work against restrictions on a woman’s right to control her own body; think we need comprehensive sex education in schools; comparable worth; and incentives to promote the use of women and minority contractors.

On transportation: The state legislature decides how much of tax dollars can be used for transit (and current law requires all gas tax money go to roads, not transit) – we need to increase the money available for options that develop public transportation; we need to find new ways of funding transportation (see tax fairness!); we need to develop a comprehensive transit system that gives options for single car occupancy; and we need to improve freight mobility. I would work to bring together constituencies to consider our long term transportation goals, then strategically plan accordingly.

On the viaduct specifically – I was leaning toward a San Francisco-like Embarcadero; unfortunately, we don’t have a San Francisco-like mass transportation (or street/highway) system. We have to focus on the goal – we need a beautiful, vibrant waterfront; we have a working port (one of the few natural deep water ports on the West Coast) so we need freight mobility options; we can’t decrease capacity (and get funding); we need to consider the viaduct in concert with a goal of increasing public transportation throughout the city; and we need to be able to both afford it, and live with it. I haven’t made up my mind about the options. We should, at the state level, ensure there is enough flexibility in funding so the city can make decisions about transportation that include more public transit options.

On gay marriage: I support full marriage equality. I don’t think people should have any civil rights denied because they are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender.

This has been invigorating, but I have to go facilitate a discussion on salary negotiations – I’ll respond again later!

For Lynne Dodson - Can you talk a little about your position on the environment? Thanks.

Hi, Lynne,

TERRIFIC answers.

And what an incredible background you bring to this race!

I agree with you that we need more teachers in the legislature, especially ones with a track record like yours on a range of progressive issues.

I'll pose to you the same question I asked Jim Street:

In light of the state legislature's failure to repeal I-200, where do you stand on affirmative action?

And you get a bonus question too: What kind of work have you done around immigrant rights?

Go, fight, win, Lynne!

Why is our state - with "Democrat" majorities in the House, Senate, and control of the Governor's mansion - 42nd in education funding? I know! It's because of Ralph Nader!

Why is our state - with "Democrat" majorities in the House, Senate, and control of the Governor's mansion - one of only a handful that deny voting rights to ex-felons? Must be due to Nader taking votes from Gore/Kerry!

Why is our state - with "Democrat" majorities in the House, Senate, and control of the Governor's mansion - the most unfair/regressive in the country when it comes to taxation? The scourge of Nader once again!

Why did so-called "Democrats" support Charter Schools, NEW unaccountable corporate tax exemptions, cutting funding for I-728/I-732, exhibit NO leadership on meaningful tax reform? Darn that Nader!

Why do these so-called "Democrats" in our state government get away with these things? Well, lots of reasons, but certainly among them is that supposedly informed people – like some on this SLOG – believe that obviously irrelevant issues like national political figures, and national presidential races have anything other than small, indirect relationships to the central issues facing our state's legislature.

By way of introducing a line of discussion that's at least in the ballpark of relevance (as opposed to the irrelevant, Green-baiting drivel posted by some, so far), I would like to know why we should think that candidates who take pride in working for the World Bank(!) and who take serious donations from downtown developers (Street got $700
from Martin Selig), who are corporate lawyers (Pederson), or whose political careers haven’t involved a whole lot more than Party careerism and internal "Democrat" back-scratching (Kelley), should be expected to do anything OTHER than the usual go-along-to-get-along "Seattle Democrat" drill, as per the above legislative silliness, once they get down to Olympia.

I'm for Lynne Dodson: I'll take a real Democrat, truly committed to the core values of what the Democrats SHOULD be about - who has actually spent serious time in the streets and in committee hearing rooms, building coalitions through grass-roots organizing, and drafting meaningful policy language & testifying for forward-thinking legislation, fighting for public education, for working people, for inclusion, dignity and civil rights for all - over yet one more tired, compromised, bought-off, Seattle "phone-in", phony "Democrat" any day of the week!

