Still believe the ultimate goal isn’t to resurrect the failed and highly unpopular CRC?
Rep. Sharon Wylie speaking tonight, Mar 21, 2017 towards the closing of the 49th Tele Town Hall
An Independent Conservative Voice for Clark County
Still believe the ultimate goal isn’t to resurrect the failed and highly unpopular CRC?
Rep. Sharon Wylie speaking tonight, Mar 21, 2017 towards the closing of the 49th Tele Town Hall
I have stated all along that the failed CRC (Columbia River Crossing light rail project) wasn’t “dead,” but in a politically induced coma. And while the latest effort to “begin a discussion or process” is claimed to not be about resurrecting the failed CRC, the following short clip of Rep. Sharon Wylie (D. 49) speaking in support of HB 2095 indicates to me that the end goal is a resurrection, either in whole or part.
Due to several circumstances, Clark County Conservative will maintain a neutral stance on this as it moves forward. I am told by many self professed better than me’s that they have it handled, so I defer it to them.
Rep. Ed Orcutt (R. 20th) speaks in opposition to HB 2095 before the Washington State House Transportation Committee, Feb 22, 2017, a bill to “develop a process for planning for a new Interstate 5 bridge.”
Likely one of the more sensible and logical comments heard yet.
The bill passed out of committee by a 14 to 10 vote.
Incumbent Clark County Commissioner Marc Boldt, who ran as a conservative and sold out his conservative base during his two terms on the commission, is eager to keep his seat and be reelected. No real surprise, the position not only pays pretty well for a former truck driver, it carries power and a degree of prestige, as public office does.
But that does not justify the lengths Marc Boldt is taking to retain his seat.
Politicians of all walks are noted for trying to present their best view for us and are expected to embellish somewhat. But Marc Boldt has elevated the art of dishonest deception presented to voters to a new level for the office he seeks to retain, with the willing assistance of the unofficial daily newsletter for the CRC & Democrat Party, the Columbian.
While they Columbian’s Stephanie Rice strains gnats to paint Boldt’s strongest opponent, successful businessman David Madore as less than sincere, she makes no effort whatsoever to vet Marc Boldt’s claims he makes or vet those who speak on his behalf.
With the latest stunt of Vancouver, Washington mayor Tim Leavitt and the city council, which more resemble a cartel than an elected body of representatives, it has come time to vote out any up for reelection.
Last September Mayor Leavitt, now known for his blatant lies to be elected as the Mayor in opposing tolling the new bridge that will eventually be constructed across the Columbia River, engineered a little sleight of hand trick, combining a citizen vote on extending Portland, Oregon’s financially failing Light Rail in with a vote for a sales tax increase to “preserve and expand existing C-Tran bus service” in Clark County.
One lone council member, Jeanne Stewart, gauging strong public sentiment against light rail from Portland, cast the deciding vote to split the ballot measures, correctly seeing that the public wasn’t going to fall for Leavitt’s trick and that C-Tran would most lose a significant portion of their funding.
Leavitt and the rest of the city cartel ungraciously voted to oust her from the C-Tran board, replacing her with Larry Smith.
The ongoing efforts to silence citizen opposition to extending Portland, Oregon’s Loot Rail into Vancouver, Washington, part of an overly expensive planned project to replace the aging I-5 bridge between the 2 states, is being elevated to a new level, publicly berating citizen’s who exercise their first amendment rights to speak out in opposition.
Saturday’s Columbian contains a front page article, Mayor Leavitt ready to cut open mic at city council meetings featuring the names and photographs of those who have spoken out in opposition to Loot Rail and Tolls at past meetings, including how often they speak.
Previously mentioned HERE, the effort now seems centered around a plan to continue rewriting Guidelines for Citizen Communications, that has been “under review” for several months now and modify or do away with the portion still published that says, “Citizens Communications is the place on the agenda when the public is invited to speak for approximately three minutes about an issue of concern or interest not already scheduled for public hearing during the meeting, or otherwise addressed on the agenda.”
The following video was shown to the City of Vancouver planning meeting in regards to mayor Pollard’s dream for Vancouver’s Columbia River Waterfront development.
