Category: Uncategorized

Prop. 1 Wants to Pre-emp Local Action

Jerry LeClaireAug 6

Climate change, global warming, is here. We experience it right here in Spokane with year after year of record heat and choking smoke. If we do not quit adding to the greenhouse gases, including methane (natural gas) and carbon dioxide, that we have pumped into the atmosphere over the last two centuries we will ultimately face a world that is uninhabitable. 

The first thing one needs do when trapped in a hole is to stop digging. Installing more gas lines and equipping more houses and apartments to burn natural gas (methane) at the same time as we try to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels makes no sense. Stop digging. 

This imminently reasonable idea of limiting new installations of natural gas infrastructure was floated among the proposals made in an action plan draft released earlier this year by the City’s volunteer Sustainability Action Subcommittee. The Subcommittee has been working for two years to update the City of Spokane’s 2009 Sustainability Action Plan, something many of us were unaware even existed.

The draft proposal that the city ban “gas hookups from all new commercial and multifamily residential buildings by 2023, and from all new construction by 2028” must have set off alarm bells among climate deniers and doubters, purveyors of fossil fuels, and the building industry. Even though no Spokane legislator is proposing to ban natural gas hookups (yet), these interest groups sense a threat to their bottom line. They gathered their resources and quickly proposed and gathered signatures for Proposition 1, which will appear on the ballot in the November general election. 

Here’s the clever wording:

Shall the Spokane City Charter be amended to adopt the Spokane Cleaner Energy Protection Act – preventing the City from adopting any code, ordinance, or regulation that would prohibit the use of hydroelectric power or natural gas?

The effort is backed by political action committee, “Spokane Citizens for Cleaner Energy,” almost entirely bankrolled by the Spokane Good Government Alliance PAC whose major contributors include hotelier Walt Worthy, Washington Trust Bank and building industry organizations.

Proposition 1 is a pre-emption, an end-run. It proposes not just a city ordinance, but a change in the city charter to head off any passage of a regulation in the City of Spokane that would limit the natural gas infrastructure. 

From a short article by Adam Shanks in the Spokesman on July 31 introduced me to Prop 1, “Natural gas debate heading to Spokane ballots in November”: 

The signature gathering effort and the initiative’s marketing have been handled by Camelback Strategies, a political consulting firm that has worked on behalf of politicians like Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers.

The marketing is nauseatingly clever: Hide the singular intent to cut off the power of the elected city council to even consider limiting fossil fuels. Hide it by linking the ban to hydroelectric power (this is vintage McMorris Rodgers rhetoric) as if anyone were proposing to ban hydroelectric. (No one is.) Then clothe the whole thing in a twisted lie: “Spokane Citizens for Cleaner Energy” is a deceptive name meant to gather votes of those inclined toward attacking climate change but not paying close attention. This is pure Republican climate-denying propaganda meant to mislead the voting public by preemptively limiting the ability of the City Council to even consider the issue. Prop 1 is the ultimate in deception and self-interest. It is time to rebel. 

What can you do? The five month comment period on the Action Plan ends this month. The forces behind Prop 1 are doing everything they can to undermine the Plan. Show your general support for the Spokane Sustainability Action Plan by filling out this survey today:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/YFNYGB2

You aren’t required to read the whole Action Plan to fill out the survey. Don’t get stalled in filling out the survey by feeling you must understand every detail—but if you have time to dig deeper here are some links:

Executive Summary (9-page listing of vision, goals, and strategies) 

Full Plan Draft (82-page report of the Sustainability Action Subcommittee)

Video Presentation (24-minute presentation by Kara Odegard, SAS manager

1-page flyer for posting 

Recommended:
“Climate Chaos: Our Present, Our Future” – S-R op-ed co-authored by Brian Henning, Amber Lenhart, Dr. Bob Lutz. 8/1/21 (Excellent!)

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. Below I have copied the email that alerted me to the Survey and to the Action Plan. It caught my attention in part because I had read Adam Shanks’ article on Prop 1. 

I’m casting out to my entire network to ask a question.  Have you completed the survey on the Spokane Sustainability Action Plan? Chances are you haven’t (maybe don’t even know about it).  

If not, please, please do.  This is an urgent call to show your support for a community-based, volunteer-driven, collectively organized plan to address climate chaos.  that will be submitted to the City Council for adoption before the end of the year.  

You don’t have to read the SAP to take the survey.  You don’t really need to know anything about it (although I think it would be worth your while to learn what’s in it).    Submitting it won’t take long.  I did it in under 5 minutes, and it’s mostly multiple choice.  You can offer ideas and comments, but you don’t have to be creative or think about it too much.  Just doing the survey will show that you care.  
Survey link:  https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/YFNYGB2
Here’s the thing – there is a well-organized resistance to the City adopting any plan that would set our local government on a path to mitigate and adapt to climate change.  Certain business-oriented and special interest groups have focused criticism and negativity on specific aspects of plan strategies and encouraged people to oppose the plan because it represents  “governmental interference.”  The survey will be a major influence for Council members who will decide on adopting the plan before the end of the year, and the results matter.
If you want to do something about wildfire smoke, water conservation, waste, transportation, fossil fuel consumption, climate justice, food safety, the City needs to hear from you!
Here’s another thing: the Plan only addresses high-level goals and strategies. It’s not time to worry about how everything is going to get done.  If adopted, the plan will require more assessment, prioritization, an implementation process, and ongoing monitoring.  Don’t worry, the future will be the hard part. We’re going to get there no matter what we do, but let’s try to make it better.
If you want some suggestions for the survey comment sections, here are some examples of strategy statements from the plan:  
Ensure new construction is as efficient as possible and fully reliant on renewable fuels  (Building & Energy)

Advance land use planning to minimize vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and increase community resiliency  (Transportation & Land Use)

Minimize food waste generated by residents and businesses  (Waste Diversion and Material Conservation)

Establish diverse, “future climate”-adapted landscaping within the built environment (Natural Environment)

Increase household food security regionwide (Health & Wellbeing)

Here’s the link!:  https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/YFNYGB2

Please forward this email to your own friends and networks. I strongly believe we need to push this effort hard.  Thank you for your effort.  Comments to this email are welcome – I can take it!  I’m happy to talk, too.