Lynne Dodson is the only elected labor union leader in this race. Lynne Dodson is the only teacher and long-time public education advocate in this race. Lynne Dodson is the only mother in this race. Her campaign donor list, her professional and political life work, and her direct personal life experience show what values and what constituencies Lynne Dodson will be accountable to in Olympia.

I think Kelley was pretty clear about his accomplishments, which are not minimal, and which are a lot more than mere "party backscratching." That kind of blanket accusation, when a number of accomplished activists are supporting Kelley, is not going to help Lynne's cause.

Case in point is endorsements. I don't mean to stir up trouble in noting this, but in comparing their endorsements, it struck me that both Kelley and Dodson list Larry Gosset as an endorser on their web pages. Did he do a dual endorsement? If he did, I think it perfectly expresses the quandry I feel over this race.

Well, and I think this is a very important question for people deciding about this race, I'll ask: When the Democratic Party caucus leadership comes to Kelley, asking him to vote a certain way "for the Party" -- even if this certain way is for yet more corporate tax breaks, wacko school ideas, tip credit, corporate welfare for sports teams, supporting Walmart, etc. -- given his donor lists, and endorsers, and his long-standing ties to the Party, how will he vote?

In general, a candidate's stands and positions are certainly worth looking at and carefully considering. But, I believe, at least as important are the constituencies to which that candidate has chosen to be accountable.

Lynne Dodson, independent of the articulated positions she has taken, is going to be held accountable by the education community, parents, and organized working people. I like them odds better.

Okay – I’m back, looking forward to your questions and comments! Here’s to Canned Heat and Feminista…

On the environment: I’m very glad that Governor Gregoire has committed to the clean up of the Sound. I recently also signed on (as did my union) to the No on 933 campaign. Under my leadership, our union has supported many environmental initiatives – including shutting down the FFTF reactor at Hanford, restricting the transport of nuclear waste, and increasing the use of biodiesel fuels. I’ve also encouraged student groups at the college in ways they can get the school to use alternative energy options. There are some fantastic opportunities at the state level, we could get legislation passed that would meet or beat the Kyoto standards; promote green buildings, ban toxic flame retardants, and ensure our state parks are accessible without fees. We can also have the state use Forest Stewardship Council-certified wood products which involves the protection of old growth or endangered forests and guarantees respect for worker rights. Big picture-wise, we need to reduce our dependence on cars – that means more transportation choices (public transportation, bike and pedestrian friendly commuting options.) We also need to seriously examine and address environmental justice issues so that poor neighborhoods are not ignored when regulating business practices and clean-up.

We needn’t pit jobs against the environment, and I’ve worked to build alliances between environmental and labor groups. We can strengthen our economy and protect the environment!

Affirmative Action: Tim Eyman’s foray into discrimination didn’t start with his initiative this year – he was a major player in I-200 too. I was the advisor to “Students Against I-200” and worked with labor on opposition to it as well. I have been surprised that the state legislator has not repealed at least portions of it, especially considering it did not pass with as much support as other initiatives the state legislature suspended (class size and teacher cost of living adjustments). We’ve seen a decline in the number of women and minority contractors, and students of color in our universities since its passage. I would support repealing part or all of it. Or, if we can’t repeal it, we can certainly mitigate its harmful effects – provide incentives to businesses that actively recruit minority and women contractors and employees, encourage the colleges (and K-12 schools) to use multiple measures to prove achievement, and, of course – adequately fund our early childhood through higher education system so that we can address disparities effectively.

Immigrant Rights: This is a critical issue right now – for education, for labor, for civil rights. I’ve worked with unions in organizing, supporting, protecting, and extending immigrant worker rights; in the colleges on securing funding for, and strengthening programs that serve immigrant populations; with community groups like Casa Latina and Comite; and as the Chair of Washington State Jobs with Justice one of our annual priorities for the last several years has been immigrant worker rights.

Hi WF –

Yes, Larry Gossett endorsed both of us – in the interest of fairness, he also endorsed Jim Street. He’s worked with all of us in different venues and apparently believes any one of us would do a good job as a state representative.

