JXIndivisible

“Right to Work” vs. Right to Bodily Autonomy

George Orwell, were he alive today, would wryly smile at the Republican devotion to the “right to work.” One would think, of course—and many do—that “right to work” laws are meant to guard the individual liberty of workers to engage directly with an employer. In reality, “right to work” has been, for decades, an ingenious and integral part of the Republican Party’s strategy to divide and conquer labor and labor’s power to bargain. Meanwhile, corporate management consolidates while it provides insanely large executive salaries and benefit packages. It is really all about power and rhetorical cleverness.

So what do “right to work” laws actually seek to accomplish?

Simply put, “right to work” laws undermine union bargaining by requiring unions to tolerate free-riders, employees who benefit from union contracts but don’t want to contribute to the collective effort to negotiate a union contract by paying union dues. Of course, “right to free-ride” wouldn’t have the deceptive Orwellian doublespeak allure of “right to work.” 

Using this deceptive rhetorical tactic, Republicans have sponsored and passed “right to work” rules in twenty-six states (not yet including Washington State and not yet nationally). I was stimulated to write this post after listening to Michael Baumgartner mention his support for “right to work” in the October 8th forum at the Myrtle Woldson Performing Arts Center while his opponent, Carmela Conroy, expressed pride in being a third generation union member. 

Here’s what Emry Dinman reported:

The Republican [Baumgartner] agreed “unions are great” but said they should be optional.

“It’s just un-American to force folks to join any organization to get a job,” he said.

That he thinks “unions are great” is a nice—and totally meaningless—and an unsupported flourish. The second sentence is the very definition of the Republican Party’s decades-long effort to trash union power using “right to work” rhetoric. You can bet that Mr. B. would be delighted to enshrine union-undermining “right to work” into federal law if ever offered the chance to vote to do so. 

Republican dogma only pretends to support “freedom”—and only when such pretense serves Republican purpose. Consider for a moment the blatant inconsistency of the Republican Party claiming to value supposed individual rights such as the “right to work” while simultaneously celebrating state governments that pass laws curtailing a woman’s right to make her own reproductive healthcare decisions. 

In the recent forum Mr. Baumgartner was asked if, in view of his previous opposition to an abortion exception in the case of rape in 2012, if he would vote for a federal law to nationally legalize abortion in that specific case if presented with such a bill in Congress. (See here at about 2:54) He looked quite uncomfortable and a bit sheepish as he ducked the question by insisting, “Well, I won’t vote on any abortion legislation because it is the role of the states.” Based on that answer and his discomfort, if there is anyone who believes Mr. B wouldn’t vote against a bill legalizing abortion in the case of rape, I would like to offer that person a bridge for sale. No one should trust this man in Congress to protect their bodily autonomy. He hides behind “States’ Rights” now—but if he had to vote yea or nay on a federal bill to ban abortion nationwide you know he would vote with his party. 

And Baumgartner’s commitment to “freedom” is entirely malleable. It depends on what his party (and the Washington Policy Center) need him to support. “Freedom” is rhetorically fine, if, by invoking it, they can weaken unions or kill a pesky progressive tax (I-2024), but “freedom” is to be denied for a woman’s right to control her own body.

Vote Carmela Conroy for Congressional District 5 U.S. Representative. You cannot trust Baumgartner to protect your freedom.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. In general, disingenuously appealing to individual “freedom” is a tried-and-true Republican tactic to undermine any movement of which Republicans disapprove. Consider wealthy hedge fund manager Brian Heywood’s Initiative 2124. Its intent is to bankrupt the collective funding of long term care insurance. The method? Appeal to individual’s “freedom” to opt out of paying a tiny payroll tax of 0.58%—less than a penny on a dollar. Of course, these same Republicans don’t want you to cop a clue that their real objection is that the highest earners will pay, over time, more dollars into the fund than those high earners are likely to get out of it, that is, this is a tiny progressive tax on earnings. OMG! Consider the injustice of that! High earners might provide a net subsidy to low-wage earners to provide some care in the event of medical or physical catastrophe. Heavens! Not that! That would be, dare I say it, dreaded ______ism! [Sarcasm alert.]

