Democratic Primary Thoughts

Ordinarily in these emails I try to avoid paying much attention to national politics. It is covered exhaustively in the national news media. We we really need to pay attention to is what’s going on in local government–because that affects us most directly AND it filters upward in coming years, something Republicans know and the rest of us need to re-learn. However, on this day before Super Tuesday, with our Washington State Presidential Primary ballots in hand I need to make an exception.

I recommend three articles:

Adam Jentleson, “Why Don’t We Know Which Democratic Candidate Can Beat Trump?”
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/17/opinion/democratic-primary.html

Leonard Pitts, “Vote blue, no matter who?” that appeared in the Spokesman at https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2020/feb/17/leonard-pitts-jr-vote-blue-no-matter-who/ but can be found in multiple publications, I think, by googling the title.

David Freedlander, “An Unsettling New Theory: There Is No Swing Voter”
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/02/06/rachel-bitecofer-profile-election-forecasting-new-theory-108944

I believe Donald Trump and his Republican Party are a threat to democracy, a step toward autocratic governance with many of the earmarks of the rise of the Nazis in 1930s Germany. Among the many who share my fear I find two camps: one camp that fervently believes a candidate that can beat Trump in November has to play to the middle (e.g. Biden or Bloomberg or Klobuchar) and another camp that is sure that only someone from further left, (e.g. Sanders or Warren) can inspire voters to the polls who otherwise will sit out.

My conclusion: No one knows–and anyone who says they do know is blowing smoke. Even after the election we won’t know, even though a lot of ink and hot air will be spent trying to analyze the meaning of what happened and claim how things would have been different if only we had nominated ____.

For me the three articles I cite above hammer home some of this unsettling uncertainty. Each is worth reading, but even if you do not chose to click and read I want to leave you today with Jentleson’s conclusion (from the first article cited above), with which I agree:

No one can tell us who can beat Mr. Trump, because no one knows.

All we really know is that the last two Democratic presidents to win were dynamic performers on the stump who inspired people with optimism and were able to assemble a broad coalition.

As a potential member of that coalition, the single smartest act of political analysis one can perform may be to step back from the data, and ask yourself a simple question: How do the candidates make me feel?

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

Hold Your Ballot Past Super Tuesday

The due date for the Washington State Presidential Primary ballot return is March 10 at 8PM. However, ballots “drop,” that is, they’re mailed out, by County Auditors in Washington State yesterday, today, and tomorrow, February 19-21. It is a simple ballot except for one thing: because in Washington State we have great paper ballots, ballots that literally are a paper trail, the ballots were printed weeks ago to be ready to mail now. Click here to see the ballot. Many of the Democratic Presidential Candidates listed on the ballot have already dropped out. (Here‘s a current listing.) After next Tuesday, March 3, aka Super Tuesday, a week and a half from now, when fifteen states vote in the Presidential Primary, even more might drop out. (Like the ballot, the WA State Voters pamphlet is out of date. For example, the first bio is for Michael Bennett. He dropped out February 11th.)

Be sure to vote, and be sure to vote for a candidate who is still in the race after Super Tuesday. Hold your ballot that week and a half and do a little homework before you fill it in and mail it or drop it off. 

This is an important vote for people in non-swing states, states that are highly likely to vote majority Democratic (or Republican). Thanks to the archaic Electoral College system voters in non-swing states are likely to have more say about who becomes President by voting in this Primary than you will have a say (at least concerning the U.S. Presidency) in the General Election in November. Delegates determined in these Primary Elections (caucuses, still, in some states) are sent to the Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin in July.

This year for the first time in Washington State Democratic delegates are sent to the Democratic National Convention mostly based on the results of the voting in this March 10th Primary. The complex details of delegate selection can be accessed here.

Make sure your VOTE counts for WA State delegate allocation by holding your ballot until AFTER Super Tuesday, March 3, 2020. Make your choice, then mail or drop your ballot at a dropbox soon after March 4th. The final day to vote is March 10th.

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

P.S. For Idaho Voters: The Idaho Presidential Primary is also held on March 10. In 2018 the Idaho Democratic Party switched to a state run Primary from party caucus system. I believe Idaho will also have candidates on the ballot who have already dropped out (for the same reason Washington does–paper). Idaho still has polls, so most of the voting (unless you’ve applied for an absentee ballot) requires appearing at your polling place. More detail: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Idaho_Democratic_primary

Subversion of the People’s Initiative Process

Every initiative, referendum, and “advisory vote” on last fall’s November 5 General Election ballot win the City of Spokane was traceable to Republican operatives. On a state level Tim Eyman put forward I-976 (his latest car tab, anti-tax effort), while City of Spokane Props 1 & 2 originated with the few uber-wealthy conservatives who formed “Better Spokane” to provide cover and a tax write-off for their efforts. As a reminder Prop 2 read, “Shall the Spokane City Charter be amended to prohibit the City of Spokane from imposing an income tax on wages, salaries, investments, the sale of goods or services, or any other income source?” (It passed with 72% of the vote.)

That is a startling realization. Weren’t initiatives and referenda enshrined in our Washington State Constitution and the Spokane City Charter as a check “By the People” on the actions (or inactions) of our elected representatives? Is Tim Eyman, with his clever anti-tax, anti-government framing and his PAC name and motto, “Permanent Offense,” representing “the People” or is he subverting the will of a distracted populace for the benefit of a few? Whose money are Fritz and Alvin Wolff, Michael Cathcart, and company, the basis of “Better Spokane” protecting with their Charter Amendment to preemptively block any form of City income tax?

It takes money and effort to launch an initiative, referendum, or proposition. There are signature gathering requirements, rules and regulations about wording, and, at least at the state level, seemingly inevitable court challenges from those opposed. It is a daunting task most of us never consider, a task in which a team player with monetary backing has a substantial advantage. Eyman (statewide) and Cathcart (City of Spokane) are great examples.

