Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« HUMP: A Cry For Help | Lieberman's Last Day as a Demo... »

Monday, August 7, 2006

I-933, Anti-Government Activists, and Your Supreme Court

Posted by on August 7 at 10:54 AM

There’s a good post over at WashBlog detailing the links between anti-government and development interests such as the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW), the campaign for Initiative 933 (which would force state government to pay landowners to follow environmental and zoning laws) and state supreme court candidates Stephen Johnson and John Groen, who are challenging Justice Susan Owens and Chief Justice Gerry Alexander, respectively. Anti-government groups including the BIAW, the Washington State Farm Bureau, and a group called Americans for Limited Government associated with Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, and Grover Norquist, have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to the pro-933 campaign—and to Johnson and Groen.

I-933 would neutralize decades of environmental law, requiring the state to pay developers to follow virtually every state and federal regulation. Among other bizarre provisions (outlined comprehensively by Sightline here), I-933 makes no allowance to enforce federal laws like the Clean Air Act; includes no exemptions for public nuisances (like pig farms, with their “lagoons” of open sewage) and actually allows property owners to jeopardize their neighbors’ health and safety (by digging a gravel mine, for example, or discharging harmful pollutants) as long as the threat is not “immediate.”

Scary stuff, no? It gets scarier. Under I-933, according to WashBlog,

farmers who have been using water for decades under established rights could see their supplies dry up. That’s because anyone would be allowed under I-933 to use as much groundwater or upstream water as they could collect on their own private land. In fact, they’d be allowed to waste the water as much as they want. You can’t do that legally now.

Under I-933, the burden of paying for pollution cleanup would shift from polluters to taxpayers. Our state’s vehicle emissions testing program could be declared illegal. People would be able to burn garbage whenever they wanted. Anyone could build in floodplains.

I-933 would also allow property owners to sue for damages from laws that were passed decades ago. And so much for small government: Administering I-933 would cost the state an estimated $1 billion every year.


CommentsRSS icon

Ah! A trip back to the days when Seattlelites burned their own garbage or dumped it in the sound!!!

Can we also FINALLY build the bridge to Vashon and build an airport there, and FINALLY finish the RH Thompson Expressway? And, while were at it, let's fill in that land off of the coast of Magnolia that we platted for residences years back.

PROGRESS, PEOPLE - PROGRESS!!!

Say what you will about the religious fundies, but these anti-government, "it's my land and you have no right to tell me what to do," taxes are an abomination, types are the really scary ones. Of course, they two groups are often intertwined…

This reminds me of the idiots that wanted to make the Kyle Huff house into a memorial park. As Dan Savage said, "It's private property and the government has no right to force people to give it up." I agree. More density would mean an airport on Vashon. A bridge would bring more business, and higher property values. That's always a good thing. The NIMBY anti-growth crowd is ruining this city.

Looking at initiatives, I now realize how flawed and ill advised the whole process is. I'm just gonna vote against every initiative in every election until the end of time, and I encourage others to do the same. Letting any whacknut who can collect 100,000 signatures write laws is an irresponsible way to run your state.

Property, I was being sarcastic. I know that's hard for some literalists (and I'm being kindly there, in my description - it's much nicer than "retarded") to grasp sarcasm, and I'm sorry you had to embarrass yourself because of me.

An airport on Vashon with a bridge linking it to the mainland is just one of the many DUMBASS ideas that was floated around here back before we realized that we need to be more conscious of the world around us, both from an ecological and financial standpoint. You probably can't grasp the many, many reasons that a Vashon SeaTac is a bad idea, and I don't want to bore everyone else by trying to explain it to you. I thought that linking that to the idea of burning garbage or dumping it in the sound (as we used to do up until the 60's or so) would have made that abundantly clear that is was DUMB DUMB DUMB.

But to recap: WISE land use is the most profitable form of land use, both for the current time, and for future generations. Cynical initiatives by greedy assholes that appeal to the functionally illiterate serve no one well.

I've gone one step further Gomez- I refuse to sign any petitions, and I tell the signature gatherer's why. It pisses them off when others walk away while (as they often get paid by the signature...). I get squealing from both the left and right about that, but I figure that's why we're in a representative democracy. The alternative is to issue every citizen a palm pilot, and have "voting time" every morning on each issue of the day.

"I-933 would also allow property owners to sue for damages from laws that were passed decades ago. And so much for small government: Administering I-933 would cost the state an estimated $1 billion every year."

If that's true, this is a FAR more important issue than gay marriage or the viaduct. Why isn't the Stranger covering this more?

Thanks, Erica, for covering this article that I wrote last night.


I don't see this issue as more important than gay rights -- which is a central spiritual issue for our time. But I do agree with the last commenter here that there is an urgent need for us to pay attention. We are right on the edge of a massive transfer (theft) of wealth that belongs to the people and communities of this state. We may also be on the edge of some real civic chaos. Tim Eyman's been bad. But we ain't seen nothin yet.