In Gratitude and Hope,
Ian
– Ian Cunningham
ian.daddio@gmail.com
509.990.6434


P.S.
More Background:
You’ve probably heard or read something about the Spokane Sustainability Action Plan, the 82-page blueprint authored by a volunteer group of dedicated citizens that could possibly set us on a path toward adapting to climate change.  The plan is a draft containing goals, strategies, and action ideas for meeting three major objectives:

95% reduction of greenhouse gases by 2050 using a step approach, compared to 2016 levels (State mandate)

Build resiliency to ensure our neighborhoods and economy are ready for future challenges

Prioritize those most exposed to health impact and economic downturns related to climate change

Over 40 people participating in drafting the SAS proposal. The SAP was posted on the City website in April, launching a five-month public comment period which ends this month.  The SAS plan proposal will be edited and refined before submitting to the Council in September or October.

Prop. 1 Wants to Pre-emp Local Action

Jerry LeClaireAug 6

Climate change, global warming, is here. We experience it right here in Spokane with year after year of record heat and choking smoke. If we do not quit adding to the greenhouse gases, including methane (natural gas) and carbon dioxide, that we have pumped into the atmosphere over the last two centuries we will ultimately face a world that is uninhabitable. 

The first thing one needs do when trapped in a hole is to stop digging. Installing more gas lines and equipping more houses and apartments to burn natural gas (methane) at the same time as we try to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels makes no sense. Stop digging. 

This imminently reasonable idea of limiting new installations of natural gas infrastructure was floated among the proposals made in an action plan draft released earlier this year by the City’s volunteer Sustainability Action Subcommittee. The Subcommittee has been working for two years to update the City of Spokane’s 2009 Sustainability Action Plan, something many of us were unaware even existed.

The draft proposal that the city ban “gas hookups from all new commercial and multifamily residential buildings by 2023, and from all new construction by 2028” must have set off alarm bells among climate deniers and doubters, purveyors of fossil fuels, and the building industry. Even though no Spokane legislator is proposing to ban natural gas hookups (yet), these interest groups sense a threat to their bottom line. They gathered their resources and quickly proposed and gathered signatures for Proposition 1, which will appear on the ballot in the November general election. 

Here’s the clever wording:

Shall the Spokane City Charter be amended to adopt the Spokane Cleaner Energy Protection Act – preventing the City from adopting any code, ordinance, or regulation that would prohibit the use of hydroelectric power or natural gas?

The effort is backed by political action committee, “Spokane Citizens for Cleaner Energy,” almost entirely bankrolled by the Spokane Good Government Alliance PAC whose major contributors include hotelier Walt Worthy, Washington Trust Bank and building industry organizations.

Proposition 1 is a pre-emption, an end-run. It proposes not just a city ordinance, but a change in the city charter to head off any passage of a regulation in the City of Spokane that would limit the natural gas infrastructure. 

From a short article by Adam Shanks in the Spokesman on July 31 introduced me to Prop 1, “Natural gas debate heading to Spokane ballots in November”: 

The signature gathering effort and the initiative’s marketing have been handled by Camelback Strategies, a political consulting firm that has worked on behalf of politicians like Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers.

The marketing is nauseatingly clever: Hide the singular intent to cut off the power of the elected city council to even consider limiting fossil fuels. Hide it by linking the ban to hydroelectric power (this is vintage McMorris Rodgers rhetoric) as if anyone were proposing to ban hydroelectric. (No one is.) Then clothe the whole thing in a twisted lie: “Spokane Citizens for Cleaner Energy” is a deceptive name meant to gather votes of those inclined toward attacking climate change but not paying close attention. This is pure Republican climate-denying propaganda meant to mislead the voting public by preemptively limiting the ability of the City Council to even consider the issue. Prop 1 is the ultimate in deception and self-interest. It is time to rebel. 

What can you do? The five month comment period on the Action Plan ends this month. The forces behind Prop 1 are doing everything they can to undermine the Plan. Show your general support for the Spokane Sustainability Action Plan by filling out this survey today:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/YFNYGB2

You aren’t required to read the whole Action Plan to fill out the survey. Don’t get stalled in filling out the survey by feeling you must understand every detail—but if you have time to dig deeper here are some links:

Executive Summary (9-page listing of vision, goals, and strategies) 

Full Plan Draft (82-page report of the Sustainability Action Subcommittee)

Video Presentation (24-minute presentation by Kara Odegard, SAS manager

1-page flyer for posting 

Recommended:
“Climate Chaos: Our Present, Our Future” – S-R op-ed co-authored by Brian Henning, Amber Lenhart, Dr. Bob Lutz. 8/1/21 (Excellent!)

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. Below I have copied the email that alerted me to the Survey and to the Action Plan. It caught my attention in part because I had read Adam Shanks’ article on Prop 1. 

I’m casting out to my entire network to ask a question.  Have you completed the survey on the Spokane Sustainability Action Plan? Chances are you haven’t (maybe don’t even know about it).  

If not, please, please do.  This is an urgent call to show your support for a community-based, volunteer-driven, collectively organized plan to address climate chaos.  that will be submitted to the City Council for adoption before the end of the year.  

You don’t have to read the SAP to take the survey.  You don’t really need to know anything about it (although I think it would be worth your while to learn what’s in it).    Submitting it won’t take long.  I did it in under 5 minutes, and it’s mostly multiple choice.  You can offer ideas and comments, but you don’t have to be creative or think about it too much.  Just doing the survey will show that you care.  
Survey link:  https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/YFNYGB2
Here’s the thing – there is a well-organized resistance to the City adopting any plan that would set our local government on a path to mitigate and adapt to climate change.  Certain business-oriented and special interest groups have focused criticism and negativity on specific aspects of plan strategies and encouraged people to oppose the plan because it represents  “governmental interference.”  The survey will be a major influence for Council members who will decide on adopting the plan before the end of the year, and the results matter.
If you want to do something about wildfire smoke, water conservation, waste, transportation, fossil fuel consumption, climate justice, food safety, the City needs to hear from you!
Here’s another thing: the Plan only addresses high-level goals and strategies. It’s not time to worry about how everything is going to get done.  If adopted, the plan will require more assessment, prioritization, an implementation process, and ongoing monitoring.  Don’t worry, the future will be the hard part. We’re going to get there no matter what we do, but let’s try to make it better.
If you want some suggestions for the survey comment sections, here are some examples of strategy statements from the plan:  
Ensure new construction is as efficient as possible and fully reliant on renewable fuels  (Building & Energy)

Advance land use planning to minimize vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and increase community resiliency  (Transportation & Land Use)

Minimize food waste generated by residents and businesses  (Waste Diversion and Material Conservation)

Establish diverse, “future climate”-adapted landscaping within the built environment (Natural Environment)

Increase household food security regionwide (Health & Wellbeing)

Here’s the link!:  https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/YFNYGB2

Please forward this email to your own friends and networks. I strongly believe we need to push this effort hard.  Thank you for your effort.  Comments to this email are welcome – I can take it!  I’m happy to talk, too.

