On Friday Democratic Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi’s home in San Francisco was invaded and her husband Paul was brutally attacked by a wing-nut conspiracy theory devotee wielding a hammer. Fox News published an opinion piece entitled “Paul Pelosi attack should be a ‘wakeup call’ to Democrats on crime, but they won’t change: Leo Terrell” and gave air time to its author, Mr. Terrell. On air the commentators wildly spun the attack as a result of “soft-on-crime”, and had the unmitigated gall to suggest that the suspect might soon be “out on the streets”. I searched in vain for any Fox News mention that the attacker was eerily intoning, “Where’s Nancy?”, mimicking the calls heard in the U.S. Capitol during the insurrection on January 6, 2021. Any hint of condemnation of the widespread culture of violence nurtured by Donald Trump throughout his presidency? Not a peep—although one commentator mentioned a rise in violent crimes against political figures—as if such attacks arose out of nothing. Who, me?
Right wing media tout the January 6 insurrections as “Patriots” and “tourists” and treat the jail sentences of some of these people as terribly unfair to “good people”. Meanwhile, the January 6 Committee in the House of Representatives has firmly established the leader of the Republican Party and the darling of many Republican voters, former President Trump as the plotter and leader of the violent January 6 insurrection.
Where are the Republicans willing to denounce the culture of political violence nurtured for the last seven years by Trump and many of his followers? I have heard no Republicans (except Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger) willing to speak against the culture of violence nurtured by the Trumps, Jordans, and Taylor Greens of their own Party. Silence is acquiescence—and their silence is deafening.
Are local Republicans exempt from this hypocrisy? Watch the free hour-long Frontline documentary on YouTube, Michael Flynn’s Holy War. Recall that General Flynn and company brought his holy war to an audience of “thousands” in Post Falls just last month. There Flynn preached his unholy gospel of required impending violence to salvage his vision of “Christian” nationalism. Then recognize Flynn’s links with the Insurrection and a litany of conspiracy theories that continue to fuel the insurrectionists—and people like Paul Pelosi’s assailant.
Right wing media trying to capitalize on the bludgeoning of Paul Pelosi as just another example of crime they say they will control is a sickening hypocrisy as long as they refuse to acknowledge, call out, and quell the calls for political violence made by members of their own Party.
Wherever you are offered a choice—vote them out. If you haven’t filled out and turned in you Washington State ballot, do so today.
Voter information tips: See the progressivevotersguide.com for detailed recommendations. (Note: I personally favor Julie Anderson over Steve Hobbs for Washington State Secretary of State. Not only is she better qualified, but she is in favor of Ranked Choice Voting. Mr. Hobbs is not.)
To access the archives of my writing and the links found therein use the search function (the magnifying glass symbol) at either
P.S. If one is still tempted to vote for a Republican in the November election recall that the Republican vision of “Freedom” for women and men in making intimate reproductive choices should involve, as Dr. Oz said in the recent debate, “women, doctors, local political leaders, letting the democracy that’s always allowed our nation to thrive to put the best ideas forward so states can decide for themselves.” So if you want “local political leaders” helping you make decisions in your doctor’s office and in your bedroom, by all means, vote Republican.
By now you have your ballot—they were sent out a week ago. If you haven’t received it or it disappeared into the recycling, contact your elections office today. (Click here for contact information.) Check out vote.wa.gov for additional (and somewhat personalized) details. If you take the time to vote this weekend it is likely you can drop your completed ballot in any post office box and expect it to arrive in time and be counted. Postage is covered—you don’t have to search for a stamp! Or you can drop your completed ballot into one of the conveniently located drop boxes—click here for current information. Two drop boxes, the South Hill Library and the Indian Trail Library, are currently unavailable on account of construction. (You can check a little later to confirm that your ballot was received and accepted by visiting vote.wa.gov.)
Instead of my laying out my meager musings, I recommend that you visit The Progressive Voters Guide. I am in accord with their voting recommendations for every position in Spokane County—with a few caveats that I’ll come to below.