Sort of reminds me of waterfronts along Chicago, New York, Miami and other such overgrown cities plagued with high unemployment, ultra high taxes, out of control crime and street pan handlers.
Is this what “Boss” Pollard wants for our community, to out Portland Portland?
Add to this his other dream “cap” over I-5, most likely destined to be a haven for the homeless or drug dealers to hide out.
Should “Boss” Pollard’s “dream” for the community come to fruition, how long before we are more like sections of Detroit?
Vote Tim Leavitt for Mayor.
It was with much fanfare that proponents for Oregon and Washington States Assisted Suicide Law boasted about gaining voter approval of the measures.
Oregon was the first to pass such a measure in October 1997 with challenges making it to the United States Supreme Court, who gave the practice the SCOTUS stamp of approval in January 2006.
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor even likened the measure to Court mandated Executions of criminals when she pointed out “doctors participate in the administration of lethal injections to death row inmates.”
In November 2008, Washington State followed suit when voters approved Initiative 1000 by a margin of 59% to 41%, legalizing Assisted Suicide in our state now too.
Oregon and Washington State remain the only two states in the country that have declared Assisted Suicide legal.
Given that suicide has been embraced now by the neighboring states, it was with some surprise I read the article appearing in the June 21, 2009 Columbian newspaper, I-5 traffic resumes after police take man into custody.
Portland Oregon’s KGW 8 ran the incident as Suicidal man with bow and arrow closes I-5 bridge for hours.
For those who do not know, the I-5 Bridge mentioned is the main arterial between the two states, crossing the Columbia River between Portland Oregon and Vancouver Washington.
As the articles state, bridge traffic was stopped for 4 hours while Police and Fire Rescue personnel dealt with the unidentified man until they convinced him to surrender, holding him for mental health evaluation.
I cannot applaud the actions of Emergency Workers enough in preventing this man from committing Suicide.
But, I am left with a quandary as to why do we decide to show such care and concern over an obviously depressed and despondent person considering ending their life, yet pass a law legalizing other people who are also despondent and depressed in ending their life.
Many say suicide attempts are actually a despondent person reaching out, seeking some compassion, some attention and they don’t really seriously desire to end their lives. How do we know that those choosing Assisted Suicide weren’t also despondent, reaching out due to the pain of hearing a doctor say they were terminal and instead of true compassion, heard only the “Death With Dignity” crowd crying out “jump, jump, jump?”
Yes, Assisted Suicide is supposed to be only for those who are terminally ill, but when someone is considering suicide on a bridge or at home, do we know they too aren’t also terminally ill and wish to end their life prematurely due to that reason?
Personally, I voted against Initiative 1000, as I do not believe suicide is an appropriate answer for any reason. Obviously, the majority of voters disagreed with me. Even the Columbian, the newspaper reporting on the effort to save the suicidal man yesterday, endorsed passage of Initiative 1000 in October 2008.
Maybe I’m just a simple minded old man, but I simply can’t grasp how people, voters, who vote to legalize, and even encourage Assisted Suicide, justify shutting down the main arterial for the whole west coast for 4 hours to talk another out of ending his life prematurely.
With the majority seeming to think suicide is now a viable means to deal with life’s worst troubles, does it really make sense for them to also call for compassion for others choosing suicide as well? Is this consistency?
Perhaps this incident will plant a seed in voter’s minds that they were misled last year and the left’s continuing culture of death will begin coming to a halt.
Suicide is a very permanent solution to what is often only a temporary problem. Even the terminally ill can still contribute to their loved ones and society.
If we can justify shutting down the west coast of the United States for 4 hours to help a despondent person choose life, surely we can reach out to those who have been convinced their lives have become meaningless and that death is their best answer.
Death comes soon enough, my friends. I can’t see hurrying it along.
Published in the February 26, 2009 Vancouver Voice
The eulogies given for the Clark County GOP after the results of the last election are indeed premature. While we didn’t gain seats in the legislature and even lost one, 4 incumbents retained their seats and are gladly taking a stand to give you real relief, not plunge you further into debt or tax you more than you already are.
The issue of upgrading the I-5 bridge remains a hot issue with some deciding we will have Portland’s Light Rail, like it or not. The former Mayor of Portland, Tom Potter and Vancouver’s Mayor, Royce Pollard both are on record as desiring to “force people out of their cars.”