In Gratitude and Hope,
Ian
– Ian Cunningham
ian.daddio@gmail.com
509.990.6434


P.S.
More Background:
You’ve probably heard or read something about the Spokane Sustainability Action Plan, the 82-page blueprint authored by a volunteer group of dedicated citizens that could possibly set us on a path toward adapting to climate change.  The plan is a draft containing goals, strategies, and action ideas for meeting three major objectives:

95% reduction of greenhouse gases by 2050 using a step approach, compared to 2016 levels (State mandate)

Build resiliency to ensure our neighborhoods and economy are ready for future challenges

Prioritize those most exposed to health impact and economic downturns related to climate change

Over 40 people participating in drafting the SAS proposal. The SAP was posted on the City website in April, launching a five-month public comment period which ends this month.  The SAS plan proposal will be edited and refined before submitting to the Council in September or October.

Day Off

Jerry LeClaireAug 4

Here’s the link to the Spokane County Election results (which are not final and will not be for a couple of weeks). The “top two” vote getters advance to the November general election:

https://www.spokanecounty.org/2995/Current-Election-Results

Other than that I’m taking the day off. There are just too many balls in the air today for this juggler.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

CMR’s Vaccine Low Profile

Jerry LeClaireAug 2

Don’t forget to put your completed ballot in a Drop Box or get it postmarked before Tuesday, August 3 at 8PM (no postage needed).

Between 5 and 6PM today, August 2, Rep. McMorris Rodgers (CD5, eastern Washington) is holding a town hall at Spokane Convention Center, Centennial Ballroom, 334 West Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA 99201. On Tuesday she’s in Republic and Colville (where she’s usually more comfortable).

I covered several issue one might raise with her in the EXTRA sent out yesterday. To see it without searching your email visit jerrysindivisible.substack.com . 

Is McMorris Rodgers vaccinated? Would she clearly answer that question in front of her conservative audience, like she apparently did on March 18 available on a Channel 4 youtube video that was up to 19 views after I watched it? Would she make a clear statement encouraging her followers take the jab to protect themselves and others? As covered in yesterday’s EXTRA post, she is actively working to threaten electronic media like Facebook if they continue to flag or delete posts—which would include those offering gross misinformation about the vaccines. She wishes to promote cacophony over clarity and truth. Her buzz words are “more speech is always better” as she ignores the skillful use of electronic media by some to amplify lies and obscuration. 

Shawn Vestal in a Friday, July 30, column in the Spokesman put what she needs to do far better than I can:

If Cathy McMorris Rodgers were sincerely concerned about a lack of confidence in the vaccines, she would do something real about it and forgo the anti-government fear-mongering and craven bootlicking about Operation Warp Speed that she spouted this week.

She would follow the McConnell plan.

Even as McMorris Rodgers and her fellow House conservatives are singing a chorus that the CDC’s renewed guidance for mask-wearing indoors will undermine confidence in the vaccine – the empty, staged concern of the fox for the henhouse – Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, spent money from his own campaign coffers to send a clear message: Get the vaccine.

Not: Talk to your doctor.

Not: I believe in the vaccine but you do you.

Not: Freedom!

Not: “Remember the glories of Operation Warp Speed.”

Nope. Just the simple truth: The vaccine is safe. The vaccine works. Get the vaccine.

This is the message McConnell, and some other Senate Republicans, have begun emphasizing in an effort to counteract anti-vaxxer sentiment in their own political circles.

Meanwhile, what is McMorris Rodgers doing as her state approaches a fifth wave bolstered by low vaccination rates in rural red counties? Complaining that the renewed guidance for indoor mask-wearing will “undermine vaccine confidence,” whining that Trump has not received enough praise for Operation Warp Speed, and suggesting that the latest CDC recommendations are nothing more than an effort by Biden to employ “force and fear” – not to mention “command and control.”

Talk about undermining vaccine confidence.

This faux-concern over vaccine confidence is, one assumes, some GOP strategist’s idea of a clever rhetorical play – pretending to care about the shots while heaping wood on the bonfire of anti-government paranoia driving politicized anti-vaxxers. At this stage, though, with the pandemic roaring back, clever political plays are reprehensible.

The return of the mask-wearing guidance truly, deeply bites. It is especially crushing for those of us who spent the last year attempting to do the right thing to protect ourselves and others, and to bring the pandemic under control against a steady wind of resistance on the right. We wore masks, we stayed home, we got our shots and now we’ll make the sacrifices we need to make to try – again – to put this problem in check, while those who are keeping it alive continue down their reckless path.

No, the renewed calls for masking are lousy indeed, and the resurgence of the delta variant is a dispiriting and exhausting development, and none of us wants to go through any more of this. But it is not some dark, perfidious effort to deny Americans their freedom, and it is stupid and despicable to say so. It would be a mistake to expect anything more honorable or honest from McMorris Rodgers, and yet even by her own low standards this shows atrocious leadership.

McConnell, on the other hand, has somehow managed to do better, and there is not a more cutthroat political operator on earth. He’s spending tens of thousands of his own unspent campaign cash to air 60-second radio spots across Kentucky, urging people in clear, unqualified terms to get their shots and expressing what is now, apparently, radical in his party: faith in science and scientists.

“(T)hanks to American investment and ingenuity – and especially thanks to the tireless work of our scientists, doctors and health care heroes – it took less than a year for us to develop three highly-effective COVID vaccines,” McConnell says in the ads. “It’s nothing short of a modern medical miracle.”

He discusses his own battle with polio as a child, and adds, “If you haven’t been vaccinated, do the right thing for you – for your family – and get vaccinated right now.”

This is the message McMorris Rodgers owes her constituents: Get vaccinated right now. Those who need to hear it most need to hear it from her and people like her. Not from Joe Biden or Jay Inslee, not from Anthony Fauci or Sanjay Gupta, not from the CDC or the Spokane Regional Health District. No, none of those will serve, because politicized people who lack confidence in the vaccines do not believe reliable, factual sources.

They need to hear it from people like Cathy McMorris Rodgers.

Shawn Vestal can be reached at (509) 459-5431 or at shawnv@spokesman.com.

Go to her town hall. Ask her for a clear recommendation on taking the vaccine. Her followers lives may depend on it. Our way out of this pandemic may depend on it.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

Jerry LeClaireAug 1

Between 5 and 6PM this Monday, August 2, Rep. McMorris Rodgers (CD5, eastern Washington) is holding a town hall at Spokane Convention Center, Centennial Ballroom, 334 West Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA 99201. On Tuesday she’s in Republic and Colville (where she’s usually more comfortable).