This is not an election in which one should be tempted to lodge a protest vote—at least when there is a choice offered. This is not time to vote against an incumbent like Senator Patty Murray simply for the sake of change and because her opponent is a “fresh face”. That’s how we lost Thomas Foley and got George Nethercutt and then his hand-picked successor, McMorris Rodgers. On the other hand, I cannot imagine a reason to vote for McMorris Rodgers—not if one wants any positive federal action on voting rights, the right to choose, climate change, sensible gun control, or a myriad of other issues.
For Washington Secretary of State, the only statewide position on the ballot this election, I endorse the proven administrative expertise of nonpartisan candidate Julie Anderson over the incumbent political appointee Steve Hobbs. I have met and talked with Ms. Anderson on two occasions—and I find her hands on experience and command of the details of the office of Secretary of State impressive. Ms. Anderson is supportive of Ranked Choice Voting—as am I. Mr. Hobbs is skeptical. Finally, I thought Ms. Anderson acquitted herself extremely well in the recent debate with Mr. Hobbs held last Sunday at Gonzaga.
I also strongly endorse non-partisan candidate Deb Conklin for Spokane County Prosecutor over incumbent Prosecutor Larry Haskell. The racist, white nationalist, diatribes on Gab lodged by Larry Haskell’s wife, Leslie, are an embarrassment to all of eastern Washington. Anyone who imagines that Leslie’s white nationalist rhetoric doesn’t spill over into Larry’s work as Prosecutor must be dreaming—or has never been married.
All the races on the ballot are important but some are of paramount importance in part because they could be close and much rests on the outcome. I highlight Maggie Yates’ challenge to incumbent Al French for County Commissioner from District 5 (SW & W Spokane County). Ms. Yates winning would make a huge positive difference in county governance. Finally, retaining Vicky Dalton as Spokane County Auditor over Bob McCaslin Jr. is essential to the continued proper management of the Auditor’s office. Electing the incompetent challenger could compromise precisely the election integrity and transparency to which he pretends.
Vote. This weekend. Then contact five or ten friends and encourage them to do the same. Much rides on this election.
I am embarrassed to admit that for many election cycles prior to 2016 I cast my votes in local elections influenced by the recommendations I found in the Spokesman Review. I naively bought the often-repeated Republican line that certain things, like maintaining the right to privacy and the details of elections and vote counting, weren’t something to consider in voting for local candidates: After all, such things were determined at the state or federal levels. Until the mid-1990s and Newt Gingrich’s winner-takes-all politics as Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives I also tended to believe that elected Republican legislators would actually vote based on intelligent analysis guided by statements made during their campaigns, rather than voting as a bloc. Those times are past: the Republican Party is not the Party I thought I knew.
The Dobbs decision and the Republican dance around Trump’s Big Lie totally exploded all of those naive suppositions. Any trust I once had in the statements made by Republican candidates now lies in ruins. Dobbs trashed the constitutional right to privacy women and men in our country relied on for half a century—so long that many have forgotten or never knew what it was like to live in a country where the government could dictate one’s most personal decisions regarding one’s own body, how to manage a pregnancy, buy and use birth control, and whom one was allowed to love. Dobbs is the result of the perfidy of the Supreme Court Justices elevated to the Court by Republican U.S. Senators playing minority political hardball.
For half a century all Republicans, as an article of faith and conviction, have declared that life begins at conception. Before Dobbs the logical consequences of that article of faith could be conveniently ignored—but now, post Dobbs, that conviction looms as a threat to personal freedom (what is all that rhetoric about “Freedom” we’ve been hearing for years from far right Republicans and Libertarians, anyway?). When U.S. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (CD-5, Eastern Washington) and Tiffany Smiley (candidate for U.S. Senate from Washington State challenging Senator Patty Murray) or any Republican candidate bobs and weaves around questions of how they would vote on proposed federal restrictions (See Lindsey Graham) on abortion access neither I, nor anyone, should find them credible or trustworthy. “States’ rights” be damned: if it came down to a vote, McMorris Rodgers and Smiley would impose nationwide restrictions on abortion access that would supersede the will of Washington voters and current Washington law in a split second. Furthermore, if presented with a bill to codify Roe v. Wade in federal law they would vote “Nay” without a moment’s hesitation—in fact, McMorris Rodgers has already cast that “Nay” vote in the House.
With Dobbs the logical consequences of “life begins at conception” reach all the way to local elections. The WeBelieveWeVote.com Survey Question 4 “Life” states that “The [Washington State] Reproductive Privacy Rights law needs to be challenged and/or repealed at both the state andlocal levels.” The Washington State Reproductive Privacy Rights law (RCW 9.02.100–click to read) squarely places reproductive rights as the province of individuals in the context of medical care—not a matter for the state (except after fetal viability). All but two local Republican candidates for legislative offices (generally the only candidates willing to respond to the Survey) happily check off 10 out of 10 agreement with the need to “challenge[d] and/or repeal[ed]” Reproductive Privacy. The other two Republican candidates wisely “Did Not Respond”—recognizing a liability when they saw one. How much more clear could the national and local Republican Parties be in their continued quest to insert themselves into the most private of personal medical decisions?
After Dobbs’ repeal of Roe v. Wade every Republican candidate for legislative office must be seen as a serious threat to the right to privacy in the most intimate, private decisions a woman (or man) is ever called upon to make. So much for “Freedom”—whenever any of these candidates cry “Freedom” they should be struck by lightning in retaliation for their hypocrisy.
Keep to the high ground,
Jerry
Thanks for reading Indivisible–The High Ground! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
The job of Spokane County Auditor requires both personal and managerial attention to detail. The Auditor is responsible for Recording, Financial Services, Motor Vehicle Licensing and Elections Divisions of county government. The job of auditor requires leadership and oversight.
Would you knowingly vote for a candidate for the job of Auditor who, on multiple occasions during their campaign, demonstrated their inability to respect deadlines and details? Bob McCaslin, Jr., current (until January) Representative to the Washington State legislature from LD4 (Spokane valley north to Mt. Spokane) is seeking to replace incumbent Spokane County Auditor Vicky Dalton.
Every candidate for every elected position in the State of Washington has their fitness as an administrator tested in the course of their campaign. In Washington State a candidate must follow detailed financial reporting requirements during the course of (and after) their campaign for public office.
Bob McCaslin Jr., Republican candidate for Spokane County Auditor, is falling short on this test of administrative ability. We should notice. Candidates in our state must report on a timely basis the details of their campaign finances to the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission (the “PDC”, at pdc.wa.gov).
Mr. McCaslin, like most candidates for public office in Washington State, hired a campaign treasurer, Sharon Hanek. The relationship between the candidate and their campaign treasurer should be seen as a microcosm of the relationship between the Auditor and the staff of the Auditor’s office.
The rules and regulations around campaign finance reporting to the Public Disclosure Commission in Washington State are complicated, but not nearly as complicated as the rules and regulations under which the office of County Auditor functions.
Still, Mr. McCaslin and his treasurer were consistently unable to follow the campaign reporting rules of the PDC. Here’s a snapshot:
This is part of Case #109883, McCaslin, Bob: Alleged Violations of RCW 42.17A.235 and .240 for failure to timely and accurately file C-3 and C-4 reports (EY22, June22), the details of which can be read under “Rules and Enforcement” at the PDC’s website.
The Public Disclosure Commission’s investigation of Case #109883confirmed the detailed allegations in the complaint (the details are here). However, because the PDC investigation found no intent by the McCaslin campaign to deceive the public, the result was only a warning to Mr. McCaslin, which read in part:
Staff expects you to file all required reports of contributions and expenditures in future years, including surplus funds. The Commission will consider this formal written warning in deciding on further Commission action if there are future violations of PDC laws or rules.
Legal processes like this take time (as we are currently observing on a national scale). The original complaint against the McCaslin campaign was filed electronically on June 22, 2022. The result of the hearing on this complaint were posted on September 20. The warning letter was issued on October 4, only a month before the upcoming November General Election. Nevertheless, the very next C-4 Report, due on October 18, was filed a day late. Obviously, “consider[ing] this formal written warning…if there are future violations” is not going to happen before the November Election.
Voters, especially MAGA voters, are focused on the Elections Division of the Spokane County Auditor’s Office. That is shortsighted. The Auditor’s Office also manages the Recording, Financial Services, and Motor Vehicle Licensing Divisions. Consider what falls under the Financial Services Division:
The Financial Services Division of the Auditor’s Office maintains and controls the County’s financial system to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the County’s financial information, financial reporting, payment of liabilities, and safeguarding of assets. Financial Services also provides financial, accounting, payroll, and accounts payable services to the County’s various departments, agencies and acts as the disbursing officer for smaller taxing districts with the County. To facilitate effective management of these responsibilities, the Division is organized into 3 sections, Financial Services, Accounts Payable and Payroll.