Today, Tomorrow, and Friday–at least in Spokane County

In 2011, by state legislation, Washington State finished converting to our present Vote-By-Mail system. By state law (RCW 29A.40.070) county auditors in Washington State must mail a ballot to each voter “at leasteighteen days before each primary or election” [the italics are mine]. The November General Election is held nationwide on the Tuesday after the first Monday of November (by federal law). On account of that timing, typically Washington State Ballots are put in the mail just a little more than 18 days before, that is, mid-October, commonly on a Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday mid-month. This year that would center on Thursday, October 17. However, Washington State’s county auditors have the latitude to mail ballots even earlier—if their homework is done early.

Of course, “mailing ballots” sounds simpler than it is. With our sliced and diced electoral landscape with its many overlying jurisdictions, the printed ballot required for the voters of one precinct may be quite different even from that required in an adjacent precinct. Once the contents of each precinct’s ballots is determined, each county gets in line to have their ballots printed. (I am told that one printing company does nearly all the ballot printing for a slew of western states, so place in the queue matters.) 

Once those obstacles are mastered there is nothing that keeps a county auditor from mailing ballots a week (or more) earlier. This year ballots will be mailed from the Spokane County Election’s office (part of the Auditor’s office) today (Wednesday), Thursday, and Friday, October 9, 10, and 11. If everything is working correctly you should have your ballot in your mailbox by this weekend. (The same week-early mailing occurred in 2020, the last presidential election year.) 

Don’t Wait—Do Your Homework and submit your ballot

Once you’ve filled out and returned your ballot the volume of calls and door-knocks should diminish. Campaigns have access to databases that show whose ballot has been received and accepted—but not for whom you voted. The campaigns use this data to focus their efforts elsewhere. 

Pro-voter tip: At vote.wa.gov you can check to see if your ballot has been “accepted” by clicking the tab “Your Ballot and Voting Materials.” (There you can also read an online version of the Voter Guide. (You should also receive both a state and a county guide in the mail.)

There are good sources of information about the candidates and the ballot measures you will see on your ballot. My favorite source for reasoned, rational information is The Progressive Voters Guide (click to go there). By entering the address of your voter registration (not necessarily the same as the address to which your ballot was mailed) you can see the guide customized to the races that appear on your ballot. 

In past years I have recommended checking out “WeBelieveWeVote,” as a guide to rigidly right wing candidates to avoid. This year WeBelieveWeVote seems to be barely functional, displaying “The Voter’s Guide will return in November,” although I still see an occasional yard sign for the organization. Perhaps publicly signing on to what many voters consider extremist articles of faith is now seen by the more clever right wing candidates as a losing proposition.

Insofar as you might find what I have written useful, for best way to access earlier articles published in this blog, Indivisible—The High Ground, I recommend the archives at jxindivisible.org. I archive there because WordPress has a more robust Search function than does Substack. At jxindivisible.org you can scroll through titles and articles or enter keywords like “Baumgartner” or “French” or “PFAS” in the Search box to call up articles in which that keyword appears. (I use this archive to help bolster my aging memory, especially for links to references.) Looking back, I realize that, with the exception of the post “Carmela Conroy for Eastern Washington” I have concentrated less on the excellent candidates I support than I have focused on the candidates I believe deserve to lose. 

Do your homework, fill out your ballot, turn it in promptly, discuss your voting choices with like-minded friends, and encourage them to register and vote. Most of us understand that Washington State’s electoral votes, to a high degree of likelihood, will go to support the Harris/Walz ticket, i.e. we’re not a swing state. That said, control of the U.S. Congress and that of state and county government is also at stake in this election. Don’t neglect the down-ballot races. 

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry 

The CD5 candidate’s extremism v. Carmela Conroy’s voice of reason

Former Spokane County prosecutor and career foreign service officer Carmela Conroy and Mr. Baumgartner are vying for the U.S. House seat to be vacated by Cathy McMorris Rodgers the end of this year. Choose carefully. If you wish to make sure that the next Las Vegas mass murderer has access to the “right” equipment for the job, Michael Baumgartner is your guy. 

Surely Michael Baumgartner would rather it were known only to a select audience, but he is a 2nd Amendment extremist—and is proud of his voting record that proves the point. He is anxious to make sure that everyone can access the most efficient people-killing equipment legally available—the “bump stock”—a device that, in practical terms, converts a semi-automatic rifle into a machine gun. Bump stocks came into public consciousness when, in 2017, a lone gunman firing from a 32nd floor hotel room in Las Vegas killed sixty and wounded over four hundred more defenseless concert goers—a grim lone-gunman record. (See P.S. below for bump stock regulatory background and more.) 