She is making one of her rare visits to “her” district in eastern Washington for a couple of days during the August recess. These chances to see her and ask her questions are not widely advertised. She claims these gatherings as outreach even as she manages to avoid much controversy or pointed questions by careful advertising. I encourage people to attend and to record and share the interaction. 

There are certainly some uncomfortable questions she ought to confront: 

Global Warming: Why did she recently vote to let oil and gas companies release methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere instead of requiring them to collect it so they can sell it as natural gas? For details see Cathy’s Climate Sabotage. McMorris Rodgers denies the scientific reality of human induced global warming, but cleverly resists plainly saying so—even as her constituents breathe smoke summer after summer. Perhaps a direct question, “Do you believe that methane and carbon dioxide are greenhouse gases and that their release into the atmosphere is the major cause of the global warming behind the smoke we’re breathing?” would help her constituents pinpoint her denial. (McMorris Rodgers flustered in response to the direct question, “What is your take on evolution and science? Do you believe the earth is more like 6000 years old or four and a half billion years old?” Her “I can’t say how old the earth is” response raises the question of whether she is doctrinally incapable of understanding climate science.)

McMorris Rodgers recently advertised in an email sent out by her office that she was “Holding Big Tech Accountable”. She and her crew recognize that people are concerned over the role of electronic platforms, so “Holding Big Tech Accountable” sounds like the right thing to do. One might be lulled into thinking that they are addressing the truth of speech advanced by electronic media or the marketing algorithms that draw Facebook readers down conspiracy theory rabbit holes. No. Take time to visit the Energy and Commerce Republicans webpage where they lay out their propaganda. There you’ll find that McMorris Rodgers, allied with nervous Jim Jordan (R-OH), is proposing to amend the Communications Decency Act in order to punish electronic media companies if they take down blatant lies (clothed as “free speech”):

Preserving constitutionally protected speech, led by Republican Leaders Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Jim Jordan (R-OH), to remove liability protections for companies who censor constitutionally protected speech on their platforms, require appeals processes, and transparency for content enforcement decisions. 

There is zero chance of these bills passing the current House, but in 2023, who knows? For the moment this is clever messaging to the deluded wing of the Republican Party to signal support to punish electronic media companies for taking down, banning, or labelling blatant political lies (which these people read as “truth”). Meanwhile, the messaging lulls the general populace into thinking that Republicans are actually addressing the worrisome issues around electronic platforms. 

Those are just two lines of questioning. Here are a few more with links where one can research the specifics:

SJ Res 15-True Lender Disclosure. CMR voted NO. Cantwell and Murray both voted YES in the Senate. This bill would require lenders to disclosure their true source of funding for primarily residential loans.  Think Mortgage Broker funded/owned by a bank. Who is your true lender? Disclosure would lessen rate gouging.

HR 239-Equal Access to Contraception for Veterans Act. CMR voted NO. Think about that.

HR 2662-Should IG [Inspector General] be Removed for Cause.  CMR voted NO. This would strengthen the political ability of a rogue President to remove an IG for purely political purposes. In other words, in the past administration with Trump, an IG could longer be fired when they provide an unbiased, factual report.

H. Res. 503-Select Committee to Investigate January 6th.  CMR voted NO. The heading provides all you need to know.

HR 3684-Invest in America Act. CMR voted NO. The bill would reauthorize surface transportation programs, water infrastructure projects, and funds for highway and rail projects. She then touts the funds coming to WA under this package even after voting against it.

Look into her votes and rhetoric. Attend the town halls. Ask her for honest answers to straightforward but pointed questions.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. I regret that I am unable to attend in person but I hope to review and share what occurs from a recording or video from the event.

From McMorris Rodgers’ website. Her staff always says “Space is limited”, but it rarely is:

Monday, August 2, 2021

“Conversation with Cathy” Town Hall
When: 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM
Where: Spokane Convention Center, Centennial Ballroom, 334 West Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA 99201
**Space is limited. This event is first come, first served.**

Tuesday, August 3, 2021

“Conversation with Cathy” Town Hall
When: 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM
Where: Northern Inn, 852 S Clarke Ave, Republic, WA 99166
**Space is limited. This event is first come, first served.**

“Conversation with Cathy” Town Hall
When: 3:00 PM to 4:00 PM
Where: Stevens County Ambulance Center, 425 North Highway, Colville, WA 99114
**Space is limited. This event is first come, first served.**

Jerry LeClaireAug 1

Between 5 and 6PM this Monday, August 2, Rep. McMorris Rodgers (CD5, eastern Washington) is holding a town hall at Spokane Convention Center, Centennial Ballroom, 334 West Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA 99201. On Tuesday she’s in Republic and Colville (where she’s usually more comfortable).

She is making one of her rare visits to “her” district in eastern Washington for a couple of days during the August recess. These chances to see her and ask her questions are not widely advertised. She claims these gatherings as outreach even as she manages to avoid much controversy or pointed questions by careful advertising. I encourage people to attend and to record and share the interaction. 

There are certainly some uncomfortable questions she ought to confront: 

Global Warming: Why did she recently vote to let oil and gas companies release methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere instead of requiring them to collect it so they can sell it as natural gas? For details see Cathy’s Climate Sabotage. McMorris Rodgers denies the scientific reality of human induced global warming, but cleverly resists plainly saying so—even as her constituents breathe smoke summer after summer. Perhaps a direct question, “Do you believe that methane and carbon dioxide are greenhouse gases and that their release into the atmosphere is the major cause of the global warming behind the smoke we’re breathing?” would help her constituents pinpoint her denial. (McMorris Rodgers flustered in response to the direct question, “What is your take on evolution and science? Do you believe the earth is more like 6000 years old or four and a half billion years old?” Her “I can’t say how old the earth is” response raises the question of whether she is doctrinally incapable of understanding climate science.)

McMorris Rodgers recently advertised in an email sent out by her office that she was “Holding Big Tech Accountable”. She and her crew recognize that people are concerned over the role of electronic platforms, so “Holding Big Tech Accountable” sounds like the right thing to do. One might be lulled into thinking that they are addressing the truth of speech advanced by electronic media or the marketing algorithms that draw Facebook readers down conspiracy theory rabbit holes. No. Take time to visit the Energy and Commerce Republicans webpage where they lay out their propaganda. There you’ll find that McMorris Rodgers, allied with nervous Jim Jordan (R-OH), is proposing to amend the Communications Decency Act in order to punish electronic media companies if they take down blatant lies (clothed as “free speech”):

Preserving constitutionally protected speech, led by Republican Leaders Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Jim Jordan (R-OH), to remove liability protections for companies who censor constitutionally protected speech on their platforms, require appeals processes, and transparency for content enforcement decisions. 

There is zero chance of these bills passing the current House, but in 2023, who knows? For the moment this is clever messaging to the deluded wing of the Republican Party to signal support to punish electronic media companies for taking down, banning, or labelling blatant political lies (which these people read as “truth”). Meanwhile, the messaging lulls the general populace into thinking that Republicans are actually addressing the worrisome issues around electronic platforms. 

Those are just two lines of questioning. Here are a few more with links where one can research the specifics:

SJ Res 15-True Lender Disclosure. CMR voted NO. Cantwell and Murray both voted YES in the Senate. This bill would require lenders to disclosure their true source of funding for primarily residential loans.  Think Mortgage Broker funded/owned by a bank. Who is your true lender? Disclosure would lessen rate gouging.

HR 239-Equal Access to Contraception for Veterans Act. CMR voted NO. Think about that.

HR 2662-Should IG [Inspector General] be Removed for Cause.  CMR voted NO. This would strengthen the political ability of a rogue President to remove an IG for purely political purposes. In other words, in the past administration with Trump, an IG could longer be fired when they provide an unbiased, factual report.

H. Res. 503-Select Committee to Investigate January 6th.  CMR voted NO. The heading provides all you need to know.

HR 3684-Invest in America Act. CMR voted NO. The bill would reauthorize surface transportation programs, water infrastructure projects, and funds for highway and rail projects. She then touts the funds coming to WA under this package even after voting against it.

Look into her votes and rhetoric. Attend the town halls. Ask her for honest answers to straightforward but pointed questions.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. I regret that I am unable to attend in person but I hope to review and share what occurs from a recording or video from the event.

From McMorris Rodgers’ website. Her staff always says “Space is limited”, but it rarely is:

Monday, August 2, 2021

“Conversation with Cathy” Town Hall
When: 5:00 PM to 6:00 PM
Where: Spokane Convention Center, Centennial Ballroom, 334 West Spokane Falls Blvd, Spokane, WA 99201
**Space is limited. This event is first come, first served.**

Tuesday, August 3, 2021

“Conversation with Cathy” Town Hall
When: 10:00 AM to 11:00 AM
Where: Northern Inn, 852 S Clarke Ave, Republic, WA 99166
**Space is limited. This event is first come, first served.**

“Conversation with Cathy” Town Hall
When: 3:00 PM to 4:00 PM
Where: Stevens County Ambulance Center, 425 North Highway, Colville, WA 99114
**Space is limited. This event is first come, first served.**

Links to Resources

Jerry LeClaireJul 30

ERRATUM: In Monday’s post, Money Talking in the Spokane Primary, I incorrectly named Riley Smith as a candidate for the City of Spokane City Council from District 1 (NE Spokane). The excellent candidate I failed to name for that position is Luc Jasmin III. Riley Smith is another excellent candidate, but he is running for one of the seats on the Spokane Public School’s Board of Directors. I apologize for my error and thank the reader who noted it.

POST:

This coming Tuesday, August 3, is the turn-in deadline for the primary election. A wide variety of local seats on city councils, school boards, fire districts in Washington State are on the ballot. This year we have an additional resource, newly required by state law, the county-wide “Official Voters’ Pamphlet”s. Spokane County’s Pamphlet is helpful, but voting solely on this guide is guesswork. Here’s the link to get you to a digital copy (as well as other election resources). The result of this “top two” primary will determine which candidates appear on the ballot this November. Do some homework and vote—if you don’t you have no grounds to complain that you don’t like any of the choices this fall. 

A great deal of information about these candidates, who they are, where they’re coming from, whether they’re qualified, and some idea of what they mean to accomplish can be had by visiting a few websites. 

My starting point is The Progressive Voters Guide. The Guide’s assessment is well worth reading even if you don’t consider yourself a progressive.

The Washington Public Disclosure Commission offers a huge trove of information on the candidates’ fund-raising and alliances. Reporting to the PDC is required by law. Since it covers the entire State of Washington navigating the site is a little complicated, but it is definitely worthwhile because the data is authoritative. Click my Primary Guides for help in locating the race and candidates you want to learn about. One addition: Be sure to explore the “Independent Expenditures” tab on a candidate’s page to get a glimpse of special interest support.

WeBelieveWeVote.org is also useful, but perhaps not for the reason one might think. Digging into the site as described in Primary Guides will eventually lead the reader to a copy of the Questionnaire any candidate who responded at all was required to fill out. This Questionnaire is a straightforward litmus test for hard right Republican pseudo-religious ideology. The website speaks of “our Christian values”. The Questionnaire reveals those values to include things like protecting “States Rights”. I do not recall that as a Christian value I was taught in Sunday School. The survey responses are revealing—and there to see if you dig.

Vote 411. On the non-partisan end of things, the League of Women Voters’ Education Fund offers another great voters’ guide and pages of voting information on its Vote 411 website. On that page just enter your street address under Personalized Voting Information to see whom of the candidates appearing on your particular ballot have responded and what they had to say. 

The Spokane Public Radio website is a little clunky to find one’s way around, but you can listen to interviews with many candidates by going to SPR’s search page and entering the candidate name. 

Don’t procrastinate. Do your homework and turn in your ballot over the weekend (if you haven’t already). Let’s have the best choices we can get for the November general election.

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

WA State Realtors Are Trying to Buy the City Election–Again

Jerry LeClaireJul 28

Spokane must be special. The Washington Realtors Political Action Committee (WaRPAC) is weighing in with independent expenditures in favor only three candidates in this year’s primary races in the State of Washington—and two of those three races are in Spokane. As Adam Shanks writes in his Spokesman article “It’s 2019 all over again.”

It’s not chump change, either. 

Realtors have contributed more than $53,000 to [Jonathan] Bingle in District 1 (NE Spokane] and $49,000 to [Mike] Lish in District 3 [NW Spokane] from two sources, the Washington Realtors PAC and the National Association of Realtors Fund.

For perspective, fifty thousand nearly doubles the direct contributions each of these two candidates have reported to the Public Disclosure Commission. The Realtors “independent expenditures” are perfectly legal as long as they are reported to the PDC and the spending is done without “coordination” with the candidates’ campaigns. (On a federal level this represents the huge loophole blown into campaign finance law by Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and Citizens United v. FEC (2010) on the grounds of First Amendment rights and money as a form of speech.) There is no contribution limit to “independent expenditure” PACs, whereas there are limits to legal direct contributions to candidates (both at the federal and Washington State level). Big money, big voice. So much for the voice of the average citizen.