Currently, Senator Craig Pridemore (D) has a bill proposed, SB 5540, that places the final decision for adding Light Rail into Clark County in the hands of just a portion of Clark County voters, while voters in the entire county would be taxed to support and maintain the extension of Portland’s Max Line into Vancouver.
Clark County voters rejected this extension by a 2 to 1 vote years ago, but our Democrat officials seem ready to force it on us. As a January 10, 2009 Oregonian article put it, “Light rail is coming to Vancouver. Deal with it.”
In a reply to me, Senator Pridemore said, “the ultimate decisions regarding the configuration of the I-5 Bridge as well as any local tax options that will be part of it will be made by locally elected officials and local voters.” Sounds reasonable enough, but only technically correct.
Senator Don Benton (R) further clarifies SB 5540 and states, “the locally elected officials mentioned are not directly accountable to the voters of Clark County. The CTRAN board of directors is what is known as a federated board, not directly elected but appointed from various bodies throughout the county.”
Senator Benton also tells me, “SB 5540 does not clarify where or what size the taxing district will be, that will be left up to the CTRAN board of directors, a body that is not directly accountable to the voters.”
In looking out for Clark County taxpayers, Senator Benton has proposed SB 6040 “that calls for a county wide public vote before any more state money is spent on the Columbia River Crossing Project.”
At a time of such economic turmoil, shouldn’t we voters and taxpayers be given a clear voice in deciding a multi-billion dollar expenditure that is projected to only benefit some 3 percent of those who cross the Columbia River daily?
Governor Gregoire and Senators Murray and Cantwell are eagerly looking forward to receiving hundreds of millions of our tax dollars returned to us under the federal stimulus plan to help with transportation projects. Do you really believe Clark County would receive much of that money over King County’s Alaska Way Viaduct project?
Senator Benton is not alone in looking out for citizens of Clark County as Representative Jaimie Herrera, recalling the violation of New Orleans citizens Second Amendment rights after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, when all legal guns were illegally confiscated from law-abiding citizens, leaving them virtually defenseless against roving looters and gang members, has proposed a bill, HB 1832, to “repeal the prerogative of the Governor, upon declaring a state of emergency, to prohibit private citizens from carrying firearms on their person, away from their home of residence, during the declared state of emergency.”
In such a state or emergency, when the authorities would be extremely busy and over taxed, who would protect us but ourselves?
As Democrats work to impose higher taxes on us instead of identifying waste and cutting it out, the few Republicans we still have in the legislature stand fast in trying to protect our rights and income.
When the next election rolls around, look at who stood up for us versus who stood for the state and choose accordingly.
Now that dust is settling from the elongated campaign and election season we just endured and Democrats pretty much made a clean sweep in obtaining offices, it’s time to get back to caring for the nation and state.
Of particular concern to all is the pitiful state of our economy as citizens lose their jobs, wages fall, property values plummet and tax receipts dry up.
Democrats love affair with increased taxes is well known as was addressed in Recession, Depression, Bankruptcy, Foreclosure, Unemployment: Let’s Raise Taxes last year.
We have now been strapped with the most massive spending bill we have ever seen with Governor Gregoire, Senators Murray and Cantwell eagerly looking forward to Washington receiving monies from that pork laden edict, ignoring that any money received was taken from us in the first place.
Patty Murray tells us,
“the package could have nearly $500 million for improvements to Washington roads, highways and bridges – work that’s intended to spur jobs.”
Any bets on how much of that money would go to King County’s Viaduct compared to improvements in the I-5 Corridor here in Clark County?
Governor Gregoire ran for reelection on promises of not raising taxes to cure our massive budget deficit the state is facing. Other Democrats quietly ran saying nothing about raising taxes on citizens, leading us to believe we might see some relief as we rapidly head off to the poorhouse.
Since the election, several bills have been introduced proposing what else, tax increases! Even the much-hated income tax is up for a vote again. An engine displacement size tax was proposed last year and no doubt will be introduced again this year.
As if we aren’t over taxed enough, now word is out that we expect to Look for property taxes to increase in Clark County, in spite of property values decreasing and home sales drying up.
Clark County Assessor, Linda Franklin and Clark County Treasurer Doug Lasher, both Democrats explain it away as “some districts have begun charging higher tax rates,” with the Columbian’s Cami Joner telling us, “Residential property owners will pay an average of $2,832 in property taxes this year, $488 more than in 2008,” after telling us this past Friday January home sales off 21.8%
As usual, our Democrat elected officials seem to talk out of both sides of their mouth’s, promising no increase in taxes or insinuating such, but then sticking it to us once elected.
In 1988, former President Bush (41) made a famous pledge of “Read my lips, No New taxes” and when Congressional Democrats brought a massive tax increase to him, he signed it. By 1992, that pledge and subsequent tax increase was used against him to defeat him and elect Democrat, B. J. Clinton, who went on to give us 2 of the largest tax increases we ever saw.
In Washington State and Clark County, we didn’t hear a “read my lips” pledge but are seeing the massive increases in our taxes just the same. Our wages go down, our property values decrease, but the one thing we can always count on is for Democrats to take more of our hard earned money away from us, waste it, then demand more.
I don’t know about you, but I work and struggle hard to pay my mortgage and even though I have no massive credit card bills outstanding, still have very little left over to live on.
I go to Wal-Mart, Fred Meyers, Winco and elsewhere and see several “underprivileged” packing goods into fairly new SUV’s. I have seen school children walk by my house and destroy campaign signs in my yard, throw trash over my back yard fence, joined all too often by the few riders C-Trans has waiting a few feet outside of my kitchen window at the bus stop and who seem to think my Rose bushes are for their taking.
I visit local restaurants and struggle to express my order in English to a counter person who speaks mainly Spanish.
I see kids with their pants down around their asses aimlessly wandering about the Mall or local streets seeking some trouble to get into and who can’t phrase a simple sentence properly, much less make change properly should they find a job and the computer not tell them exactly how much to give back.
Then, I hear the Teachers Union and Democrats demanding I give up even more of my money so they “can continue this fine education” given these kids, when it reality most of it goes to increased wages and little makes it to the kids, even as they used agreements between the legislature and Teachers Union to lose a $13.2 Million Grant to some schools in Math & Science last year.
This is what I pay out all my hard earned money for? This is considered good return?
It really is too bad our elected officials didn’t also claim, “read my lips.” Perhaps we could have used it against them in the last election and install better representation for us in government.
By now most have undoubtedly seen the television ad hawking David Carrier’s vow and refusal to accept Special Interest and PAC money and even the Columbian’s report of his campaign initially accepting an illegal contribution from another legislative district, which was subsequently returned.
The excuse listed of the Special Interest and PAC monies he did receive come across a bit lame, in my opinion.
Discussing the acceptance of Special Interest and PAC after viewing the last Presidential Debate at Republican Party Headquarters last week, Office Manager, Cindy Langston, wife of State Senate candidate Tom Langston, came up the small group and told us that Tom accepts no Special Interest or PAC money, at all.
We all have heard Political Candidates make claims that cause us to be skeptical and initially, I took Cindy’s claim with a little skepticism too. After all, it is just too easy to find out to who contributes to the candidates by a simple visit to the Public Disclosure Commission’s website, which is updated frequently.
It was a very pleasant surprise to discover that Tom and his wife are truthful. He has indeed not accepted PAC or Special Interest money and his acceptance of the money from the 49th Legislative District is legal as he is running for office within the 49th Legislative District.
Tom’s opponent, incumbent Democrat Craig Pridemore, lists several PACs he has accepted donations from, including the same Seattle law firm that specializes in asbestos litigation that David Carrier states is “from an individual employed by the firm who wished to remain anonymous.”
Unlike Carrier, I have never heard Pridemore make a vow to not accept such donations and again, accepting from Special Interest and PACs is not illegal. They can leave a candidate beholding to such groups, as we all know, but they are completely legal to accept.
Langston, desiring a more business friendly environment for Washington State, opposes any effort to impose an income tax on us. Strangely enough, Pridemore’s issue’s page is blank, leaving the voters will little information on just where he stands on current issues affecting the state.
Langston’s page prominently displays his stand on the issues and his pledge to the voters in dealing with them.
Pridemore, not willing to make his stand known to the public on his campaign website, leave us wondering if once again he would cave in to others on an income tax since we are again facing a severe budget shortage and as he said in 2005 after voting against his stated principles in raising taxes on Tobacco and Alcohol said, “The Senate has balanced the budget on the backs of the poor and powerless,” even though it was he who cast the deciding vote in passing the legislation.
To Pridemore’s credit, he did later sponsor a tax rebate bill, but even that could face elimination with the current severe budget shortfall we face since Democrats took control of the State Government.
Langston opposes the Light Rail project across the Columbia River that the CRC desires to impose upon us, in spite of voters rejecting it. Pridemore chaired that same commission previously. Does he also advocate strapping commuters to Portland with tolls should they choose to exercise their freedom to drive their car? Does he prefer to force commuters to use public transportation; joining Portland and Vancouver’s Mayors desire to “force people out of their cars?”
Tom Langston has shown himself to be a man of conviction who stands by his word, something we saw Pridemore vote against in 2005. Could that have something to do with his rapid rise in powerful committees in the Senate?
With the serious budget shortfall we face, we need a businessman to represent us, someone who has had to work to make a payroll and keep costs down to turn a profit and stay in business. Saying we need to “trim the fat” in our budget and actually doing it are often very different. Tom Langston knows how to do it.
Craig Pridemore has shown us he is willing to compromise his own principles on our backs.
Join me in voting for Tom Langston, Senator for the 49th Legislative District. Let’s return Washington State to sound fiscal footing and get back on track to improving Washington’s economy and drawing businesses and jobs back to Washington State.
Now that the dust has settled from our first ever top two primary, we can take closer looks at those we will be electing to represent us in Olympia. One race that merits attention is who will replace Republican Jim Dunn for Representative of the 17th Legislative District.
As we all know, Dunn fell from grace with the Republican Party and lost the primary to challenger, Joseph James. James will be facing off against Democrat, Tim Probst.
Looking over their campaign websites, both seem qualified, both seem to be family oriented men and both seem to care about our community. But, one will be elected to represent the 17th L.D., so voters must make that difficult choice.
Both men have received numerous endorsements from members of their respective parties. Probst has received the endorsement of labor unions locally, as Democrats most often do.
James has received the endorsements of the Human Life Political Action Committee and the Faith and Freedom Political Action Committee, as Republicans most often do.
Both have an impressive array of endorsements from citizens and businessmen, it seems right along party lines. Ultimately, though, only one will be selected and sent to Olympia.
Recently the Columbian made hey out of a slip on James part. Staff writer, Kathie Durbin made a point to ask us, “Is Republican legislative candidate Joseph James math-challenged?” James’ campaign sent out a flyer claiming, “over 90 percent of transportation funds go toward mass transit,” whereas “only 3 percent of us use mass transit.”
Since there is a question of the accuracy of the numbers, Ms. Durbin turns to Dena Horton, the Chair of the Clark County Democrat Party. Ms. Horton, in a purely partisan moment, asks, “How can Joseph James claim to be working for our trust when we can’t even trust him to do his homework on an issue as important as transportation?”
The Columbian isn’t known for fairness when it comes to dealing conservative Republicans, so I was pleasantly surprised to read a letter to the editor on August 27th from Doug Simpson, the consultant who supplied the information to James. Simpson said,
Point tripped up by typo
In the July 17 editorial, “Campaign alert,” it was stated that candidate Joseph James’ consultant “conceded the 90 percent figure came out of thin air and that he didn’t know how much of the state’s transportation dollar goes for mass transit as opposed to highways, ferries, etc.”
Allow me to set the record straight. I am that consultant, and I did not say or imply that, and I feel that reporter Kathie Durbin’s agenda in the July 15 story, “Candidate’s claims called ‘inaccurate’,” was less than unbiased or professional.
News organizations know it’s impossible to avoid every typo, even after proofing. As James’ consultant, I let him down because of my own typo. My apology goes to him and to the public. It is disheartening for any candidate when errors are knowingly used against them for political gain.
The point was that a disproportionate share of transportation dollars goes to transit, which moves an extremely small share of daily trips.