What did it take to get Proposition 2 on the City of Spokane ballot? First, an idea, of course. What better use of the distaste for taxes and government the Republican Party and its think tanks have been nurturing for decades, than to put forward a measure to insure that the wealthiest among us would never face a city income tax, even on their highest marginal incomes? Perfect. Never mind that no current politician would propose such a tax. If nothing else, putting a “no income tax” measure on the ballot might encourage certain folks to vote who might not otherwise and, if passed (as it did), it sends a nice message: the wealthy in Spokane have the electorate so well deceived you can come here and join us with no worries. Prop 2 was pre-emptive taxation protection for the wealthiest among us. Even better to make the prohibition a “charter amendment,” the city equivalent to amending the Constitution (but much easier). It is actually the same process as any initiative, but a “charter amendment” sounds more impressive.

Second, it takes signature gathering, a significant hurdle. How many? The Smart Reforms for a Better Spokane website tells us. (As does the City Charter.) For last fall’s municipal election the number was only 2226, 5% of all votes cast in the most recent Spokane General Municipal election (2017). That is a remarkably small number, especially compared to the task of qualifying a statewide initiative. For last fall’s election a statewide initiative needed 259,622 signatures to get on the ballot, 8% of the votes cast in the last election for Washington governor. [You can read about all the twists and turns of Washington statewide initiatives here.]

Third, it takes considerable effort and knowhow to get the initiative properly written and advertised. Note, however, that with a Spokane City initiative no Pro and Con needs to appear in the voters’ pamphlet like it does for a statewide initiative. Better Spokane, a non-profit run by a few wealthy locals consists of a website (where Prop 2 is posed as “Taxpayer Protection”) and a Facebook page, a Board consisting of the contributors, and one employee, Michael Cathcart. Most of the magic to get a citywide initiative passed is in the framing of the question–and not proposing anything that provokes well-funded opposition. [The most recent example of a citywide ballot measure that provoked a desperate and well-funded corporate blowback was the oil stabilization initiative, Prop 2 of the 2017 municipal elections. Burlington Northern, seeing a threat to their bottom line with towns all across the country passing such ordinances, pulled out all the stops in opposition advertising.]

We should watch for more Michael Cathcart initiatives with similar political purpose, perhaps even this year, 2020. A BETTER SPOKANE (Sponsored by: The Standard Trust), 2020 registered as a “Continuing Political Action Committee” with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission last May. As of this week it reported no contributions or expenditures, but the groundwork is laid for more cleverly framed initiatives backed not “By the People” in the broad sense, but by the money of the wealthy Republican business operatives on the Better Spokane Board. [One might laugh at their claim of bi-partisanship.] For orientation, City of Spokane Props 1 and 2 in 2019 were pushed by Better Spokane under an “Initiative Committee (Local)” called SMART REFORMS FOR A BETTER SPOKANE, 2019. That Committee had just fifteen contributors, with Fritz Wolff of The Wolff Co. contributing more than a third (25K) of the total (69K). Another 35K of that 69 came, obscurely, from “The Standard Trust” and “Better Spokane PAC,” the better to muddle the origins of the money.

Bottom lines: 1) Keep Michael Cathcart (recently elected to the City of Spokane City Council) and his network of wealthy Republican backers at Better Spokane on your radar. 2) Never assume a political process like an Initiative can’t be hijacked by people with self interest and gobs of money.

Tim Eyman is the Washington Statewide version of the same process, but, as a recently declared candidate for WA State governor, he deserves a separate post.

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

The Electoral College and the Route Around It

The history of the United States (and the world) would be very different if the Electoral College hadn’t elected a minority President twice in the last 20 years. (GW Bush in 2000 and DJ Trump in 2016).

The Framers settled on a system of State selected Electors as a compromise. The process is well described at History.com, “Why Was the Electoral College Created?” Here’s the opening:

It wasn’t like the Founders said, ‘Hey, what a great idea! This is the preferred way to select the chief executive, period,’” says [George C.] Edwards. [Professor of Political Science at Texas A&M] “They were tired, impatient, frustrated. They cobbled together this plan because they couldn’t agree on anything else.”

The article goes on:

One group of delegates felt strongly that Congress shouldn’t have anything to do with picking the president. Too much opportunity for chummy corruption between the executive and legislative branches.

Another camp was dead set against letting the people elect the president by a straight popular vote. First, they thought 18th-century voters lacked the resources to be fully informed about the candidates, especially in rural outposts. Second, they feared a headstrong “democratic mob” steering the country astray. And third, a populist president appealing directly to the people could command dangerous amounts of power.

Out of those drawn-out debates came a compromise based on the idea of electoral intermediaries. These intermediaries wouldn’t be picked by Congress or elected by the people. Instead, the states would each appoint independent “electors” who would cast the actual ballots for the presidency.

The Electoral College was a flawed compromise from the beginning. The Constitution was ratified in 1790. Fourteen years later, by 1804, three-quarters of the states had hurriedly ratified the 12th Amendment to the Constitution, a fix meant to prevent the election of a President and a Vice-President from two competing political camps. The Framers did not anticipate the rise of political parties based on competing ideologies, nor did they foresee the complications of two people with antagonistic views holding these two offices.

The Electoral system described in the Constitution, even as modified by the 12th Amendment, leaves it up the individual State legislatures to decide how to select their Electors. The 12th Amendment says the selected Electors of each State shall meet in their State and they shall vote, but neither the Constitution nor the 12th Amendment says anything about the State specifying for whom each Elector shall vote. That too is apparently left for each State to decide.

Article II, Section. 1. reads: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

Make note. Each State decides. That constitutional clause is important to freeing ourselves from this well-intentioned but greatly flawed compromise that is the Electoral College.