A candidate like Mike Lish (NW Spokane), with only $21,700 in individual contributions, can, by saying the right words, attract special interest spending that dwarfs the monetary voice of individual contributors. Both of Lish’s opponents have exceeded his individual contributions [Lu Hill ($36,087.24) and Zack Zappone ($24,212.09)]. The Realtor’s candidates Lish and Bingle, by hewing to the Realtor’s libertarian line dissing urban growth boundaries and the city’s Centers and Corridors plan, more than double their money in Realtor “independent” support. I urge you to visit pdc.wa.gov and explore [Here’s the click pattern: all campaigns / election year 2021, MUNICIPAL / CITY OF SPOKANE / CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, CITY OF SPOKANE; then click candidate names and the CONTRIBUTIONS tab for the candidate.]

Why is Spokane in the crosshairs of the Realtors PACs? A Spokane politico controls the Realtor’s monetary spigot. Tom Hormel is not only the president of the statewide Washington Realtors but also a member of the Washington Realtors Political Action Committee’s legislative steering committee. The Spokesman article notes that “Spokane Association of Realtors’ members make the decision on who [sic] to support.” Do the assembled members of the Spokane Association of Realtors take a vote? More likely the decisions are made by a committee of politically interested realtors and developers who have been chaffing at the City of Spokane’s urban growth boundaries, political types who see an opportunity to steer the Council in their favor. The check box for $35 as a Realtors PAC contribution on the annual Washington Realtors’ membership renewal provides the funds. Most realtors in the state likely pay minimal attention to the exact use to which their money is put.

Building tract housing on open land (i.e. “urban sprawl”) is far easier and more profitable than building infill housing under the Centers and Corridors Plan. From a let’s-make-lots-of-money-quickly perspective, trashing Centers and Corridors is the way to go. In the Realtors vision the main streets in Spokane need to be publicly funded high speed thoroughfares to funnel tract house suburbanites to their jobs in town. Walkable cities and local shopping opportunities accessible on public transportation? Not so much.

The National Association of Realtors’ Realtors Political Action Committee (RPAC) is clear on what it stands for:

The REALTORS® Political Action Committee and other political fundraising are the keys to protecting and promoting the real estate industry. 

The interests of RPAC do not include supporting policies for comfortable, walkable, attractive, sustainable cities. Their mission is to promote maximal profits. The national RPAC is consistently the largest contributor to political candidates at the federal level. (For reference, the National Rifle Association isn’t even in the top ten.)

Tom Hormel’s efforts as President of the Washington Realtors and a member of the WA RPAC steering commitment bring realtor money from all over Washington State and focus that money on the City of Spokane City Council races. Bear that in mind when you vote. Cruise through the Public Disclosure Commission’s “Independent Expenditures” tab on the various candidates to see who agrees with the Realtors’ vision of progress—then vote for Lu Hill or Zack Zappone in the NW or Riley Smith or Naghmana Sherazi in the NE. 

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. This is not Tom Hormel’s WA Realtors’ PAC’s first attempt at buying a City of Spokane election. In 2019 WA RPAC broke records in independent expenditures in favor of four candidates, Woodward, Wendle, Cathcart, and Rathbun. That met with only 50% success (Nadine Woodward was elected Mayor and Michael Cathcart represents NE Spokane on the Council.) Apparently, 50% success from spending member money was good enough for Mr. Hormel to try again. 

WA State Realtors Are Trying to Buy the City Election–Again

Jerry LeClaireJul 28

Spokane must be special. The Washington Realtors Political Action Committee (WaRPAC) is weighing in with independent expenditures in favor only three candidates in this year’s primary races in the State of Washington—and two of those three races are in Spokane. As Adam Shanks writes in his Spokesman article “It’s 2019 all over again.”

It’s not chump change, either. 

Realtors have contributed more than $53,000 to [Jonathan] Bingle in District 1 (NE Spokane] and $49,000 to [Mike] Lish in District 3 [NW Spokane] from two sources, the Washington Realtors PAC and the National Association of Realtors Fund.

For perspective, fifty thousand nearly doubles the direct contributions each of these two candidates have reported to the Public Disclosure Commission. The Realtors “independent expenditures” are perfectly legal as long as they are reported to the PDC and the spending is done without “coordination” with the candidates’ campaigns. (On a federal level this represents the huge loophole blown into campaign finance law by Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and Citizens United v. FEC (2010) on the grounds of First Amendment rights and money as a form of speech.) There is no contribution limit to “independent expenditure” PACs, whereas there are limits to legal direct contributions to candidates (both at the federal and Washington State level). Big money, big voice. So much for the voice of the average citizen.

A candidate like Mike Lish (NW Spokane), with only $21,700 in individual contributions, can, by saying the right words, attract special interest spending that dwarfs the monetary voice of individual contributors. Both of Lish’s opponents have exceeded his individual contributions [Lu Hill ($36,087.24) and Zack Zappone ($24,212.09)]. The Realtor’s candidates Lish and Bingle, by hewing to the Realtor’s libertarian line dissing urban growth boundaries and the city’s Centers and Corridors plan, more than double their money in Realtor “independent” support. I urge you to visit pdc.wa.gov and explore [Here’s the click pattern: all campaigns / election year 2021, MUNICIPAL / CITY OF SPOKANE / CITY COUNCIL MEMBER, CITY OF SPOKANE; then click candidate names and the CONTRIBUTIONS tab for the candidate.]

Why is Spokane in the crosshairs of the Realtors PACs? A Spokane politico controls the Realtor’s monetary spigot. Tom Hormel is not only the president of the statewide Washington Realtors but also a member of the Washington Realtors Political Action Committee’s legislative steering committee. The Spokesman article notes that “Spokane Association of Realtors’ members make the decision on who [sic] to support.” Do the assembled members of the Spokane Association of Realtors take a vote? More likely the decisions are made by a committee of politically interested realtors and developers who have been chaffing at the City of Spokane’s urban growth boundaries, political types who see an opportunity to steer the Council in their favor. The check box for $35 as a Realtors PAC contribution on the annual Washington Realtors’ membership renewal provides the funds. Most realtors in the state likely pay minimal attention to the exact use to which their money is put.

Building tract housing on open land (i.e. “urban sprawl”) is far easier and more profitable than building infill housing under the Centers and Corridors Plan. From a let’s-make-lots-of-money-quickly perspective, trashing Centers and Corridors is the way to go. In the Realtors vision the main streets in Spokane need to be publicly funded high speed thoroughfares to funnel tract house suburbanites to their jobs in town. Walkable cities and local shopping opportunities accessible on public transportation? Not so much.

The National Association of Realtors’ Realtors Political Action Committee (RPAC) is clear on what it stands for:

The REALTORS® Political Action Committee and other political fundraising are the keys to protecting and promoting the real estate industry. 

The interests of RPAC do not include supporting policies for comfortable, walkable, attractive, sustainable cities. Their mission is to promote maximal profits. The national RPAC is consistently the largest contributor to political candidates at the federal level. (For reference, the National Rifle Association isn’t even in the top ten.)

Tom Hormel’s efforts as President of the Washington Realtors and a member of the WA RPAC steering commitment bring realtor money from all over Washington State and focus that money on the City of Spokane City Council races. Bear that in mind when you vote. Cruise through the Public Disclosure Commission’s “Independent Expenditures” tab on the various candidates to see who agrees with the Realtors’ vision of progress—then vote for Lu Hill or Zack Zappone in the NW or Riley Smith or Naghmana Sherazi in the NE. 

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. This is not Tom Hormel’s WA Realtors’ PAC’s first attempt at buying a City of Spokane election. In 2019 WA RPAC broke records in independent expenditures in favor of four candidates, Woodward, Wendle, Cathcart, and Rathbun. That met with only 50% success (Nadine Woodward was elected Mayor and Michael Cathcart represents NE Spokane on the Council.) Apparently, 50% success from spending member money was good enough for Mr. Hormel to try again. 

Inform us or push our buttons?

Jerry LeClaireJul 26

We are molded by the perspective that we more or less passively consume. Much of what we “know” we know through the eyes and the filters of the reporters, pundits, and commentators who present us “news”. News and commentary manipulates our emotions—and our voting patterns.

Few of us follow the actions of the Washington State legislature closely enough to have a clear picture of laws passed this session with the intention of reining in police excesses. The discussions in the legislature were in the wake of a series of documented police killings of unarmed citizens, including a young, unarmed mentally ill acquaintance of mine shot dead by one of Sheriff Knezovich’s deputies in Spokane Valley. 

Recently, several articles have appeared in local Spokane media concerning the resultant changes in state law that are about to go into effect. The slant of some of this reporting is deplorable.

One of my readers saw this posted on NextDoor. It was titled by the person who posted it “People get ready”.

SPOKANE, Wash. — Thirteen laws passed during the 2021 legislative session will directly affect law enforcement, when a majority of them go into effect on July 25.

Across the state, concerns are already being raised by local police departments because of their impact on public safety.

For example, military equipment of weapons 50 caliber or greater cannot be used, eliminating current shotguns and the less lethal beanbag shotguns used in situations of de-escalation.

Tear gas, which was used during the protests, can only be used for barricades, a hostage situation, or for riots outside a correctional facility. However, before law enforcement can use it, they have to get permission from the highest jurisdiction. For local police departments, this will mean the mayor.

911 calls relating to domestic violence and mental health will not be responded to, unless certain conditions are met. Also, police pursuits are now limited.

“The new policy that impacts the entire state only allows pursuits for a handful of violent crimes, and you have to have probable cause that the person who committed the crime is in that vehicle,” said Spokane Police Chief Craig Meidl. “Reform to me means that something is broken, to me. I don’t think, that majority of law enforcement in Washington State is broken. I think what we need to do, and what we are obligated to do, is constantly evolve.”

Spokane Police Department has already been putting these laws into effect. While Chief Meidl understands the reasoning behind the laws, he’s also concerned.

“I do feel like, based on the language of the bills that were passed and will become law on July 25th, I think this has gone too far, and I think this is going to create dangerous communities,” Chief Meidl said.

Liberty Lake Police Chief Damon Simmons has been keeping a close eye on these bills that were passed. He believes, some of these laws directly contradict their police oath.

“We in law enforcement are going to experience the inability to protect the public in the matter that which we’ve been sworn to do so,” Chief Simmons said. “It actually sickens me to think that people are going to call 9-1-1 and ask for assistance and they’re not going to get it.”

Liberty Lake Police Department will be discussing these new laws and how they will affect the community during their city council meeting on July 20th. The meeting will be available on Zoom.

The post was followed by more than thirty outraged comments, including the usual one’s about the “liberals are coming for your guns”.

Googling the first line of the post takes one back to its source, KXLY.com, where at least the article’s title was a little less inflammatory: “New police reform laws raise concerns for local police departments.”

This KXLY presentation is worthy in its bias of a Fox News, a Sean Hannity, or the Epoch Times. The author, Rania Kaur, offers not a hint of the reason the laws were passed by the state legislature, no detail on the rest of the content of the laws, or any voice to the legislators who wrote and passed the new laws. She presents only the opinion of certain members of law enforcement, people who, being human too, are not likely to be in favor of any law that poses limits on their actions. 

The Spokesman’s Emma Epperly and Sydney Brown in their later article, “As police-reform laws go into effect, sheriffs and activists disagree on their effectiveness”at least offered a voice from among those who wrote, debated, and passed the legislation:

Rep. Jesse Johnson, D-Federal Way, the co-sponsor of several police reform bills that passed the Legislature this year, said he wanted these laws to increase police accountability and address historic racial bias against communities more likely to be on the receiving end of police violence.

Better still, Epperly and Brown offer a glimpse at the process by which laws are interpreted, rolled out, and applied:

The Washington state attorney general will give a formal opinion about parts of the law both police and lawmakers agreed were unclear, Johnson said. These concerns include a ban on .50 caliber weapons and new standards for whether officers can take someone to a treatment center during mental health calls.

“As long as they understand our legislative intent … that will help clear up those questions,” Johnson said.

Even with that acknowledgement of legislative intent and interpretation of details, the Spokesman article starts with:

A group of 20 sheriffs and police chiefs expressed concern at a news conference Thursday about police reform legislation they say will hurt their ability to do their job, while community activists and families affected by police violence say this should only be the start of accountability.

The leaders of law enforcement agencies from across Eastern and Central Washington said during the press conference at CenterPlace Regional Event Center in Spokane Valley that the legislation will hinder their ability to respond to mental health and domestic violence calls.

This lead-in to the article inevitably feeds the confirmation bias of “law and order” Republicans, many of whom harbor an abiding distrust of government in general. A press conference does not occur by accident. A press conference is a soapbox designed to present a narrative to the press. Epperly and Brown write as if this press conference materialized out of thin air. Who organized it? Who paid for it? Who chose CenterPlace in painfully conservative Spokane Valley as the venue? What do the assembled eastern Washington police chiefs and sheriffs mean to accomplish with this grandstand? Do they wish to instill fear, worry, and distrust of state government as a political statement? Whatever their intent of this press conference, for the casual reader both these articles fan division and stir fear rather than consider the value of the making of laws and the rule of law in helping to solve society’s problems. 

Read and listen to the news. Consider its emotional effect. Ask what the coverage leaves out. Complain. Write letters to the editor. Otherwise the media lead us around by the nose…

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. An article in the July 23rd Spokesman, “Hundreds of new Washington laws go into effect on Sunday covering areas from police accountability to wildfires to education” by Laurel Demkovich offers better context for the legislative actions the assembled eastern Washington police chiefs and sheriffs were complaining about from their press conference soapbox.

Inform us or push our buttons?

Jerry LeClaireJul 26

We are molded by the perspective that we more or less passively consume. Much of what we “know” we know through the eyes and the filters of the reporters, pundits, and commentators who present us “news”. News and commentary manipulates our emotions—and our voting patterns.

Few of us follow the actions of the Washington State legislature closely enough to have a clear picture of laws passed this session with the intention of reining in police excesses. The discussions in the legislature were in the wake of a series of documented police killings of unarmed citizens, including a young, unarmed mentally ill acquaintance of mine shot dead by one of Sheriff Knezovich’s deputies in Spokane Valley. 

Recently, several articles have appeared in local Spokane media concerning the resultant changes in state law that are about to go into effect. The slant of some of this reporting is deplorable.

One of my readers saw this posted on NextDoor. It was titled by the person who posted it “People get ready”.

SPOKANE, Wash. — Thirteen laws passed during the 2021 legislative session will directly affect law enforcement, when a majority of them go into effect on July 25.

Across the state, concerns are already being raised by local police departments because of their impact on public safety.

For example, military equipment of weapons 50 caliber or greater cannot be used, eliminating current shotguns and the less lethal beanbag shotguns used in situations of de-escalation.

Tear gas, which was used during the protests, can only be used for barricades, a hostage situation, or for riots outside a correctional facility. However, before law enforcement can use it, they have to get permission from the highest jurisdiction. For local police departments, this will mean the mayor.

911 calls relating to domestic violence and mental health will not be responded to, unless certain conditions are met. Also, police pursuits are now limited.

“The new policy that impacts the entire state only allows pursuits for a handful of violent crimes, and you have to have probable cause that the person who committed the crime is in that vehicle,” said Spokane Police Chief Craig Meidl. “Reform to me means that something is broken, to me. I don’t think, that majority of law enforcement in Washington State is broken. I think what we need to do, and what we are obligated to do, is constantly evolve.”

Spokane Police Department has already been putting these laws into effect. While Chief Meidl understands the reasoning behind the laws, he’s also concerned.

“I do feel like, based on the language of the bills that were passed and will become law on July 25th, I think this has gone too far, and I think this is going to create dangerous communities,” Chief Meidl said.

Liberty Lake Police Chief Damon Simmons has been keeping a close eye on these bills that were passed. He believes, some of these laws directly contradict their police oath.

“We in law enforcement are going to experience the inability to protect the public in the matter that which we’ve been sworn to do so,” Chief Simmons said. “It actually sickens me to think that people are going to call 9-1-1 and ask for assistance and they’re not going to get it.”

Liberty Lake Police Department will be discussing these new laws and how they will affect the community during their city council meeting on July 20th. The meeting will be available on Zoom.

The post was followed by more than thirty outraged comments, including the usual one’s about the “liberals are coming for your guns”.

Googling the first line of the post takes one back to its source, KXLY.com, where at least the article’s title was a little less inflammatory: “New police reform laws raise concerns for local police departments.”

This KXLY presentation is worthy in its bias of a Fox News, a Sean Hannity, or the Epoch Times. The author, Rania Kaur, offers not a hint of the reason the laws were passed by the state legislature, no detail on the rest of the content of the laws, or any voice to the legislators who wrote and passed the new laws. She presents only the opinion of certain members of law enforcement, people who, being human too, are not likely to be in favor of any law that poses limits on their actions. 

The Spokesman’s Emma Epperly and Sydney Brown in their later article, “As police-reform laws go into effect, sheriffs and activists disagree on their effectiveness”at least offered a voice from among those who wrote, debated, and passed the legislation:

Rep. Jesse Johnson, D-Federal Way, the co-sponsor of several police reform bills that passed the Legislature this year, said he wanted these laws to increase police accountability and address historic racial bias against communities more likely to be on the receiving end of police violence.

Better still, Epperly and Brown offer a glimpse at the process by which laws are interpreted, rolled out, and applied:

The Washington state attorney general will give a formal opinion about parts of the law both police and lawmakers agreed were unclear, Johnson said. These concerns include a ban on .50 caliber weapons and new standards for whether officers can take someone to a treatment center during mental health calls.

“As long as they understand our legislative intent … that will help clear up those questions,” Johnson said.

Even with that acknowledgement of legislative intent and interpretation of details, the Spokesman article starts with:

A group of 20 sheriffs and police chiefs expressed concern at a news conference Thursday about police reform legislation they say will hurt their ability to do their job, while community activists and families affected by police violence say this should only be the start of accountability.

The leaders of law enforcement agencies from across Eastern and Central Washington said during the press conference at CenterPlace Regional Event Center in Spokane Valley that the legislation will hinder their ability to respond to mental health and domestic violence calls.

This lead-in to the article inevitably feeds the confirmation bias of “law and order” Republicans, many of whom harbor an abiding distrust of government in general. A press conference does not occur by accident. A press conference is a soapbox designed to present a narrative to the press. Epperly and Brown write as if this press conference materialized out of thin air. Who organized it? Who paid for it? Who chose CenterPlace in painfully conservative Spokane Valley as the venue? What do the assembled eastern Washington police chiefs and sheriffs mean to accomplish with this grandstand? Do they wish to instill fear, worry, and distrust of state government as a political statement? Whatever their intent of this press conference, for the casual reader both these articles fan division and stir fear rather than consider the value of the making of laws and the rule of law in helping to solve society’s problems. 

Read and listen to the news. Consider its emotional effect. Ask what the coverage leaves out. Complain. Write letters to the editor. Otherwise the media lead us around by the nose…

Keep to the high ground,

Jerry

P.S. An article in the July 23rd Spokesman, “Hundreds of new Washington laws go into effect on Sunday covering areas from police accountability to wildfires to education” by Laurel Demkovich offers better context for the legislative actions the assembled eastern Washington police chiefs and sheriffs were complaining about from their press conference soapbox.