Keep this bump stock background in mind as you contemplate this quote from Mr. Baumgartner from an interview he gave a couple of months ago (watch here starting at 5:08):

Let me say first on the bump stock ban I was in the senate when the Democrats brought that to the floor in the Washington State senate. I voted against it, ahhh. and did not support that, and did not support President Trump’s measure to ban bump stocks and was glad that the Supreme Court has overturned that because as we know the far left wants to take away ALL of our gun rights and every step they can get closer to that is all just part of their plan, their goal.

The “bump stock ban” Baumgartner is proud of voting against passed the Washington State Senate as ESB 5992 on February 27, 2018 by a vote of 31 in favor (Republicans and Democrats) to 18 against (all Republicans). Signed by the governor, the law is now part of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW 9.41.190) [the bold is mine].

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, it is unlawful for any person to:

(a) Manufacture, own, buy, sell, loan, furnish, transport, or have in possession or under control, any machine gun, bump-fire stock, undetectable firearm, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle;

This bump stock prohibition still stands in Washington State as a perfect example of the “states’ rights” that Baumgartner otherwise promotes in the video and elsewhere. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down a federal bump stock prohibition because it was an ATF regulation, rather than a U.S. Congress-passed law. Baumgartner, if elected this fall to the U.S. Congress, will work hard with other extremists to keep bump stocks and all manner of other military hardware as unregulated and available as possible. He will oppose passage of a federal bump stock ban—or any gun regulation whatsoever. Of course, he will drape that stance in 2nd Amendment absolutism while drumming up angst over an imaginary slippery slope.

Carmela Conroy, Baumgartner’s far better qualified opponent in the November election—as well as this gun-owning, shooting-sport-participating writer—stand for the sensible gun regulations that a majority of Americans want to see enacted. 

Baumgartner’s YouTube interview from which his quote was drawn is a treasure trove of the far right extremism that lives beneath the shallow veneer of Baumgarnter’s “Aw, shucks” exterior. Both the interview setting and the interviewer are revealing. The setting is 3 Aces “Personal Security Operations Center” on Broadway in Spokane Valley. Click that link. “3 Aces” seems to be advertising something more like paramilitary training than personal security advice. (Shades of Matt Shea’s “Team Rugged?”) The interview is conducted by William Kirk, a lawyer who claims to specialize (and have exalted credentials in) both “gun law” and in “DUI Defense.” Researching Mr. Kirk is a tour of self-aggrandizement using glitzy website presentations. Mr. Kirk appears as the sole attorney and personality of two Washington west side organizations of self-proclaimed renown, Washington Gun Law and the Cowan Kirk Law Firm. 

Let us work to elect Carmela Conroy as our Representative to the U.S. House this fall, not her far-right extremist opponent.

Keep to the high ground,
Jerry

P.S. Bump Stock Background: On October 1, 2017, just seven years ago in the first year of Trump’s presidency, a lone gunman perched in a room on the 32nd floor of a Las Vegas hotel committed the deadliest mass shooting by one person in American history. Made possible by “bump stocks”, a device that essentially converts a semi-automatic rifle into a machine gun, the shooter fired off more than a thousand rounds in just ten minutes into a crowd of concert-goers, killing 60, wounding at least 413 more and causing injuries to hundreds more in the resulting stampede. Ponder that. 

The incident was so horrific that, in 2018, additionally spurred by the Parkland High School Shooting in February of 2018, Trump tweeted and even the NRA supported “additional regulations” around bump stocks. The ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco, and Explosives) heard the call, administratively reclassifying bump stocks as “machine guns,” thereby requiring registration and fees under the National Firearms Act of 1934. 

Then earlier this year 2024 (thanks to the same six Supreme Court Justices responsible for overturning Roe v. Wade) the ATF regulation was struck down, the six Justices declaring that ATF had overstepped its statutory authority. Note two things: (1) This the same Supreme Court majority that McConnell and Trump brag about establishing and (2) this ruling does NOT prohibit either state or federal legislation that would regulate bump stocks. Nationally, now that the memory of Las Vegas and bump stocks is fading, there is zero chance of any regulation of bump stocks passing Congress until there is a substantial Democratic majority in both the House and Senate.

