Slog - Comments on House Work

Comment by Gidge

Gidge — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:09:23 -0800

Last year's original bill
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/billdocs/2007-08/Pdf/Bills/Senate%20Bills/5550.pdf

The way that you the Dems are avoiding any substantial fight or progress, you'd think that they're afraid of some sort of voter backlash, a la early 1990s. I don't know why they should expect anything other than voting along party lines in this election. If anything, the Dems should stand to win undecided independents.

Comment by linus

linus — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:30:03 -0800

I like the idea in threroy...comeing from florida originaly our economy funtions on crocked contracters....but my instincts tell me to be wary

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:42:02 -0800

Of course, the next question is: Is this year a short session or a long session?

If a short session, it's hard to get much through, regardless.

Comment by kinkos

kinkos — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:48:33 -0800

impeach frank chopp

Comment by Gidge

Gidge — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 17:14:25 -0800

It's a short session, Will, although I don't think that totally excuses things. In theory, the extra time of the long session should be eaten up by the budget, and there should be enough time in either session to get some other work done (I know that's not exactly how it works). But it's one thing to limit your agenda because it's a short session; it's another thing to run up the white flag and say "we're not going to do shit (or at least anything that requires balls) because we don't want to lose the upcoming election."

Comment by Will in Seattle

Will in Seattle — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 17:33:33 -0800

Well, they should at least hold hearings, but trying to push through a large agenda is unlikely, given it's a short session.

This is what we count on individual representatives and senators for.

Like, oh I don't know, my State Rep Frank Chopp.

All I've asked him to do is tell him to stand up for Seattle's interests personally. But most of the stuff he is working on are things that matter to us ...

Comment by Gidge

Gidge — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:48:07 -0800

It's not the volume of the session, it's the shying away from anything controversial ("This isn't a year for launching new initiatives"). It's clear that they're playing it safe because of the election year--I think the Dems are flat out admitting that. Plus, in the last short session (2006), the legislature finally passed the bill prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.

I get that the shorter session carries some limits. I'd just like to see them a little less gun shy when it comes to tackling tough issues.

Comment by Fonky

Fonky — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 20:28:44 -0800

I am so pissed at the democrats for always doing this shit! Stop being so fucking concerned with staying in power and pass some fucking decent legislation already! There's a reason you were elected, you know?

Comment by Cale

Cale — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:48:48 -0800

I find myself disagreeing with Mr. Chopp too often.

Comment by I Got Nuthin

I Got Nuthin — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:39:14 -0800

Why in the hell isn't anyone challenging Frank Chopp? He's wrong on too many issues. Wallingford is as progressive as any Seattle neighborhood, there's got to be someone willing to truly represent progressive values, not the values of the BIAW.

Comment by catalina vel-duray

catalina vel-duray — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 07:08:43 -0800

I can see why the legislature may be shying away from any new financing initiatives, given the perilous state of the economy (I fear we have a major rainy day coming here, kids) but they can certainly pass laws. Although a law allowing contractors to be sued could very well close quite a few of the Seattle builders down. There's some real garbage going up out there.

On the same general theme, I applaud the governor for stepping up to the plate and doing something about the viaduct, and proposing we start tolling 520 in anticipation of its replacement. Those are probably our two biggest weaknesses in this state right now.

Comment by unPC

unPC — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 07:14:50 -0800

The Chopp theory as well as Gregoire is that if you tone down the Democratic agenda you pick up more seats out in the burbs or now the exurbs.

Spell check: c-o-m-p-r-o-m-i-s-e.

Good when you get half a loaf AND a position to go for the rest later.

Bad when you get 1/4 a loaf and put yourself in a position where no one knows what the hell your party stands so future progress is impossible. MAking your message: "we didn't spend as much as you thight we might" teaches everyone the Republican frame is right and abandons the chance to inform folks that the real Democratic agenda works for them.

Comment by 43rd

43rd — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:29:52 -0800

Frank Chopp has been a huge disappointment. He's stubborn, obnoxious and wrong far too often. Some of those traits have been helpful to have in a Speaker, but he has not been a friend to progressives. Time for him to move along.

Comment by Jack on the Hill

Jack on the Hill — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:04:41 -0800

Chopp has moved mountains to get the Dems back to STRONG majority status.

And this lame duck from Mercer Island thinks he is going to cram someting down Frank's throat? Silly old goat, Mr. W.

Frank is the best thing that has happened in Olympia in many years. If you want a socialist, vote socialist.

Comment by Greg

Greg — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:49:28 -0800

@14: A big Democrat majority is useless, as Josh has repeatedly pointed out, if they don't work on advancing the Democratic agenda. Why should we give a shit about that big majority if it's going to be functionally the same as not having it?