I can personally attest that C-Trans buses that run along my home and stop at the Bus Stop some 20 feet from my kitchen window are rarely filled with more than 4 or 5 riders. Traveling around Clark County I rarely see a C-Trans Bus even half-full. Yet, after voters rejected a taxpayer subsidy to retain many of these routes, C-Trans pulled a switcheroo in 2005 with a special election, restricting votes from the whole County to those areas they considered “would benefit from bus service” the most. After an aggressive campaign, the measure passed and we now pay more sales tax to keep near empty buses running.
Looking backwards on this, Joseph James claim, even with a typo on numbers, was correct. Even if there was a typo on numbers.
Tim Probst, meanwhile, on his website, takes the safe path speaking vaguely on transportation and crediting one Democrat politician with providing for Clark County’s transportation needs, adding, “We can’t afford to allow one of our state representatives to ignore our transportation problems.”
Just who those that would ignore our transportation problems are remains unnamed.
As I indicated in an earlier article, Republican Senator Don Benton spoke out against a desired transportation project that would drain Clark County of tax money while providing little relief. Joseph James agrees with Senator Benton completely.
Democrats, almost down the line, advocate that very project, Light Rail, that would cost Billions of tax dollars, give us tolls for many years and not supply one extra lane of traffic across the Columbia River.
Probst states no specific position on the matter.
It leaves me wondering if Probst agrees with Vancouver’s Mayor Royce Pollard and Portland’s Mayor Sam Adams in their desire to “force us out of our cars?”
Probst deserves high marks for his help in encouraging passage of a resolution calling on the governor and legislature to enact “clean elections” legislation. We do need less mudslinging in our elective process. But, does Probst actually follow those “clean election” calls of his?
Probst has prominently displayed on his website the Columbian article mentioned above, with no mention of the clarification provided by the consultant.
He also links to some soft hit pieces from around the state by our Liberally biased media accusing Republican Joseph James of “stretching the truth.” This time over accusations of “inflating campaign contributions to make the candidate appear more legitimate” and for taking “liberties with the truth” because when explaining his opposition to tax increases, he refers to one as “Christine Gregoire’s Income Tax.”
We are led to believe that Governor Gregoire does not advocate a State Income Tax, which is in reality the true “taking liberties with the truth.”
Democrats desire to impose an Income Tax in Washington State is well known, statewide. The subject has continually come up for decades. As for Governor Gregoire, her words from an interview with the Spokesman-Review out of Spokane, are,
“We don’t have an electorate out there that will support it right now. Clearly, when I go across the state, the support’s not there. So much of it is, how are we going to educate them to the regressive tax system that we have in this state and how we need to have some sort of conversion over to a partial income tax. … So now’s not the time….”
“But it’s not as if it’s not a good idea. It’s not as if it’s not one that we shouldn’t pursue. It’s one that we just have to keep holding hearings and let time pass and eventually I assume we’re going to get there.”
Following some of linked articles prominently displayed on Probst’s site, we find Governor Gregoire’s Help Fight The Attacks site where we are told,
“Governor Chris Gregoire’s position is clear – she opposes a state income tax. Just look at the record:
Yakima Herald-Republic, 08/14/2008: “State income tax? Rossi’s attempt to tar Gregoire is spurious”
Online Town Hall Meeting, 04/08/2008: “You know there has been some comments made by my opponent on this, and I guess he’s forgotten four years ago. Four years ago, I was involved in a hotly contested primary. My opponent was for an income tax, and I made it clear I did not support it. I haven’t changed my mind…”
Seattle Weekly, 05/05/2004: “Gregoire is flatly opposed to a state income tax.”
Spokesman Review, 07/18/2004: “Democratic rival Christine Gregoire is against an income tax…”
Yet, the same Spokane Spokesman Review in an April 25, 2007 article says,
“The chief reason for the regressivity of the tax code is that Washington is one of eight states without an income tax. It’s a tough sell, say leaders, including Gov. Chris Gregoire and Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, who support the idea of adopting such a tax. They add that it’s just not the right time to push for it, because the public hasn’t sufficiently been educated on the merits.”
Is this the Democrats idea of those “Clean Elections” Probst brags about advocating? Or, is it just a catch phrase on how candidates may obtain donations for their campaigns?
Looking at the “Latest News” portion of his website reveals 3 of the 5 news articles shown are not about his abilities, but are against Joseph James. Isn’t that the same old tired campaign tactic we have grown tired of? Does he not have merits of his own to display instead of trying to tear down his opponent?
On the other hand, looking over Joseph James’ site, I find no negative mention of Probst.
James speaks specifically and admits errors on his part. Probst, described as a Democratic Party Activist, speaks in vague generalities, leaving out specifics about his ideas and plans, a common thread I find in Democrat Party candidates. We only discover their true intent once elected, when it is too late to properly vet them and our taxes have increased.
If you are as tired of the same old political spin we continue to get from Democrats, while being told they are for us and our taxes continue to increase, never solving the problems they claim they need increased taxes for and ending up with yet more tax increases down the road, then it is time for a shake-up in Olympia.
It’s time to elect Joseph James and Republicans and end this ever so slow yet ongoing slide towards Socialism.
Clark County needs Representatives like Joseph James in Olympia occupying the 17th Legislative District, position 1 seat.
Governor Gregoire assumed the governors office in 2004 under very shaky circumstances. Upwards of 70% of Washingtonians wanted a revote, both partys. Democrat denied and took the office.
Since that time our taxes have steadily increased and I see no equivalent rise in services, at least for Clark County.
We were told that accepting the 9.5 cent tax increase on gas would benefit first King County with them eventually helping foot the bill for projects here. Now that it is time to replace the aging I-5 Bridge, or build a third bridge, we hear we must accept tolls and be stuck with an extension of Portland’s Max Line Light Rail.
Even the Seattle Times exposes Christine Gregoire’s out of control $8 Billion increase in State spending, leaving us with a projected $2.5 Billion deficit soon.
It would appear to me that the Democrat majority in Olympia just rubber stamps Gregoire’s spending and we taxpayers are expected to just continue handing over our hard earned dollars and do without when it comes to our families.
Dino Rossi, rightful winner in the 2004 race, is running again and placing much better in polling than he did last time he won, before the shady recounts. A businessman, Rossi has the ideas and knowedge to turn our state around.
We need Dino Rossi as governor, but he cannot do it alone. We must take Olympia away from the rubber stamp Democrats and elect responsible Republicans that will control spending.
Note that I wrote “responsible” Republicans. The Republicans made some big mistakes by trying to imitate Democrats and it has cost them. Many have been purged from the party and others marginalized. So, check out candidates closely and see if they really are fiscally conservative.
Don’t fall for claims of “problem solving” experience as they admit now knowing how to solve our problems.
It is time to send some fresh faces to Olympia with fresh ideas and to return those that fight for our tax dollars to be wisely spent.
Most of all, though, we need a strong, wise and capable candidate like Dino Rossi at the helm to turn Washington State back around and restore the economy we used to have.
Now that the primary is pretty much finished and we see the choice to replace outgoing Bill Fromhold for the seat of the 49th Legislative District, position one will be between GOP candidate, Debbie Peterson and Democrat Jim Jacks, we need to look at both of these candidates and select who will serve Southwest Washington the best.
A particular hot issue for us in Vancouver and Portland is in replacing the I-5 Bridge or building a new third bridge. Vancouver’s Mayor and Portland’s Mayor have both indicated there will no discussion of new I-5 Bridge unless we accept the addition of Light Rail from Portland’s Max line.
Unfortunately for them, they are not the last word.
Debbie Peterson is on the record in appearing before the RTC Board with her views in opposition to the multi-billion dollar venture of Light Rail extending just inside the State Line from Portland.
Jim Jacks supports replacing the aging bridge, including Light Rail, calling it a 100-year investment in the future. He neglects to mention that in order to build a new 6-lane Bridge to replace the current 6-lane Bridge, taxes will undoubtedly be increased and tolls will be added to the new structure.
For those who deicide to take the short ride on light rail into Portland, everyday for work, undoubtedly there will be parking fees for their vehicles they drive to the Clark College area, fares paid to Portland for ride and increased taxes.
When asked why are you running for the Legislature, Debbie Peterson says she is running to prepare the state for her students when they graduate from school, having been inspired by them for how hard they work in her classroom to learn and grow.
Asked the same question in the July 8, 2008 CVTV interview, Jim Jacks mentions his intent is to “listen and learn” and to his 7-year-old daughter, he said, “they make the rules for people and he wants to make the rules more fair.”
In the August 5, 2008 debate held by the League of Women Voters in Vancouver, both candidates were asked if they propose any changes in the Washington State Tax System.
Debbie Peterson reiterated her stance that our tax system is fine as it is, it is the spending that has gotten out of hand. She vows to fight to bring spending back under control.
Jim Jacks rambled on about services outpacing revenues and how people need services more when revenues are down, before blurting out, “I don’t know how to solve it, I’m not a tax expert.”
Yet, throughout his campaign he claims to have a proven record of “problem solving.”
On his website, Jim Jacks states, “As your State Representative, I’ll fight for investments to strengthen our economy and our community.”
What Democrats don’t tell you is that the word “investment” used by them is code for “tax increases.”
In the July 7 interview, he says the state must be accountable to the public for the money they spend, but goes on to say that communities get the level of services they pay for.
Yet, by August 8 he says, “I don’t know how to solve it, I’m no tax expert.”
Debbie Peterson, on the other hand, presents clear and concise ideas on cutting unnecessary spending to include eliminating Clark County residents getting raped over a costly Public Transportation System that would only benefit Portland.
Jim Jacks did gain the vast majority of votes in the August 19th top two primary with nearly 59% of votes cast, some 11,000 votes.
The Columbian’s Kathie Durbin tells us on their Political Beat Blog that Jacks attended a Rotary Club Luncheon on Wednesday, August 20, where tradition dictates that when members names appear in the newspaper, they be ‘fined,’ the money going to provide grants to community organizations.
To his credit, Jim Jacks was prepared to lay down his personal check in the very generous amount of $59.00, representing the 59%. I do hope it didn’t hurt his bank account too much.
Debbie Peterson has adopted a slogan of “For Pete’s Sake, vote for Debbie PETErson.” It is not only a play off of her name, but she explains on her campaign website that
Pete “ is your neighbor, the librarian, electrician, the teacher, your parent’s caregiver and your garbage collector. Pete is all of us in the 49th, who work hard, care for our families, and make it to that soccer game on Saturday morning. Pete is the one who is asking for a break from taxes that are impacting his or her discretionary spending money. Pete is the one who is asking his and her state government to be responsible, just as he and she are in managing their businesses and homes.”
Jim Jacks, that I see, does not really have a slogan. If he did, from his repetitive use of the words, I imagine it would be “listen and learn with Jim Jacks,” or something of that accord.
In comparing both, I find Jacks to speak in vague and general terms, often using Democrat code instead of just outright saying he will raise taxes to pay for services he feels should be provided.
There is mention of a projected massive budget shortfall for Washington State coming. How is this possible with all the taxes we pay in Washington State?
Debbie Peterson has it right in that it isn’t our taxes that are the problem; it is the out of control spending by the State that must be brought under control.
Throwing money at problems, your money, is the usual Democrat method of solving issues. The only problem is they never seem to be resolved and our taxes end up being raised time and again to resolve the same issues that just years earlier were to be solved with the last tax increase.
Isn’t it time to end this cycle of raising taxes time and again? Isn’t it time to recognize that not all spending is necessary and if there are too many employees, some must find work in the private sector?
Since both candidates desire to improve our schools, which one do you think will do better? A mediator who says he “doesn’t know how to solve the tax problem” and has won the endorsement of the Teachers Union? Or, a school teacher who clearly and concisely laid her ideas on the table and who sees that it was in large part, the teachers Union that ended up causing Washington State Schools to lose a $13.2 Million Grant in Math and Science studies?
If you are ready for a fresh face with fresh ideas in Olympia, visit Debbie Peterson’s campaign site. If you get the chance to meet her through out town, take a moment and ask her about something you think needs addressed.
She is part of our community, being a 30-year resident and makes time for people.
Stop by the Republican Party Headquarters, Thursday, August 28th from 4:30 to 7:30, located on the corner of 78th Street and Hazel Dell Avenue in Hazel Dell. Enjoy light refreshments and for Pete’s Sake, meet Debbie and see for yourself who the 49th Legislative District deserves.