Who in their right mind would choose a right wing politico with a degree in Education over a Certified Public Account with decades of experience to run this Division?
Bob McCaslin Jr. is signaling his lack of fitness for the office of Spokane County Auditor. No sensible employer would hire a man interviewing for a detail oriented job managing forty-two full time employees (with as many as 140 additional temporary employees during election season) who cannot inspire his campaign treasurer to submit campaign finance reports on time. In our case, we the voters are the employer. McCaslin’s application for employment should be soundly rejected. Vote for proven management skills. Vote for Vicky Dalton.
Keep to the high ground,
Jerry
Thanks for reading Indivisible–The High Ground! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Please have a look at RANGE Media’s Voter’s Guide to Voter Guides, especially if your ballot just arrived or arrives over the weekend—and you want to send it in or put it in a drop box so that campaigns lose their incentive to knock on your door. (The fact that you voted is available to them, but not for whom you voted.)
I do have one addition. The RANGE article mentions the Secretary of State’s Voters Guide, but does not mention that, thanks to a recently passed state law, residents of Spokane County will also receive in the mail a similar guide that covers right down to the local races. (Some Washington State counties may combine theirs with the Secretary of State’s Voter’s Guide. We in Spokane County have a separate guide for technical reasons of publication deadlines.) I urge you to go beyond these two government-mandated guides, since they mostly put forward photos and abbreviated campaign literature provided by the candidates themselves.
My personal favorite in the ProgressiveVotersGuide.com as a positive voter’s guide and WeBelieveWeVote.com (WBWV) primarily as a negative indicator. Check out RANGE’s comments on both. (If you visit WBWV, be sure to drill down to the “Survey” each candidate who responds has to fill out in order to receive a rating. The questions and responses are often illuminating. For the November General Election WBWV has made it harder in some races to find the raw Survey results. One sometimes needs to click on the candidate’s name, then scroll down, and click on “View Survey Responses” under “Alignment Rating and Survey.”)
Keep to the high ground,
Jerry
Thanks for reading Indivisible–The High Ground! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
In the heated atmosphere of the upcoming national, state, and county elections in November (at least in Washington State) it is tempting to put local governance mentally on the back burner. After all, City of Spokane elections for Mayor, City Council President, and City Council Members don’t happen until August and November of next year, 2023. However, important long term issues still can and do simmer on that back burner—a back burner I fear I have wrongly neglected. The City of Spokane Redistricting Board members were chosen last spring and had their first formal meeting on June 16. The Board held a Town Hall on July 20, at which just one citizen appeared, a representative of the non-partisan League of Women Voters of Spokane. Between August 2nd and 19th the Board held a “Thought Exchange” that garnered only 155 comments. Those comments emphasized two goals for the Board’s deliberations: 1) That the Board draw lines for the new City of Spokane Council Districts that correspond to Neighborhood Council boundaries (see below) and 2) That each Council District to contain a piece of downtown—since we all share downtown. Neither of these wishes was much respected by the Board in the map they are putting forward to the Council.
First, I think it is important to review the government structure of the City of Spokane. In 1999, twenty-one years ago, the City adopted the current “strong mayor” form of government. Spokane’s strong mayor system consists of an executive branch (the Mayor’s Office) under a mayor elected by citywide voting and a legislative branch (the “City Council”) with a Council President also elected citywide elected and six City Council members, two elected from each of three City Council districts. All eight City of Spokane elected officials are, nominally at least, non-partisan.
After each decennial census (2010, 2020) a redistricting board is formed to propose adjustments to the three council districts to allow for changes in population. This re-districting seems to come almost as an afterthought to other re-districting processes that readjust other (U.S. Congressional, state, and county) districts. Since the first municipal (city) elections affected by the changes aren’t held until two years after the census year, I suppose it seems reasonable that city council re-districting should come last. (There may also be a district border readjustment at each 5 year mark, depending on the perceived need.)
In 2000, around the same time the City of Spokane converted to a strong mayor system of government, the City also adopted the Neighborhood Councils Program “In order to foster communication between the citizens of Spokane and all facets of City government.” Each Neighborhood Councilsends a representative to the Community Assembly (found on the City website under “Official Commissions”), providing a neighborhood voice to City of Spokane government. Check out the map of Neighborhood Councils. (The map was an eyeopener for me. For years I’ve read in the Spokesman of this or that neighborhood and imagined a map location. The map revealed to me that my mental picture was often totally wrong. Can you confidently place the Riverside neighborhood, for example? I couldn’t.)
Just three of these Neighborhood Councils—East Central, West Hills, and Riverside—are currently split between two City Council Districts. The Neighborhood Councils are pretty much by definition “communities of interest”. Under RCW 29A.92.050:
To the extent feasible, the district boundaries shall coincide with existing recognized natural boundaries and shall, to the extent possible, preserve existing communities of related and mutual interest.
East Central, in particular, is a community of interest that suffered intentional geographic division when a path was cleared through the neighborhood for the building of I-90 beginning in the 1950s. This intentional division was (and is) perpetuated by City of Spokane City Council District borders that split East Central between District 1 (NE) and District 2 (South). As a consequence the voice of East Central is weakened. No City Council Member needs to listen as closely to the voice of East Central because East Central’s votes are divided between two City Council districts.
Between September 22 and October 2nd the Redistricting Board looked for more input in choosing from among fifteen maps they and others had offered up. The Board solicited rankings of the maps on an online Survey Monkey Survey. The Board logged just 287 responses, plus another roughly 30 emails (verbal statement by the Board Chair from the October 4 Board Meeting video). Survey Monkey results depend on awareness and motivation. Results can be overwhelmed by either a few folks filling out a survey multiple times (responses are anonymous) or by a highly motivated group logging in at a high rate. Even so, the two leading maps coming out from that survey were Map #1 “Minimal Changes with Shared Downtown” and Map #2 “Whole Neighborhood Council Boundaries with Shared Downtown”. (Here’s a map of the current City Council boundaries. Here is the Neighborhood Council Map, the same one linked.)
The clincher came at the October 4 Redistricting Board Meeting—a “Town Hall” (which you can watch here). Four maps were up for consideration, but only two were much discussed, #1 and #2 noted above. Over thirty people came to speak. Three spoke in favor of respecting Neighborhood Council boundary lines. Listening to all the others, it is immediately clear they were all raising the same talking points, often in the same order. If you take the time to listen to the video you will hear the “Talking Points” put forward by the SpokaneGOP (copied below in the P.P.S.) repeated over and over. Daniel Walters wrote in an article October 6th (it is worth clicking that link and reading Walters’ full article) :
…there was an active right-wing campaign to rally opposition to Zappone’s map [Map #2] and support for Map 1.
Note that Map #2 became “Zappone’s Map” in part thanks to Daniel Walters’ prior writing—and, in spite of the fact that while many people submitted maps to the Board, Map #2 had risen to a position near the top on its own merits of preserving Neighborhood Council boundary integrity. (No one harped on the fact that Map #1 was proposed by Jennifer Thomas, one of the three voting Board members, and, arguably, the one with a partisan axe to grind—See P.S. below.)
Daniel Walters attended the October 4 “Town Hall” of the Redistricting Board and reported on the biases in the comment period on a revealing Twitter thread.
Following that hijacked comment period, the three voting members of the Redistricting Board, with several notes of reluctance, voted 3-0 to put forward Map #1 (Jennifer Thomas’ map) to the City Council (next Monday, October 24th). Seen in retrospect the comment period was a shameful exercise in partisan politics.
Next Monday, October 24, at the City of Spokane City Council Meeting, the Redistricting Board will officially present its recommended map, Map #1, the “Minimal Changes” map, to the City Council for either approval or modification. Next Monday’s City Council Meeting is the last chance for the public to address this issue. Please send an email to your Council people in support of Map #2 (click here), the Neighborhood-Council-respecting map. Better, attend the comment period at the Council meeting and speak in favor of Map #2 (and against Map #1).
We should all have been paying attention sooner. We let the SpokaneGOP, along with its main financial backers, the builders and realtors, hijack the process (See P.S.)—and we hardly noticed.
Keep to the high ground,
Jerry
P.S. Jennifer Thomas: There are issues with the makeup of the City of Spokane Redistricting Board. The Board was composed of three voting members chosen by Mayor Woodward and approved by the City Council. Qualifications are laid out in Sections 59 and 60 of the City of Spokane’s City Charter. The qualifications for the City of Spokane Redistricting Board try to minimize partisan bias by proscribing lobbyists and recent active participants in political campaigns.
Please recall that Mayor Woodward was elected in 2019 with major monetary support from the Builders and Realtors. Jennifer Thomas, one of the three Redistricting Board Members put forward by Mayor Woodward, is the current Government Affairs Director for the Spokane Home Builders Association. Registered lobbyist? Not exactly, but certainly someone who may well have a partisan axe to grind. In addition, Ms. Thomas narrowly avoided the prohibition against a Redistricting Broad member “contribut[ing] to any political campaign of any candidate for local, state, or federal office while a member of the districting board”. Just four days before her appointment to the Redistricting Board was confirmed on March 21, 2022, Ms. Thomas contributed to City Councilman Michael Cathcart’s campaign to become County Commissioner, County Commissioner District 2. (When I last checked a few years ago only around ten percent of registered voters had ever contributed any amount to a political campaign.)
P.P.S. Below I’ve copied the SpokaneGOP call to action on Redistricting. (Note that they meant Map #2 when they wrote Map #4.) Of course, maintaining the integrity of the Neighborhood Council District boundaries is nowhere mentioned, in spite of importance of that concept in earlier input submitted to the Redistricting Board.
In the wake of another mass shooting, this time by a fifteen year old boy in Raleigh, North Carolina, I am reminded that “my” U.S. Representative, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, is so deeply entwined with the NRA that she co-sponsors a bill that could make these deranged shooters even more deadly.
You all recognize the cylindrical device that an assassin screws onto the muzzle of his gun in spy movies, the device that reduces the discharge of the gun to a muffled “Pfffft!”. The mass shootings that have become so sickeningly common in our country—Sandy Hook, Uvalde, and Parkland to name just a few—have NOT involved such muffled (“silenced”) weapons. Imagine if these shooters had ready access to devices that muffle the sound of their weapons, maybe not to a “Pfffft” like in the movies, but enough to make the killing less obvious and the shooter harder to localize. How many more would die?
There is a simple reason why these deranged shooters aren’t already using silencers on their weapons: the purchase and ownership of a silencer is highly regulated under the National Firearms Act of 1934—along with other people-killing devices like full-on machine guns and sawed-off shotguns. Republicans would like to change that—and they want to hide their intent.
Cathy McMorris Rodgers, our soccer-mom-lookalike from eastern Washington (CD-5), the woman who solemnly offers her “thoughts and prayers” after every mass shooting, is a consistent co-sponsor of The Hearing Protection Act. The 2021-2022 version of this bill has 95 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives—every last one of them a Republican. As a shooter myself, McMorris Rodgers’ co-sponsorship of this disingenuously named bill makes me hopping mad. Read the bill. Not only would it remove federal restrictions on the purchase and ownership of silencers, but it would preempt any state and local laws that restrict silencers (See Sec 4). So much for “states rights”—a term that Republicans drag out only when it happens to suit their purpose—e.g. abortion regulations.
Has our smiling soccer mom been duped by the NRA into somehow imagining “The Hearing Protection Act” is actually about protecting our hearing? No, she fully understands what she is co-sponsoring. In May of 2018 at a small Cathy-friendly town hall in Green Bluff, when confronted with the reality of her co-sponsorship of “The Hearing Protection Act” she assured the audience, “I’m definitely going to take a look again.” She also said, “…with everything going on [this was just three months after Parkland] I tend to think that this is…that now is not the right time.” In 2022 she is still a co-sponsor. She knows what she’s doing—and she thinks she can pull the wool over the eyes of enough voters to keep her in office.
Remember McMorris Rodgers’ willful deception as you fill out your ballot this weekend. Vote for Natasha Hill.
Keep to the high ground,
Jerry
Thanks for reading Indivisible–The High Ground! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