The Obvious Choice to Represent Real Americans

We, the voters of eastern Washington, have a historic opportunity this fall to elect Carmela Conroy as our Representative to the U.S. Congress, the candidate who actually represents the values and interests of a majority of eastern Washingtonians. 

Imagine for a moment, the wheat and potato farmers of eastern Washington (and, for that matter, the apple farmers of central Washington) who export their produce across the Pacific, having in Congress a Representative who speaks fluent Japanese, has served in multiple assignments with the U.S. State Department in Japan, and retains deep cultural ties in Japan. 

Imagine having a Representative in the U.S. House from our region who possesses a law degree and a thorough understanding of our legal system with three years and ten months experience as Deputy Prosecuting Attorney in Spokane County.

Imagine having as our Representative a woman who understands the broad world from the vantage point of having honorably served with distinction as an apolitical foreign service officer with the U.S. State Department for twenty-four and a half years in posts including terrorist-plagued Pakistan and Afghanistan; a woman who, as a result of that work, lists among her many endorsements include personal endorsements by seven former U.S. Ambassadors and the endorsement of the National Security Leaders for America, a group of 741 National Security Leaders, comprised of over 230 general and flag officers, including 15 retired four-star generals and admirals, 10 cabinet secretaries, 10 service secretaries, and 148 ambassadors.

Imagine a Representative who takes seriously the scientific consensus on issues like the reality and danger of human-caused climate disruption, who believes we should all have the freedom to make medical decisions about our own bodies and to decide whom to love, who believes that being “awake” to the complexities of our nation’s history is essential to avoid repeating our mistakes.

Imagine a Representative who is fully competent with military small arms but agrees with the vast majority of Americans that unfettered, unchecked, unregistered, indiscriminate availability of military grade weaponry is a lethal danger to our children and to society overall.

Imagine a Representative who grew up as the daughter and granddaughter of skilled union laborers, who paid her own way through college and law school (when that was still feasible without massive debt) and who understands the struggles of working families. 

That Representative for eastern Washington is Carmela Conroy. Don’t let this historic opportunity to have real representation in the U.S. Congress pass us by. What can you do to help? Read the details on her website; represent your opinion to friends, relatives, and neighbors; share this post (and any others you like) widely and freely. Donate to Carmela’s campaign. Volunteer. Get the word out. That is the biggest challenge—and word from person-to-person is the most effective. And, then, by all means—

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

The only Republican good is personal and corporate profit

The bottom line to this post is simple: Vote “no” on every Washington State “Initiative” that appears on your ballot in November if you value the common good. (N.B. Some local jurisdictions have some “Propositions” or “Measures” that deserve a “yes” vote—don’t confuse those with the “Initiatives”—all four of which should be packed together and labelled as the “Republican Greed Initiatives.”)

Washington voters will see these four statewide initiatives on the November ballot. All four are spear-headed and financed by Brian Heywood, a wealthy venture capitalist transplant from California, and Jim Walsh, the chairman of the Washington State Republican Party and a current west side representative to the Washington State legislature. The intent of all four initiatives is to convince you, as a resident of Washington State, that you should reject what a majority of our elected representatives have made state law in the interest of the common good of the people of Washington. 

The measures contained in this suite of Republican greed initiatives are numbered I-2109, I-2117, I-2124, and I-2066. (To access the Voter Guide detail, see P.S. below.) 

The Cardinal Greed Initiative, I-2109

I-2109 would repeal the relatively new Washington State capital gains excise tax. The capital gains excise tax provides significant funding for K-12 education, higher education, school construction, early learning, and childcare. Why, pray tell, might Mr. Heywood be interested in repealing the capital gains excise tax? Simply put, greed. Mr. Heywood moved to Washington State from California, in his own words, “to make money.” Obviously, he is willing to go to great lengths and expense to fund and promote initiatives in order to keep every bit of that money from supporting the public schools. This despite the fact that these are Washington public schools, educating the workforce on which Heywood’s ever expanding wealth depends. 