This is certainly the quandary in this race – good people, intent on serving the state, and pretty progressive are running for the same seat in one of the most progressive and politically active districts in the state. I’m proud to be in such company and certainly respect my opponents and their accomplishments.

So, the question is – what sets us apart? We are pretty likely to vote similarly on a lot of issues. In the 43rd District, we are at the heart of the crisis in public education – we have two public colleges in our district, and many public K-12 schools. As a teacher and education activist, I understand the issues facing us in public education, and I know how to effectively address them. I also have spent my life building coalitions and relationships between organizations to get things done. I’ve worked on a lot of social justice issues, I’ve been effective at both listening to, and organizing constituents – both for education issues, and for labor issues. We need more voices for working people in Olympia and we need more teachers in Olympia!

Besides that – I’m going to win! I’ve been working on this race, like I work on everything – tirelessly, by bringing people with lots of different perspectives together on a common goal - to win. I have a great grassroots campaign, and I’ve worked effectively with people on so many important issues, in so many venues – people who know me (mostly) like me and even those with whom I’ve disagreed or sat across the table from (eg: contract negotiations!) – agree that I am principled, courageous, and effective. They’ll vote for me too.

Brigitta asks:

Well, and I think this is a very important question for people deciding about this race, I'll ask: When the Democratic Party caucus leadership comes to Kelley, asking him to vote a certain way "for the Party" -- even if this certain way is for yet more corporate tax breaks, wacko school ideas, tip credit, corporate welfare for sports teams, supporting Walmart, etc. -- given his donor lists, and endorsers, and his long-standing ties to the Party, how will he vote?

Aside from the fact that he's strongly against "corporate tax breaks, wacko school ideas, tip credit, corporate welfare for sports teams, supporting Walmart, etc.", he can also tell those unnamed bogeymen (and any other special interest groups) that they don't own him. Because he refuses to be bought by them. Because he'll return any and all contributions from them greater than $100 in the primary and $100 in the general election.

We're going to elect someone in the 43rd to represent us in Olympia, to influence the political climate in our direction ... not to fight against the legislative process, not to foment a rebellion. Whoever we elect is going to have to get along with his or her colleagues as well as exercise influence in order to move them in a direction that strengthens the common-good underpinnings of the Democratic party. It's a fine balance, necessitating progressive energy as well as political acumen, backbone as well as the capacity to compromise. We should be looking for a candidate who encompasses all of those strengths.

N -

What's the point of Dick collecting the $100 for the General election, when we all know that there won't be a General election of any consequence?

I was married to Lynne and we raised two children. I think I can discuss her character with some authority. Lynne is clear thinking, warm, articulate, intelligent and compassionate. She has proven effective working with diverse groups of people. Lynne knows how to work through to solutions. She is balanced and calmly provides creative focus within difficult situations. She is genuine.

Lynne believes in hard work, equity and respecting people regardless of their station in life. These are principles of the Democratic Party.

It seems simple enough. Does a candidate reflect their spoken values and beliefs by way of their actions? Do they walk their talk? Look at Lynne's record. Talk with her. Is there really any doubt? Lynne has always acted upon her belief that government exists to support people...all people, regardless of their economic or social station in life. Lynne acts upon a personal and moral obligation to make this world a better place for those who are in need. This again, is a truely deomocratic principal. Do we as Democrats want a representative that would act in any other way?

Families, working people and underrepresented people of all pursuasions have traditionaly seen the Democratic party as their political hope in this country. In Olympia, part of her duty will be to speak clearly for their needs. Would we as Democrats want a representive that would not see this as an obligation?

Again, look at her record. Lynne has never been a member of the Green Party or sought their endorsement or to represent them in office. Period. Has she at times been frustrated, hoped and pushed the Democratic Party to speak more forcefully? Haven't you? The bottom line is that Lynne has been a member of the Democratic party all of her voting life. We are fortunate that she is willing to step up and be a voice for us in Olympia.