The number of Electors from each state was also a compromise. The number was set as the sum of the number of Representatives from each State plus two for the number of Senators from each State. Thus, in 1790 Rhode Island selected three electors (1+2) or roughly one Elector per 28,000 inhabitants while Virginia selected twelve (10+2) or roughly one Elector per 52,500 inhabitants, (The numbers for these calculations come from here and the U.S. Constitution. The number for the population of Virginia is adjusted to reflect the infamous 3/5 Compromise that counted enslaved people as 3/5 of a person.) Current Elector/population numbers are even more skewed: Wyoming gets three Electors, one per 193,000 inhabitants, while California, with fifty-five Electors, has one per 693,000 inhabitants. Therefore, Wyoming, thanks to a small state getting a minimum of three Electors regardless of population, gets 3.6 times the Presidential electoral power of California on a per inhabitant basis. The Framers’ constructed a hybrid system that has become more skewed as the population has grown from around 4 million to 330 million. (The Senate itself is even more skewed. The 52 Senators that voted to acquit in the impeachment trial collectively represent 18 million fewer people than the 48 Senators who voted to convict.)

The buffering (of the rabble), the balance and deliberation hoped for by the Framers melted away almost immediately. Starting in 1789 with Pennsylvania and Maryland, state after state adopted an at-large, winner-of-the-popular-vote-takes-all (of the Electors) selection process. Political parties, unanticipated by the Framers, took over the system. (See “Evolution of Selection Plans” in the wikipedia article on the College.)

We are left with an archaic system, a system most of us barely understand, and a system that discourages many from even voting in the Presidential elections, since the winner-takes-all-system in many partisan dominated states effectively pre-ordains for whom the Electors of the State are assigned to vote.

(Some political thought leaders of local Christian Fundamentalists, understanding the complex advantage the Electoral College system can sometimes confer on them, want their followers to consider the Electoral College to be divinely inspired [1]–a convenient mis-reading of history.)

So how do we get out of this flawed mess the Framers wrote and political parties have commandeered?

How about a Constitutional amendment? We’ve come close. With enthusiastic bi-partisan support and the promise of a signature from Richard Nixon, the Bayh–Celler amendment passed the House in 1970, with a vote of 339-70, only to fall victim to the anti-democratic Senate, where it was killed by filibuster. (Click that link to read the sad story.)

The Electoral College is so entrenched in our political rivalries, and the process of Constitutional amendment is such a hurdle, depending, as it does, on the anti-democratic U.S. Senate, that there has to be another way. The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is that way. Remember: the States “shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct” the Electors. What if enough states to collectively vote an Electoral College majority (270 votes) all agreed that they would direct their Electors to vote for the winner of the national popular vote?

Never heard of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact? Neither had I, but it’s already well on the way. As of February 2020, enough state legislatures have passed this law to control 196 electoral votes. The law in each state works like a sleeper cell: it is only activated when the threshold 270 electoral votes are achieved. If that’s confusing (it was to me at first) I urge you to watch this entertaining youtube video on the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact by RGP Grey.

In Washington? Oh, yeah. the Interstate Compact become law in 2010.

In Idaho? Nope. So far, it is not even on the radar.

You can see a state-by-state accounting of the process here by scrolling down to the table near the bottom.

Nothing worthwhile, especially nothing actually in the interest of democracy, happens in our country without careful thought and sustained effort. Think of voting rights for former slaves, voting rights for women, civil rights. Each took decades. Scrapping the archaic Electoral College is another such issue.

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

[1] I can thank We Believe We Vote (WBWV), the Eastern Washington political action committee (PAC) that weds Fundamentalist Christianity to right wing political orthodoxy, for this concept of the Electoral College as divinely inspired. (read WeBelieveWeVote.com, What is it?)  Before the 2019 election cycle one of the published criteria for candidate evaluation by these self-described “Christians” was devotion to the Electoral College system for electing the President. These folks were so blatant about their minority political interests that, apparently, the hard fought compromise that resulted in the inclusion of the Electoral College concept in the Constitution was considered by them to have been guided by Jesus. I don’t remember that as part of my United Methodist upbringing…

Evangelicals & Politics

An “Exposing leftism… push-back night!” was held on a Friday evening in January at Covenant Church (3506 W Princeton Ave, on the near north side). The video of the event posted on Facebook (see link below) is a chilling example of a malignant form of Christian Fundamentalist, Old Testament Evangelicalism wedded to regional politics. I’ve watched it twice. I’ve written about it, and I cannot get it out of my head.

[Click here to watch the video: https://www.facebook.com/ccspokane/videos/558229091429169/ or here http://jxindivisible.org/2020/02/covenant-church/ for my commentary.]

Evangelicalism is not a monolith. The Covenant Church lies to the far right end of the Evangelical spectrum, but a far right which, cloaked as general “Christianity”, has outsize regional political influence. The lecture I recommend below is focused on the history of the broader movement of which Covenant is a particularly glaring part.

The “Exposing leftism… push-back night!” night at Covenant Church was a program dedicated to defending Matt Shea. Two of the folks who took the stage at this church event were Gabe Blomgren (who says on stage that he works for the John Birch Society) and former Spokane Valley Councilman Caleb Collier. These two are the hosts of “Church and State,” available on Facebook and also on “ACN,” the American Christian Network of radio stations based in Spokane. On KSPO, 106.5FM, an ACN affiliate, you’ll find Matt Shea listed as an “outstanding…regional Bible teacher.” It should be no surprise that Shea, a Representative who refuses to speak with most local media that serves the constituents he is supposed to represent, spent nearly $20,000 of his 2018 campaign contributions (about a sixth of all the campaign money spent that year) on “Broadcasting” with ACN.

With that as a teaser I urge you to join me in attending “The History of Evangelicals in American Politics,” a lecture by Matthew Sutton next Tuesday, February 18. I heard Prof. Sutton speak once before on another aspect of Evangelicalism and found it very informative. He is the author of several books on the subject. Here are the details for Tuesday’s presentation:

  • WHEN: Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 6:30 pm
  • WHERE: Indian Trail Library, 4909 W Barnes Rd, Spokane, WA 99208
  • WHO: Matthew Sutton
  • HOST: Spokane Public Library

What follows is copied from the website linked below:

Explore the history and meaning behind a uniquely American movement: Evangelical Christianity. Evangelicals are the strongest religious voting block in America, despite being a relatively new coalition. How did they come to hold such power?

In this balanced and respectful talk, WSU professor Matthew Sutton traces the history of the religious right in America, from its early roots to its rise to power under Ronald Reagan and into the current era. Feeling concerned about the rise in secularism, evangelicals have taken to the pulpit and the airwaves to explain how Biblical end-times prophecies make sense of a troubled modern world. How does this history help us understand our current political system?

Matthew Sutton is the Edward R. Meyer Distinguished Professor of History at Washington State University. He received his PhD from the University of California at Santa Barbara. His most recent book is American Apocalypse: A History of Modern Evangelicalism. Sutton has been featured on National Public Radio’s Morning Edition and MSNBC’s The Last Word, among many other news shows.

Sutton lives in Pullman.

[Source link: https://www.humanities.org/event/the-chosen-voters-evangelicals-in-modern-america-2/

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

P.S. Click
https://www.facebook.com/churchandstate1776/photos/a.2012598342316636/2322837377959396/?type=1&theater  to see the lead photo for the Facebook page of Church and State. It shows three men, one with a copy of the Constitution, one with a Bible, and one with an assault rifle. I ask you, “Would Jesus prefer an AR-15 or an AK-47? Left to right, these men are: Caleb Collier (John Birch Society Coordinator), Asst Dir. Of Covenant Church, Shea Protege and co-host of Church and State; Ken Peters, the Pastor of Covenant Church in Spokane and Moses Lake, Pastor of The Church at Planned Parenthood, and Shea Lieutenant; and, finally, Gabe Blomgren, Asst Pastor at Covenant Church and TCAPP, co-host of Church and State, and Shea Lieutenant. These are not representatives of any Christianity I can identify.

Deep Breath

Last week was a bitch. A lot of people I talked with sounded ready to give in, curl up in a ball, give up.

Need a reminder? Doug Muder provides a list with links, just in case you had already checked out of the news cycle, closed your eyes and cowered:

Looking around this week — in the media, among my friends, inside my own head — I observed that a lot of people are freaking out. Because Trump was acquitted, because he has started his revenge tour, because Republicans know he abused his power and don’t care, because the Democrats are doing it all wrong, because a virus is spreading out of control, because the State of the Union was full of lies, because both the National Prayer Breakfast and the Medal of Freedom have been desecrated, because a US senator willfully and illegally endangered the life of a whistleblower, because it’s been 65 degrees in Antarctica, because the Attorney General has given Trump carte blanche to violate campaign laws, because a billion-dollar disinformation project has begun, and because, because, because.

Then add to that the more local news around Matt Shea (WA legislator), Heather Scott (ID legislator), the Covenant Church, The Church at Planned Parenthood and the toxic brand of Old Testament “Christianity” that unites all of them. (More on all of that in later, and prior, posts) How many voters are there out there who feed on, and buy into, their poisonous rhetoric? (Hint: fewer than you might think. Loud and organized minorities can look much bigger than they are.)

Take a deep, deep breath. As to Trump, Democrats’ nail-biting, and electoral angst, Doug Muder offers this (the same principle applies to the local poison):

At his core, Trump is a bluffer. He puffs himself up to make people think he’s bigger and richer and stronger than he really is. It’s the only trick he knows, but sometimes it works: He scares people into giving up or going along. (That’s what we just saw happen in the Senate. You don’t really believe that all those Republicans thought keeping him in office was good for the country, do you? Or even good for their party, or for themselves? They got scared, so they went along.)

When something like that works for him, he uses it to puff himself up further and scare more people. That’s what’s been going on this week.

Don’t help him.

Don’t run around scaring other people about how big and powerful he is. When a bluffer gets on a roll, you can never predict how far it will go. But we do know one thing about bluffers: When their empires start to collapse, they collapse quickly, because each failure causes more people to think “I don’t have to be scared of this guy.”

You can never predict exactly when that process is going to start. The balloon always looks biggest just before it pops.

Doug Muder sent that email out Monday morning, right after I read Heather Cox Richardson’s late Sunday evening email making many of the same points, but adding the historical perspective of a scholar. I urge you to click that link, read, and sign up for her emails, as well as for Doug Muder’s email. Both see me through some dark moments.

Here’s what Heather Cox Richardson ends with. It’s the critical piece:

To people who want to find a way to make a difference, speak up, to your local officials, your friends, your neighbors. What do you hope for the future? Why does it matter that we continue to be a nation of laws? Our voices are only unimportant if we decline to exercise them. And, taken together, they have the power to redefine America from the “carnage” that Trump sees, to the land of hope and possibility it has been in the past… and can be again.

Uncurl from that ball you’re tempted to roll up in. Rise up. Talk. Share. Encourage. Show up. And…

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

Matt and Heather at Marble and Malheur

Daniel Walters’ article in the Inlander on February 6th is a must read. Click: “North Idaho Rep. Heather Scott reaps the glory—and the consequences—of being one of Matt Shea’s biggest allies” for the full effect, photos, captions and all. The article and its contents deserve wide sharing. I’ve copied it in its entirety below for ready access, but the original is easier to read and more impressive with its included photos and captions. (The formatting in the copied article is challenging, too. However, I was able to preserve the links from the original.)

Thanks to Daniel Walters for a tremendous effort in pulling this all together. That folks like Scott and Shea hold elected office in the Idaho and Washington State legislatures, respectively, should make us all sit up and pay attention to local politics.

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

February 06, 2020

North Idaho Rep. Heather Scott reaps the glory—and the consequences—of being one of Matt Shea’s biggest allies” by Daniel Walters

At these gatherings in northeast Washington, the jackboot of tyranny is always said to be descending, the hand of the federal government always inches away from stealing your guns, your land, your freedom to speak or to pray.
But at this particular “God and Country” celebration in June of 2016, the sense of impending doom among these self-proclaimed patriots has a grim weight to it. Blood had been spilled. Cops had gunned down militia member LaVoy Finicum during the armed occupation of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon.
Washington state Rep. Matt Shea visited Malheur during the occupation, and now at this gathering in Stevens County the following June, he’s leading a roundtable titled “You Should Be Scared,” warning the crowd that what happened to Finicum could happen to them.
“That could be any single one of us that just says ‘no’ one day,” the Republican Spokane Valley legislator says. “Any single one of us!”
But then Shea introduces one of the reasons he’s hopeful: The “finest legislator of the state of Idaho,” a woman who “has people so scared in Idaho that even the speaker now is afraid to have her in his office.”
“Representative Heather Scott, get up here!” Shea yells, and the crowd whistles and cheers.
Scott, a small woman with long brown hair and just a hint of Holly Hunter in her voice, tells the crowd that some people think Idaho is safe because it’s dominated by Republicans.
“No, we’re not safe,” Scott says. “We’re allowing refugees into our state. Last week, we lit up our Capitol with rainbow colors.”
She used to be complacent, she says. A few years earlier, she didn’t know anything about politics or even bother to vote. A message from God changed all that.
“I called Matt right away,” Scott says. “God’s telling me to run for office.”
Ever since, the fates of Scott and Shea have been intertwined. Shea has feted her with awards and praise and invited her to secret meetings.
Each has zig-zagged from one controversy to another, feuding with the press and their own party. And then in December of last year, an independent investigation commissioned by fellow state lawmakers alleged that as a leader in what some call the “patriot movement” — a loose network of militiamen, sovereign citizens, rural survivalists and anti-government conspiracy theorists — Shea had fomented multiple “armed conflicts.” His role in the Malheur standoff was tantamount to “domestic terrorism,” investigators concluded in the report.
In Olympia, Shea has subsequently been booted from the Republican caucus, but also cheered by hundreds at a recent gun rally on the capitol steps. Scott can relate. When Scott was temporarily stripped of her committee assignments three years ago, a wave of her own supporters rallied to her defense.
Shea and Scott exist in two realities — the world of the Legislature and the world of incendiary self-proclaimed patriots. The tactics and mindset that can make you famous in one world can make you infamous in the other. Shea has been the star of a Rolling Stone feature, a podcast series and international news stories, and Scott is following in his footsteps. Even if Shea and Scott never are able to reshape the Inland Northwest’s identity, they can still reshape its reputation.
“My goodness, just one person can make a huge difference. And you have done that,” Shea tells Scott in a 2016 podcast. “To the point that, I think, they’re kind of afraid of you right now.”
“And I think a lot of people feel the same way about you, Matt,” Scott responds.

A BUG OR A FEATURE?
Heather Scott knows how to make a first impression.
During Scott’s very first week in office in 2015, representing the northernmost part of Idaho, from Sandpoint up, fellow lawmakers watched her climb on her new desk in Boise and ask them if the little black object hanging from the wire on the ceiling could be a “listening device.” She then pulled out a knife and cut it down.
But it wasn’t a bug.
“We later learned that the object was believed to be a part of the Capitol building’s fire suppression system,” Idaho Republican state Reps. Caroline Nilsson Troy and Don Cheatham said in a statement.
Scott, for her part, has never confirmed their account and denied ever causing damage to the statehouse building. The fire suppression incident, long whispered about in the halls of the statehouse, first became public knowledge in 2017 when then-Idaho State Rep. Christy Perry wrote a letter summarizing her “serious, if not grave, concerns regarding the behavior patterns of Representative Heather Scott.”

Perry wrote that Scott’s “escalating pattern of behavior” meant that some female members of the caucus “do not feel safe working in her presence.”
It wasn’t just that Scott carried a gun into the Capitol. This is Idaho after all. Perry says she personally kept two Smith & Wesson lightweight revolvers in the statehouse.
The difference, Perry says, is that there was a paranoia that came out in everything Scott did.
“When you couple odd behavior and aggressive behavior and know that person does carry, that raises a concern to a different level,” Perry tells the Inlander.
Scott declined to be interviewed for this story; like Shea, she says the media is part of a coordinated conspiracy, driven in part to silence people like them.
In Perry’s letter, she wrote about Scott sneering and glaring at her colleagues, bashing them in events in their own districts, and claiming female legislators were given leadership positions if they “spread their legs.” And while the frustration with Scott wasn’t universal, Perry wasn’t alone.
“Some of those concerns were shared by others,” Idaho Speaker of the House Scott Bedke says. Bedke found the comment about female legislators to be particularly horrifying — he suspended Scott from all committees until he felt she’d adequately apologized. Today he says she’s “grown as a legislator.”
From her first campaign on, Scott has portrayed the Republican-dominated Idaho Legislature as an “orchestrated circus” and a “swamp,” beset by sell-outs, bullies, cowards and “evil people.”
Sometimes those accusations get personal: When an affair between Perry and an Idaho state senator became public in 2016, Scott shared the news on Facebook and speculated about legislative corruption: “How many good bills backed by citizens were kept in committee chairmen drawers and why?” Scott wrote.
In Idaho, Scott has argued, the battle isn’t between Republicans and the Democratic minority. It’s between the “gravy train” Republicans — addicted, she claims, to federal bribes, beholden to crony capitalism — and those working for the citizens.
Set aside Scott’s views on abortion and same-sex marriage and transgender rights and Muslim refugees, you could almost consider her a hardcore libertarian. She believes the county government’s job is to protect you from the state, and the job of the state is to protect you from the feds.
Scott imagines tyranny coming not from a bang, but a succession of whimpers.
“I think a lot of people are waiting for this big war, and they’re hunkered down and they’ve got their food and they’ve got their bullets,” Scott says in a 2015 YouTube video. “It’s not how we’re going to be taken. We’re going to be taken one small battle at a time.”
As a result, Scott and a few allies have turned even minor procedural votes — updating the state’s notary laws, for instance — into tooth-and-nail battles where the state’s sovereignty and the future of liberty is alleged to be in jeopardy.
Unlike Washington state, where Shea’s vote is drowned out by Democrats, Idaho is conservative enough that Scott’s vote matters. In 2015, Idaho representatives had to return to Boise for a special session after Scott’s choice to help kill a child support bill — citing fears about foreign tribunals and Sharia law — threatened to cost Idaho $200 million in annual child support payments.
This approach has given her nearly perfect ratings from the libertarian Idaho Freedom Foundation. She’s beloved by Idaho Second Amendment Alliance.
“She doesn’t compromise,” says Anna Bohach, a former constituent. “That’s what I like about Heather. We don’t compromise on our principles.”
But more moderate legislators saw Scott as killing perfectly fine bills by spreading fear and falsehoods.
“There are people who get things done in the Legislature because they work well with their colleagues and come up with tangible ideas,” says former Idaho Rep. Luke Malek, a Republican. “And Heather Scott is not one of those people.”
Malek would work in the Legislature and then read one of Scott’s newsletters — roaring with inflammatory rhetoric — and it seemed like she’s coming from a different world entirely.
“There’s like this alternate reality,” Malek says.

That reality is called the “American Redoubt.”
First dreamt up by survivalist fiction author James Wesley Rawles, the Redoubt calls for conservative Christians and Jews to escape ostensible government persecution in liberal areas and migrate to the Inland Northwest to turn the region into a bulwark against governmental tyranny — even a fortress in the event of a governmental collapse. Scott’s district is in the heart of it.
Last December, Rawles put both Scott and Shea on his list of “key leaders and promoters of the American Redoubt movement.”
“The beauty of it is, we’re all in the Redoubt,” Scott tells Shea on Shea’s podcast. “It is a place where people from all over the country have been fleeing.”
The Redoubt movement has its own alternative media network, filled with some of Scott’s most ardent supporters like Redoubt News blogger Shari Dovale — “Patriot Journalist” on her business card — and pseudonymous Radio Free Redoubt radio host John Jacob Schmidt.
The Redoubt is a haven for groups like the Oath Keepers, a loosely organized, militia-aligned patriot group of mostly law enforcement and military veterans who’ve vowed to defy unconstitutional orders. Shea’s an Oath Keeper. Despite not having military experience herself, Scott took the Oath Keeper’s oath, too.
“It was serious,” Scott says in a YouTube video. “It was like when I got married.”
But don’t confuse the Redoubt with the sort of white ethnostate the Aryan Nations once dreamt of in North Idaho in the 1980s, members of the movement insist. The Redoubt, Scott wrote in a statement last month, is “not a hideout for racial supremacists, religious zealots, bigots, –phobics or ‘deplorables.'”
Yet, it’s not hard to see why some people conflate the Redoubt movement with Idaho’s ugly past. Montana pastor Chuck Baldwin — the first on Rawles’ list of Redoubt movement promoters — celebrates the Confederacy and preaches anti-Semitic 9/11 conspiracy theories.
As for Scott herself? There was the time — a few weeks after a white supremacist who celebrated the Confederate flag shot nine black churchgoers in South Carolina in 2014 — that Scott proudly flew the Confederate battle flag on a parade float, arguing it was a symbol of “free speech.” And a day after the 2017 alt-right rally in Charlottesville, when a white supremacist drove a car into a crowd of protesters, Scott published a quote on Facebook arguing that a “white nationalist” was “no more than a Caucasian who [is] for the Constitution and making America great again.” Scott later argued she was just starting a conversation about how liberals distort language.
In her statement, Scott declared that she rejects “ANY AND ALL forms of racial supremacy” and believes “as the late Lavoy Finicum stated, that ‘Freedom is Color Blind.'”
In fact, some conservative critics of Scott believe that she and similar legislators deploy these sorts of controversies intentionally.
“The formula is simple. Use white nationalism stories to trigger the media, be the martyr and rally support from sympathizers who don’t like to be called racists,” an Idaho rancher wrote last year on the moderate-leaning Idaho Conservatives blog.
Put another way, she and Shea are looking for fights that, they believe, will portray themselves as victims.

THE STANDOFF THAT WASN’T
It was Matt Shea who made Heather Scott a star.
You can trace the moment back to Aug. 6, 2015 — the day that Scott believed the government was coming to take a veteran’s guns. A year after John Arnold, a Vietnam veteran in North Idaho, had a stroke, he was informed by Veterans Affairs that he was no longer able to handle his own finances — or possess a gun.
And so Scott called up Shea.
Shea, a veteran himself, knew a thing or two about showdowns with the United States government. In 2014, Shea had gone down to Cliven Bundy’s ranch in Nevada to support the armed protesters and militiamen who had come to Bundy’s defense when the Bureau of Land Management started taking Bundy’s livestock because he’d refused to pay grazing fees.
Shea had even formed an alliance of state legislators and other leaders called the Coalition of Western States — that’s COWS, for short — dedicated to fighting against the federal government’s so-called “war on rural America.”
Jay Pounder used to be part of Shea’s informal security detail and, breaking with the lawmaker, he leaked hundreds of pages of internal Shea documents to the media. Shea’s ultimate goal, Pounder says, goes beyond concerns over public land: The showdowns themselves are the point.

Washington state Rep. Matt Shea was accused of taking part in an act of “domestic terrorism” in an investigative report released in December.
“They always want these flashpoints,” Pounder says. “They have to have a flashpoint in order to have the holy justification in order to start shooting back.”
When Scott tells Shea about how Arnold might lose his gun rights, Shea leaps into action. He writes up a formalized operational plan, dubbing the tactics “Operation Armed Backyard.”
He outlines principles like “Expose them as tyrants, by making them act like tyrants” and “human life is more important than stealing guns.”
The goal, Shea writes, is for the VA to back down without anybody getting hurt, according to leaked documents. He wants hundreds to attend and for other states to join the fight.
He doles out assignments: Schmidt would be in charge of “secure communications and intercept.” Shea ally Anthony Bosworth — who’d been arrested for standing with his AK-47 in front of Spokane’s federal courthouse and refusing to leave — was to conduct site-recon, set up early warning observation posts and establish evacuation routes. Scott’s job? “Identify patriot bail bondsmen,” and contact law enforcement and local elected officials.
The document also included a long list of unassigned potential tasks, including identifying “available patriot aircraft” and “multiple resupply routes” and organizing “civilian action teams.”
Scott and Shea put out the call on Facebook.
“THE SEIZURE OF THE GUNS OF ONE OF US…IS THE SEIZURE OF THE GUNS OF ALL OF US,” Shea writes.
Infowars, Alex Jones’ right-wing conspiracy website, hypes it as a “showdown.”
And so in Priest River, a town of about 1,800, a hundred protesters — some armed, a few carrying large wooden crosses — gather to stand in support of the veteran. Members of the Oath Keepers and the Three Percenters of Idaho, another patriot group, both show up. The Bonner County sheriff stands in solidarity with the protesters.
“I’m here today because I believe Priest River is the next battleground for the federal government,” Scott announces at the start of the rally. “It’s a war against our vets.”
But the VA didn’t come to take the veteran’s guns — the VA doesn’t do that. Instead, Bryan Hult, Bonner County’s local advocate for veterans, arrives and suggests there’d been a misunderstanding.
“I called [Arnold] to visit with him to clarify what the letter said, period,” Hult tells the Inlander.
Scott later reports that the VA was working with Arnold to restore his gun rights.
Shea is ecstatic.
“They ran in fear from Heather Scott!” he proclaims on a 2016 podcast.
Accolades shower down. The American Legion gives Scott a “Certificate of Appreciation.” Shea and his Washington legislator allies give her their “2015 Statesman of the Year Award,” featuring a Don’t-Tread-On-Me rattlesnake coiled against an American flag backdrop.

Ben Olson, publisher of the Sandpoint Reader in Scott’s district, says the Priest River rally significantly raised Scott’s profile in the Redoubt.
“That really launched her within the patriot movement and the Christian conservative crowd,” Olson says. “They look to her for guidance.”
The next flashpoint, however, wouldn’t be so bloodless.

CODE NAME: GREENBEAN
On Dec. 11, 2015, Shea sends out a COWS press release, decrying the imprisonment of Dwight and Steven Hammond, two ranchers in Harney County, Oregon. The release — which lists Scott as the group’s Idaho coordinator — accuses the BLM of waging a “war on rural America” through “bureaucratic terrorism.”
That same day, COWS works with Cliven Bundy’s son, Ammon Bundy, to publish a “Redress of Grievance,” demanding Oregon and Harney County officials intervene to help the Hammonds.
And then on Jan. 2, 2016, Ammon makes a move even the Oath Keepers organization condemns — seizing Harney County’s Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters with a group of armed protesters.
The next day, Shea puts out a Facebook statement once again accusing the BLM of “bureaucratic terrorism,” but noting that the Hammonds have “rejected any help from COWS” so their “vast network of patriots” has not been involved.
But behind the scenes, Shea has a plan. COWS has “intelligence assets,” he writes in one internal message, “on-site providing real time intelligence.”
He works from a similar template as Operation Armed Backyard. This time, he calls it “Operation Cold Reality,” and sends it to a list of allies, including “Greenbean” — Scott’s code name within Shea’s network.
Shea’s goal is not only to convince the federal government to “stand down” without violence, he writes in various memos, but to “re-establish legitimate leadership over Patriot Movement” and to pursue “the Vision of Restoring a God-Honoring Constitutional Republic.”
The COWS would lead a negotiating team, Shea writes. “Greenbean” would “drive to Burns from Boise for linkup.”
So she does: Scott invites her legislative seatmate Rep. Sage Dixon and Idaho Rep. Judy Boyle on a fact-finding trip.
As they drive down, Dixon thinks about the Ruby Ridge siege in North Idaho. In 1992, an FBI standoff ended in the deaths of three people and a dog and fanned the flames of the militia movement. It went down in his and Scott’s district. In conflicts like these, he worries, “it usually ends up in somebody dying.” He wants to do what he can to prevent that.
Shea, the three Idaho legislators, and other members of COWS walk into the Harney County courthouse to meet with County Judge Steve Grasty and other local officials. The group presents themselves as potential negotiators, urging the county officials to make concessions and, at least on one occasion, accuses the BLM of terrorism. Grasty is unpersuaded.
“Get these criminals — and they are terrorists — out of my county!” Grasty declares.
Scott objects.
“By calling these people criminals and terrorists, that is just going to escalate this even further. I think that’s very dangerous,” Scott tells Grasty. “I see citizens that are pushed to their limits and they have no other options. … I live in a rural area, everyone has a gun. Not everyone is a terrorist.”
At the time, Dixon says, he didn’t know Scott was part of COWS. Neither did Grasty.
“I didn’t realize it until a couple of weeks later, that ‘Holy crap, this group was one of the instigators,'” Grasty tells the Inlander.
Back then, Grasty repeatedly urged the group not to meet with the occupiers, warning them it would be dangerous and they could inadvertently boost the occupiers’ resolve. The Idaho legislators, after praying about it, go anyway.
“These lawmakers have shown great courage to support us,” Oregon occupier LaVoy Finicum says, according to Oregon Public Broadcasting.
Finicum is killed on Jan. 26, 2016, less than three weeks after meeting with the legislators — shot by law enforcement officers at a roadblock after he’d reached for a pocket that contained a handgun.
The days that follow risk more bloodshed: Refuge occupier Sean Anderson, a central Idaho resident, screams on YouTube, demanding that the American people converge upon the refuge, and that “if they stop you from getting here, kill them.”
And as the FBI tries to get Anderson and the other holdouts to turn themselves in on the final night of the 41-day standoff, a terrified Anderson makes another call to arms on a live-stream recording over the internet, urging listeners to contact “the Idaho 3-percenters, and tell ’em that they’re here to kill us!”
Ultimately, it was a member of COWS — Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiore — who helps talk Anderson and the others into giving themselves up peacefully. Toward the end, Fiore congratulates the four holdouts for making history and assuring them that their call to action was being answered.
“There are all of the legislators who stand with you… they’re all coming here,” Fiore says, naming Boyle and Scott as two from Idaho. “These are your people.”
Shortly after the standoff ends, Redoubt News’ Dovale records a jubilant press conference with Scott and other COWS members in a Harney County parking lot.
“We’ve been involved in this since day one, in parts of the negotiations,” Scott says, smiling and praising Fiore as a “star.” “We’re just very pleased it ended peacefully.”
The takeaway?
“You have God-given rights and you need to exercise those rights so we don’t lose those rights,” Scott tells Dovale.

THE HEATHER CHANNEL
Pounder, for his part, sees Scott as more of a passenger — albeit one in the front seat — in the patriot and Redoubt movements than a driver.
“She’s kind of this follower,” Pounder says. “She’s not a strong leader. She takes orders from Matt and executes those orders.”
Yet Scott is part of the club. She’s invited to a clandestine meeting — disguised over email as a “family picnic” — where Shea distributes documents discussing topics like “biblical warfare,” assassination, sabotage and designing a new society after a governmental collapse. She’s included in Shea’s encrypted “Redoubt Emergency Network,” a chat where his fellow patriots discuss Antifa riots, try to ferret out traitors and leakers and, on occasion, fantasize about violently attacking their foes.
When the chat turns to opponents of Shea’s dream of turning Eastern Washington into a 51st state, Schmidt muses about the appeal of “skull stomping godless communists” and Scott jokes that that “sounds like the name of a rock band.”
Pounder knows the feeling. He was part of those chats, too.
“You truly feel like you’re part of a family. You’re part of something important and big and be able to reshape what America is,” Pounder recalls. “But you don’t realize that family’s really dysfunctional when you look beneath the surface.”
But sometimes others look beneath the surface.

Heather Scott is “a kind individual who loves her community, who loves people, but is being led by people who don’t love people — they love power.”
In December, at the request of Washington state House, the independent Rampart Group investigative team released a 108-page report examining whether Shea promoted political violence. And it’s all laid out: The secret meetings, the violent chats, the God and Country rallies, the Oath Keepers and the Oregon standoff.
Scott’s name appears in the report at least 20 times. When the investigators look at the documents Shea prepared for the Priest River rally, they conclude that the organizers were probably “preparing for a conflict that carried with it a significant risk of violence.”
While Shea has suffered in the world of the state Legislature since the report’s release, in the world of the Redoubt, he’s portrayed as the noble victim of a vicious smear. In particular, his defenders scoff at the portrayal of the Priest River rally as an “armed conflict.”
Meanwhile, Bedke, the Idaho House speaker, says he hasn’t read the report yet. “I pulled it up, but I just didn’t have time to wade through it,” he says.
If he had, he would have read a report that portrays Scott as a legislator who repeatedly teamed up with Shea as he ascended in the patriot movement by instigating conflicts that risked “bloodshed and loss of life.” The Idaho Statesman, for one, has called for the Idaho House to “thoroughly investigate the charges” against Scott and to “take the appropriate actions.”
The Redoubt, of course, has a much different take: When asked for an interview for this story, Radio Free Redoubt host Schmidt replied that “Heather is a patriot, a Christian, and has a huge heart for her community and her country, unlike you, you opportunistic turd.”
Among the constituents who keep reelecting her, Scott is seen as a breath of fresh air, willing to take on career politicians in the name of liberty.
To a moderate former legislator like Malek, Scott is someone who sabotages the complicated legislative process by spreading misinformation that “creates divisiveness, creates fear, creates anger.”
To Pounder, Scott is “a kind individual who loves her community, who loves people, but is being led by people who don’t love people — they love power.”
To Scott and Shea, all these varied reactions are evidence of the same thing: proof they’re in the right. When they succeed, they see it as evidence that they’re effective. When they fail, they see it as evidence that they’re so effective that dark forces are conspiring to stop them.
Scott describes to Shea in a 2016 podcast how the left comes after people like them: First they try to marginalize you. Then they try to demonize you, then to litigate you and then they try to criminalize you.
“It’s a good versus evil thing,” Scott says. “It’s Satanic.”
“It really is,” Shea says. “It’s a grand conspiracy of evil.” ♦


ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Daniel Walters, born and raised in Spokane, has been writing for the Inlander since 2008. In that time, he’s written about Rep. Matt Shea’s feud with the Spokane County sheriff, death threats wolf lovers sent to Washington state employees, and about how chemtrails aren’t actually a thing. He can be reached at danielw@inlander.com.

Below you might find the photos that accompany the original article. Again, I urge you to click  “North Idaho Rep. Heather Scott reaps the glory—and the consequences—of being one of Matt Shea’s biggest allies” for the full effect, photos, captions and all. The captions alone are worth the click.