Worried about tax on the capital gains from the sale of your home or your farm?They’re exempt—as are a host of other capital gains, like those from the sale of livestock, timber, or stocks in your Individual Retirement Account (IRA). So what capital gains are taxed? We might characterize them as “abstract capital gains,” primarily capital gains made on the sale of stocks and bonds or other financial instruments, just exactly the sort of transactions and manipulations that grow even more wealth for people who are already wealthy. Most importantly no such capital gains are subject to the excise tax until they exceed $250,000. Can you even imagine that sort of gain reported on your Form 1040? (Note also that the exemption is indexed to inflation.) None of those limiting facts about the application of the excise tax are widely advertised or known, a convenience for those like Mr. Heywood who would rather you focus only on the word “tax” and worry that your own meager nest egg might be threatened. Republican chairman Walsh (no doubt with Heywood’s backing) even tried legal maneuvering to keep any mention of the loss of school funding if the excise tax is repealed off the ballot. (See extended coverage and references in “Washington State Republicans Want To Keep You in the Dark.”)

The Climate-Trashing Heywood/Walsh Initiatives

Two of the remaining three initiatives, I-2117 and I-2066, would repeal good faith efforts to address the devastating effects of global heating. With wildfires, sequential summers of record heat, and “thousand year” storms with record tide surges, rainfall, and flooding like that of Hurricane Helene that cropping up routinely, getting on board to minimize further global heating is the paramount example of the common good. With the leader of the entire Republican Party declaring that “climate change is a hoax” and vowing that “on day one” he will “drill, baby, drill” it is time to heap ridicule on any Republican who claims to “believe in climate change,” while they proceed to advocate dismantling, or, worse, prohibiting by initiative good faith efforts to address the long term threat. 

I-2066, is a particularly bald-faced attempt to protect the fossil gas industry by baselessly ginning up angst and loathing by pretending that government and/or government agencies are about to tell existing fossil gas customers that they have to scrap their gas appliances. Alarmist BS. Stop for a second and consider what a political suicide move that would be. Yes, it is sensible to curtail expansion of gas distribution infrastructure—and would, in a long term, save us all money in installation and maintenance costs. Expansion of fossil gas piping would only insure ongoing demand for fossil gas, when we need to gradually phase out burning fossil fuels. After all, the first rule of holes is that when you find yourself in one you ought to stop digging. (Aside: Think of those coveted, short-lived, pricey to burn—and hot—incandescent lightbulbs we hardly ever see anymore?) I-2066 wouldn’t just prohibit limits on new fossil gas infrastructure; it would “require certain utilities and local governments to provide natural [fossil] gas to eligible customers.” I-2066 could hardly be more coercive in favor of perpetuating the climate risks of the burning of fossil gas.

I-2117 would dismantle Washington State’s cap-and-trade system that has just gotten off the ground. Why? Let’s roll around in the dirt and argue about how much cap-and-trade might (but might not) be adding to the cost of fuel—and by all means don’t consider the benefits of decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels or the long term costs, both monetary and human, of notaddressing the issue of global heating. Like the other global-heating-promotion initiative, I-2117 would also preemptively prohibit any similar future state efforts of similar type.

Reject both of these fossil fuel industry-funded, global-heating-denying initiatives.

Finally, I-2124, that would make long term care insurance financially impracticable

Anyone facing the need for long term care for themselves, an elderly parent, or some other family member knows how expensive and hard-to-come-by it is. Think of state-required purchase of long term care insurance as something akin to an add-on to Social Security. Like Social Security (which Republicans have wanted to dismantle since it was enacted nationally in the 1930s) long term care insurance, like all insurance programs, depends on pooled investment and the spreading of risk across participants some of whom will need it eventually and some of whom, unpredictably, never will. By changing participation in the insurance pool from mandatory to elective, I-2124, if passed, would doom long term care insurance to financial collapse—the final Republican blow to the efforts to bolster the common good.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. You can already read the WA State Voter Guide concerning these statewide initiatives by visiting vote.wa.gov, entering your voter registration name and your birthdate, clicking “Your Ballot and Voting Materials,” and, on that page, clicking “Voter Guide: What’s on Your Ballot?” (While you’re there, be sure to also click “Your Voter Registration” to confirm that your “Home Address” (the registered address that determines what will appear on your ballot) and your “Mailing Address” (to which the ballot will be sent in the next election) are both accurate, and that your registration is “Active”. 

Brian Heywood and Jim Walsh. Would you buy a used car from either of these men?