First of all, thank you, Lynne for your thoughtful responses, and especially for your calm rejoinder to the bizarre, venemous (strangely repeated!) anti-Nader attacks. (I could go on about that issue, and about the naive lack of historical perspective involved in reacting so strongly to third party movements, but that's an argument for another place. In brief--splinter parties have always tried to shift major parties more in the direction of their ideological beliefs. Sometimes it has, in fact, been an effective tactic. The 43rd is a very progressive district. It's perfectly natural to expect that truly progressive forces here will sometimes consider using this tactic to try to bring the Dems back to their roots.)

In reference to N's statement that Kelley
"refuses to be bought by them. Because he'll return any and all contributions from them greater than $100 in the primary and $100 in the general election."
I wonder, what's the magic of the $100 level? Does this mean he might be tempted to be bought at $200? Or even at the maximum of $700? That seems a pretty paltry sales price. I don't think that level of contribution really signifies much. More important is if there's a pattern of the bulk of contributions coming from some special interest or segment of the population. A candidate IS probably going to be responsive to what he/she considers to be his/her main constituencies. This applies to Kelley as well as the other candidates. All of the candidates in this race have some more or less defined constituencies. The question is, which ones represent the direction we, as voters, want to move in? I notice that Lynne's contributions come from a spectrum of labor, education, LGBT, humans rights interests, activists, and lots of just plain folks who don't have a lot of money to give. That says a lot.

Really, the $100 limit thing is kind of a gimmick, isn't it? As Willis points out, by chosing to go this route, Kelley can't use his 'surplus' contributions (now about $5000) in the primary, which is the election that counts. What's the point? It's not like this is really any kind of real election reform. As I say, it seems like a gimmick.

The reality of this candidate is that she is someone who is capable of governing. She is a woman of enormous integrity, intelligence and committment. I have worked with Lynne in a variety of situations and am thrilled that she is willing to represent us in Olympia. She is the absolute best candidate on all of the issues that matter in this district - Lynne is the clear choice for the 43rd!

Lynn's passion and commitment to those she serves is outstanding. i.e. She helped when I was in a health crisis and celebrated when I became Poet Populist. Politicians who are supportive of the arts? Yes!

Lynn's passion and commitment to those she serves is outstanding. i.e. She helped when I was in a health crisis and celebrated when I became Poet Populist. Politicians who are supportive of the arts? Yes!

I believe in Lynne Dodson and am proud that she is running for the 43rd District legislative seat. Her background and experience in Labor and Education are unmatched by any other candidate. She is also passionate about environmental issues for our region and will fight for them with the same conviction she brings to every activist cause she takes on. Contrary to the negative blogs earlier posted, she not only did not support Nader, she campaigned for Gore.

Joan Burton

I believe in Lynne Dodson and am proud that she is running for the 43rd District legislative seat. Her background and experience in Labor and Education are unmatched by any other candidate. She is also passionate about environmental issues for our region and will fight for them with the same conviction she brings to every activist cause she takes on. Contrary to the negative blogs earlier posted, she not only did not support Nader, she campaigned for Gore.

Joan Burton

I have worked with Lynne in the AFT Local 1789 for the past seven years. She is one of the smartest, most principled, hard working people that I have ever met. She has set an incredibly high standard for leadership in our union, and she would do the same thing for all of us in the state legislature. It is very seldom that we have the opportunity to vote for a candidate of this calibre.

I like Lynn because she takes the right position on issues, not just the popular position that might get her elected.

If you have come to this spot to post a vote for Lynne, today, April 24, then STOP! This is actually not the place to post your vote. I am on Lynne Dodson's committee, and she's asked me to post this (she's busy doing other campaign work!).

If you want to post your vote for Lynne, then go back out to today's Stranger blog, and scroll down a little further until you see the following text:

"So: Who do you like for the 43rd? Post your favorite candidate’s name in the comments, feel free to explain your reasoning, feel free to vote early and often, and check back tomorrow, by which time I will have tabulated the results of this totally unscientific, completely subject to manipulation, and wildly early (the election’s still months and months away) straw poll.

Voting ends at midnight tonight!"

Once you see that, then scroll down to where there's a prompt for posting comments. THAT'S where to post your vote!

--Richard Burton

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).