The wealth transferred through I-933 will not go to the property rights advocates who vote it in. It will go to developers and multinational economic powers that do not prioritize the needs of people and communities.


There is a beautiful statement (and I am not being sarcastic here) in the text of I-933: "The people also intend to recognize and promote the unique interests, knowledge, and abilities private property owners have to protect the environment and land." This statement reflects the sad fact that people who own land -- and who make their living from land-based work, have not been recognized as the stewards of our common welfare that they are.


The property rights movement has been raising central issues that I believe the Left has not adequately recognized. First of all, people are angry because they have cause to be. Landowners, including farmers, have been having very difficult struggles. I read the testimony that farmers gave in Cheney Washington to the US Dept. of Ag. last November and I was in tears. Here are the people who are feeding us -- and they are like an underclass. About a third of the people in the agricultural areas of the 5th Congressional District in Washington are eligible for food stamps. Some of these wheat farmers are getting less per bushel now than they were in 1948. Energy costs have gone through the roof.


The fury that we will experience from 933 -- and we will if it passes - this will be a tragic occurrence -- originates socially in this injustice, IMO.


Ownership and autonomy, place-based knowledge and expertise, these issues are central in our current political and environmental landscape. Urban progressives may not see this. I never did. Or they may see these ownership and independence issues as having to do with selfishness.


But really, this issue of who controls the land and wealth that we live among, that sustains us physically, is central. Respect has been lost for the unique contributions of people we depend upon to use the land sustainably. Half the land in this country is in agriculture. Half! And highly centralized agri-business concerns that treat the land like a factory and the farmers like serfs (I'm exaggerating a little bit here) have taken over economic control of so much.

This is not a rural issue. It is an economic, environmental, and social justice issue. We need to address the property rights concerns that the Right is bringing up. But we need to figure out how we can frame them more broadly together. If we leave this as an ideological conflict between left and right, we will continue to see this wholesale "enclosure" -- or theft -- of the commons that is impoverishing us all.

The ideological property rights discourse characterizes protection of the public good as a form of theft from private owners. An alternative, and more realistic, understanding is that a strong commons upholds the value of private property -- as well as the health of people and communities. In order to protect the environment, we must make peace between the urban and the rural and see them as an integrated whole. We must come to see that protecting the land means respecting and protecting the people who make their living from the land. Because this is where the physical essence of all of us comes from, the land. We are physical beings on a beautiful planet.

Please consider visiting the Back to the Roots site (http://forwashington.org/btr.php) and purchasing tickets to this program's upcoming event, an appearance by Jim Hightower at Town Hall: On Common Ground, Innovations in Energy and Agriculture and a New Civic Awakening.

http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/5459

Thank you, Erica, for covering this article, which I wrote last night.


There is a beautiful statement in the text of I-933:

"The people also intend to recognize and promote the unique interests, knowledge, and abilities private property owners have to protect the environment and land."


The property rights movement has raised central issues that the Left has not adequately recognized -- or has recognized in different ways.


Ownership and autonomy, place-based knowledge and expertise, these issues are critical in our current political and environmental landscape. The ability to make a living from sustainable uses of the land has slipped away from us. Economic independence and community power have also slipped. The people who grow our food have been mistreated -- and most of them are caught in an agribusiness model that is not advantageous to them at all.

I recently was in tears reading the testimony of farmers in Cheney Washington to the US Dept. of Agriculture. Some communities are losing several farms per winter. Some wheat farmers are getting less per bushel now than they were in 1948. A childrens advocate testified that about a third of the people in the agricultural regions of the 5th Congressional District are eligible for food stamps.


Food and energy are at the center of our economy. Half the land in this country is in agricultural use. We are in big trouble when growing food has become so inhumane -- when it has become so difficult to earn a living from sustainable use of the land. If we do not protect the economic welfare of people and communities who live on the land (and that is all of us) -- we cannot protect the environment or achieve peace.


The Right frames property rights narrowly, Policies that protect the larger public good are depicted as "takings" - or theft - from private owners. We've got to find a way to broaden this discourse together. As long as this is a battle between Left and Right, the powerful economic interests that gain financially from our political discord will continue to make off with our treasures, leaving the people and communities of the state behind in the dust.


We stand on the brink, with I-933, of a massive transfer of wealth from the public commons to developers and other powerful players who benefit from the stripping away of the power of representative government.


Please consider coming to an Jim Hightower appearance at Town Hall Seattle sponsored by the Back to the Roots program -- a group of organizers, political activists, and bloggers working on these issues. See http://forwashington.org/btr.php for more info. You can join a announcement list here too. My contact info is available there.

Helen, You're correct, it does go back AT LEAST 10 years...can you imagine people filing claims against taxpayers because they weren't allowed to build a gas station in a residential neighborhood? that's just jacked. Go and volunteer at www.NOon933.org

Actually --

I'm just seeing this now. I don't think ALG has donated to the campaigns of Johnson and Groen -- they've focused on I-933.

Tennis stars photos here: <a href=http://tennisstars.info>Tennis Stars</a>

Comments Closed

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