Master of Self Promotion

This November eastern Washington voters will choose a new person to represent us in the U.S. House of Representatives from Congressional District 5 (CD5). We need to get this right. The voters of eastern Washington, once they elect a new Representative, tend to stick with that choice for decades. (Cathy McMorris Rodgers 20 years—retiring the end of this year, George Nethercutt 10 years, Tom Foley 30 years, Walt Horan 22 years.)

Carmela Conroy is a Spokane native and now retired foreign service officer with the U.S. State Department. She served our country in non-partisan posts under four different presidents of both parties for nearly 30 years, including stints in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Japan. Her opponent, Michael Baumgartner, is the current Spokane County Treasurer and a man who exhibits a terrific knack for self-promotion. 

For example, in a video interview in a Spokane Valley gun store conducted shortly before the Washington State August Primary Election, Mr. Baumgartner declared [the bold is mine]:

I was a civilian with the State Department overseas, but I’m the only one in the race who has served my country overseas—not a veteran but a civilian—but I certainly have been shot at and seen islamic terrorists up close.

Of what did Baumgartner’s civilian service with the State Department overseas actually consist? Fourteen months in Iraq as an “Economics Officer” and nine months as a “US Government Contractor” in Afghanistan. As a “Contractor” in the latter position he describes what he actually did as “Negotiated agenda and wrote cables for weekly Government of Iraq Cabinet Meeting” and “Helped write several research papers.” 

While Mr. Baumgartner suggests great risk to life and limb (being “shot at”) during these 23 months of employment, the nature of the desk tasks at which he was employed are cause for wonder. His ignorance of the decades of service of the most prominent of his primary opponents, Carmela Conroy, suggests a man who naively expects to ride into office on gross inflation of his experience and expertise.

Another example: For the last nearly six years (a four year term and a half) Mr. Baumgartner has held the position of Spokane County Treasurer. The Treasurer’s office is housed at the Spokane County Courthouse along with many of the other offices of county government and the Spokane County Superior Court. Mr. Baumgartner’s attention to the administrative duties of his $120,000 a year job as County Treasurer is a subject of speculation: the rare “Baumgartner sighting” is a standard joke among county staffers. 

The top paragraph displayed at Mr. Baumgartner’s “About” page at his campaign website is this:

Michael Baumgartner is a former Washington State Senator and diplomat, now serving as the Treasurer of Spokane County overseeing a nearly $1.9 billion fixed-income investment fund.

That sounds impressive and demanding of great expertise, but what does “overseeing a nearly $1.9 billion fixed-income investment fund” actually amount to? Does he actively manage this immense investment? Well, no. That task is currently performed (for a considerable fee) by “Meeder Public Funds, Inc.,” a registered investment firm that publishes a monthly Investment Report of its efforts on behalf of Spokane County to securely invest that $1.9 billion of the Spokane Public Investment Fund (SPIF). (See an example of that report here. For Meeder info see last page.)

It turns out that the “oversight” of the SPIF which Mr. Baumgartner wishes to claim is actually the responsibility of the “Spokane County Finance Committee.” That committee consists of the Treasurer (Mr. Baumgartner), the County Auditor (Vicky Dalton), and the Chair of the Board of County Commissioners (Mary Kuney). From the Spokane County website:

The County Finance Committee reviews and approves the County Investment Policy and County Debt Policy. Meetings are held at least twice per year per the Spokane County Investment Policy. 

Clearly, Mr. Baumgartner is neither solely responsible for the “oversight” of the $1.9 billion of the Spokane Public Investment Fund, nor does that oversight require more than a minimal commitment of time and effort. In fact these meetings have been just two per year in 2022, 2023, and 2024 and in that time have averaged about an hour for each gathering.

Not unlike the woman he seeks to succeed in office, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Mr. Baumgartner is quick to suggest that major legislative accomplishments, like the ultimate funding of the long-awaited North-South Freeway—and the establishment of at least one of the Spokane medical schools—were pivotally dependent on his efforts, when, in fact, both of those projects were the result of extensive bipartisan efforts.

This is nowhere near an exhaustive list of Mr. Baumgartner’s vacuous self promotion—but it nonetheless suggests that we, the voters, would do well to pay more attention to the lack of substance of his claims of prowess lest we send another lightweight to represent us in the U.S. Congress.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry