Presidential Primary Makes Sense

Ever sense I can remember Washington State Democrats have touted the caucus system as their chosen method to select a Presidential candidate and delegates to the Democratic National Convention. I am a Democrat and have participated in the caucus. But I have never bought the argument that it represents grassroots participation at its best or that it is fair.

It is particularly the fairness issue that has disturbed me. This time around it is going to be held on a Saturday and in the past has been on a weekday night. Irregardless it doesn't work as the best way to maximize participation in the process of selecting a Presidential candidate to represent our party.

Figures on the Washington Secretary of State's website regarding participation are a strong reason for concern.

"Only 2% of voters generally participate in political party caucuses. An estimated 60,000 people participated in the Democratic and Republican caucuses.
By contrast, with a 42% turnout, 1,309,367 voters participated in the 2000 Presidential Primary. "

The caucus is a process that knowingly excludes participation by many Washington voters It is not a fair system. Many voters are denied access to participate even if they want to. Some prime examples of those excluded include:

• people in the military who are on duty, out of state or out of the country
• people who have to work like policemen and firemen or hospital workers
• students who are Washington voters but are out of state
• people out of state for business or vacation
• people who vote absentee because they are elderly or handicapped
• people who have to take care of young children or elderly parents who can't travel
• people whose jobs require they work on caucus day or lose pay

These people could participate in a presidential primary that allowed them to mail in their ballots. We see by the example of our current President just how important it is that we get people involved in selecting the next commander in chief. Yet the caucus is a system that benefits party insiders who are willing to not just attend the initial precinct caucus but go to the legislative district, county, Congressional and state convention.

Unfortunately at any subsequent step if the delegate selected at the precinct level does not attend the next level your representation for your candidate is lost. Likewise if there is not 15% representation at the precinct level or subsequent levels your candidate delegates are lost.

A second major reason to support the Presidential Primary is that it, and not the caucus,is a better and more realistic organizing tool for Democratic politics. The Presidential Primary is a trial run for candidates to turn out voters to support them and more accurately reflects the actual pool of voters
who will be voting in November Presidential election. There is a big difference in mobilizing 1% of the voters to turn out for a Democratic caucus versus trying to get the a majority of registered voters to vote for you in a primary.
For the record, it should be noted that in 1988 I was the Campaign Director that coordinated the grassroots citizen's effort to collect the signatures on Initiative 99 to the Washington State Legislature. The Legislature in 1989 passed the initiative into law. The law can be seen at RCW 92A.56.010 Signatures were collected by volunteers not paid signature gatherers.

additional information:

Seattle Times 4/28/2007 "A Presidential Primary that Matters to Voters"

Seattle PI Blog 4/26/2007 "State Republicans to Dems: Let's get behind Primary"

Seattle Times 4/25/2007 "Keep our Presidential Primary by Barbara Seitle, President LWV of WA

WashBlog 4/9/2007 "Washington needs to hold a Presidential Primary"

After Earth Day 2007

April 22 has passed but We and the Earth are still here. Did you make any resolutions or promises to yourself and our fellow earth travelers to do something to help the planet or even to just not make things any worse? Here are a few thoughts on some small and large actions that you can do. Feel free to add your own at the end.

1. buy food grown locally to reduce transportation costs
2. buy organic foods to reduce pollution by chemicals
3. buy fluorescent lights to save energy
4. recycle to conserve resources and reduce energy costs
5. buy reusable canvas bags instead of using paper or plastic
6. when you don't need a bag say so
7. give reusable items to thrift stores, saving resources and creating jobs
8. walk to local destinations rather than drive
9. urge public officials to build more sidewalks
10. support local transit - ride the bus one day a week or month
11. don't buy unnecessary gifts of little or no use
12. support those working to protect the environment - join an environmental group
13. vote for candidates with strong environmental records or positions
14. write letters, e-mail or call legislators to support strong environmental laws
15. support negotiation and diplomacy, instead of war, to resolve conflicts
16. support environmental education programs at schools and colleges
17. ask to be removed from junk mail lists
18. have your pet spayed or neutered
19. support programs for birth control education around the world
20. put outside lights on motion sensitive detectors
21. tell Congress to pass stringent fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks
22. tell Congress to require pre-testing before new chemicals are sold
23. tell Congress to pass new legislation to make polluters pay for cleanup
24. car pool when you can to work and meetings
25. plants some trees
26. take your children to the beach or a park or for a hike in the mountains
27. ask hotels and motels and restaurants where to recycle your recyclables
28. make sure your local schools recycle
29. don't use toxic chemicals on your lawn
30. don't dump toxic chemicals or medicine down your drain
31. support local and state land use planning
32. support renewable energy programs
33. turn down your thermostat as well as buy a programmable one
34. if uncertain, give cash rather than gifts so people can buy something they really want
35. think of others ways you can reduce your impact on the earth

Reflections on Earth Day 2007

Every day is Earth Day when you think about it. What we do every day determines the future of the earth as we know it. The reality we face is that there is less and less margin of error to allow us to correct for mistakes.

We are still at a very primitive stage of understanding the delicate balance of the earth's multiple environmental systems that keep it all together and working. We do global computer modeling based on things we think we understand and come up with projections of what might happen. The earth has feedback loops to adjust for changes like global warming but these loops have limits. Exceed the limits and the whole thing falls apart. Ask yourself how many people have had their home aquarium system die off.

The question for the future of earth is whether mankind comes to accept those limits or realizes too late that some things are not controllable by man at this time, if ever. Will we make changes in time to prevent a breakdown to our current operating systems for planet earth? Are we willing to come together to find a commonly shared solution or is it every nation and every corporation and every individual for themselves?

The prudent course of action when the engine light comes on in a car is to stop what you're doing and check out why it came on. Warning lights are going on now on the earth - the most obvious being global warming and climate change. But also the disappearance of established ecosystems with associated habitats and species is also occurring like coral reef destruction and loss of major fisheries. We are literally spraying the earth with a host of chemicals whose long term effects we know little about let alone short term effects. Nature has a potential to recover if we don't exceed global limits.

Our chemical impact is coming about for a variety of reasons. These include the introduction of new chemicals by the free enterprise market system which does not include an upfront analysis of impacts before chemicals are sold and released into the environment. Mining operations, smelters and chemical processing plants, coal plants, pharmaceutical and drug companies, military weapons, recycling operation, toxic waste dumping, disposal operations, you name it, there are thousands and thousands of ways we are producing, mixing, distributing and changing the chemical composition of our living environment that is cumulatively building up negative impacts.

Science usually operates by doing controlled experiments where you change one factor while holding the others constant. The earth is now like one huge laboratory where thousands of changes and chemical experiments and biological experiments are occurring simultaneously and very few are being tracked or understood.

The stakes are huge. Where once you would see something go awry locally, now many changes are occurring on a vastly larger scale because we are experimenting with changing things on a global level. Chernobyl was an example of a local incident that spread regionally. I remember going through a former mining area in the West some 30 years or so ago. The closer you got to where the smelter had been the more stunted the vegetation got.

Today with coal plants the same thing happens. Burning high sulfur coal produces sulfur dioxide which can be converted to sulfuric acid - that's what acid rain is. The visible effects are regional not local and are becoming global as more chemicals get introduced into the atmosphere, our land and the oceans. A recent report cited air pollution from China showing up in the western United States. Carbon dioxide buildup occurs in the atmosphere as more plants are built. China in its attempt to catch up with the US prosperity model is planning on building one new coal plant a week.

While there is one earth, there is not one world. We are still a mish mash of warring ideologies and factious peoples. Capitalism creates an economic battle for competing markets and resources in which cooperation and restraint seem a lower priority than winning market share. Religious ideologies and war also are fracturing world unity.

While capitalism has increased material goods and comfort and produced many advances in science and medicine and other areas it also has placed a higher value on individual rewards and ownership rather than addressing community needs and shared prosperity worldwide. The AIDS crisis in Africa and people still suffering starvation and malnutrition around the world are just two examples of problems the world community is not addressing together with compassion.

That is not to say we can not change but to do so means more emphasis on shared values of one world and one people all sharing one earth. Instead the world remains divided by political, economic, and religious boundaries. We still build fences to keep us separate.

For religion to change, it means accepting that we are all children of a God who exhibits himself or herself in numerous manifestations. We are all God's chosen people. There is not one chosen people or religion.

For economic systems it means accepting each other as partners and workers in one company with shared rewards. We are not competing against each other but we are working to provide basic human needs for all and sharing fairly in the rewards of hard work. We can not view others as nations or people to exploit or dominate or take advantage of.

For political systems it means governments will have to work to provide services fairly to all people, not give special tax breaks to the wealthy or tax exemptions to favored corporations.

For political systems and religions, nations need to separate religious belief systems that divide and limit people from political systems and governments that provide basic health care, nutrition, housing, food and education. Religions that limit freedom by domination and exploitation and edicts destroy human dignity and well being.

The future of the earth depends on mankind evolving into one co-operative worldwide caring community. We need to implement policies world wide that support individual life and human dignity without giving up basic freedoms. We need to develop a non-exploitative sustainable economic policy toward each other and the earth which currently sustains all of us. We need an economy that is not dependent on continual growth but that is sustainable in terms of the limits that exist for maintaining life on planet earth.

And we need to implement political policies that are fair to all by guaranteeing basic rights for all. These include access to adequate and safe food, clean water, clean air, housing, basic education and basic human rights. Religious policies need to accept the worth of every individual and practice tolerance for differences.

The future of the earth for humans depends on facing the reality that things need to change. Together we can envision and work for a future that allows us to live peacefully together, working for our common good. History is replete with wars and conquests. One side loses and the other wins. The reality of the earth today is that in a battle with the earth we all lose if we don't accept the reality of the fact that no one wins if we perish as a species because we didn't pay attention to the warning lights. The warning lights are blinking.

EarthCorps and Earth Day 2007

EarthCorps is a Seattle based nonprofit that is "dedicated to building global community through local environmental restoration service." Appropriately yesterday they were out in force holding an Earth Day work session in conjunction with Duwamish Alive!

My son was volunteering with the UW/Seattle University team and met at 9:30 A.M. at South Seattle Community College. He worked with others until 3:00 P.M. pulling out invasive blackberry bushes from the W. Duamish greenbelt area. Others helped pull ivy and mulch with wood chips. This fall native plants will be planted in cleared areas. Last weekend my son was at Golden Gardens pulling out ivy.

EarthCorps is an affiliate of AmeriCorps. Young people aged 18 -25 participate in a year long program learning about conservation, habitat restoration and developing skills in working with and coordinating volunteers from 8 years to 80 years old.

The event yesterday drew several hundred volunteers both as individuals and supporting groups. The largest group contingent was volunteers from Boeing. Other groups turning out volunteers included Seattle Works, alumni from Boston College and Emory University and Safeco as well as University of Washington and Seattle University students.

Local financial support for EarthCorps comes from groups like REI, essurance, Washington Women's Foundation, the City of Seattle, King County and the City of Mercer Island.

I had a chance to talk with Chris LaPointe who is the Volunteer Program Manager for EarthCorps. He emphasized that one of the goals of EarthCorps is to get local people involved in their community. Doing restoration work that involves local people helps to foster long term stewardship. Emphasis is placed on working with local schools and colleges to foster support for local greenbelts and parks over the long term.

You too can get involved.Chris handed me a flyer that said that May 5, 2007 has been designated No Ivy Day! Two locations are being worked on. One is Lincoln Park in West Seattle. The other is Island Crest Park on Mercer Island. For more information visit www.earthcorps.org or call Chris LaPointe at 206-322-9296 x217.

Mike Cooper is Running for Snohomish County Council

Several years ago Democrat Mike Cooper ran for Public Lands Commissioner in Washington State. He lost to Republican Doug Sutherland. Mike Cooper is back again, this time running for Position #3 on the Snohomish County Council. He is running for an open seat being vacated by Republican Gary Nelson. His campaign website is up and running. Check it out. He deserves our support.

Mike has a long record of public service. He recently retired as a lieutenant in the Shoreline Fire District after 25 years. He also served 4 terms in the Washington State Legislature as a member of the House of Representatives. He chaired the Fisheries, Ecology and Parks Committee and the Financial Institutions and Insurance Committee. He also served on the Transportation and Energy and Utilities committees.

He has received a number of awards in his public service career including:

1997Washington State Firefighter of the Year
1999 Maritime Elected Official of the Year
1999 Washington State Labor Council Legislator of the Year
2003 Inland Boatman's Union Legislator of the Year

He currently serves as Chair of the Washington State Oil Spill Advisory Council. Mike also is the current Board President of Transportation Choices Coalition. He also chaired the Snohomish County Charter Review Commission.

Check out his endorsements here and you can also donate to his campaign here.

Data Mining and Privacy Concerns at WashingtonVotes.org

WashingtonVotes.org is a website being sponsored and promoted in Washington state as a way to empower citizens to take a more active role in government. The website says it is free and nonpartisan. However its Washington State promoter and sponsor, the Washington Policy Center, is ideologically right wing and has an ideological agenda that is anti-government regulation and pro free market business interests.

The Washington Policy Center is a member of the national State Policy Network which Source Watch characterizes as "a professional service organization for the "state-based free market think tank movement."

Visiting the Washington Policy Center's website let you see what some of their recent action agenda has been.

They recommended repeal of Washington State's inheritance tax which Washington voters rejected last year.
They supported land use policies like Oregon's measure 37 to compensate property owners for zoning changes. Voters also rejected that proposal.
They opposed banning PBDE's - toxic flame retardants urging that Washington state not adopt a "precautionary" approach to environmental hazards. The Washington State Legislature just passed a ban on PBDE's.
They opposed stricter air emissions standards for cars. The Legislature passed a measure to follow California's lead to reduce air pollution.
They questioned the validity of recent global warming impacts reported in Washington State.

So what is their interest in setting up and maintaining a website that allows voters and citizens to access information about the Washington State Legislature? Isn't this a good thing they are doing, helping citizens to be more informed on what the Washington State Legislature is doing?

In my recent post "WashingtonVotes.org Lacks Privacy Policy" I raised a serious question about whether or not the website is being used to collect and mine user data from unsuspecting users for information. I contend that it is. Reading their "terms of use" posted on the site says that a private entity, USA Votes, Inc actually owns the site and that, in their own words

"By posting comments, inputting data, or engaging in any other form of communication on, with, or through the Washington Votes web site, you are granting USA Votes, Inc. a royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive, irrevocable, unrestricted, worldwide license to:Use, copy, sublicense, adapt, transmit, publicly perform or display any such communication.Sublicense or transfer to third parties the unrestricted right to exercise any of the foregoing rights granted with respect to the communication.
The foregoing grants shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such communication, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, "

The WashingtonVotes.org site is patterned after MichiganVotes.org which has an almost identical "terms of use" agreement. What is curious here is that both Washington and Michigan have official state government Legislative websites which detail privacy protections for people using the state websites. I previously wrote about Washington's.

Reading Michigan's official state site privacy policy points out even clearer what it is you are giving up by using these websites that are privately run and owned by "free market" right wing think tank interests. You are agreeing to give up your privacy and letting information about your legislative and voting and political interests and positions be sold or used by those on the right wing for their own financial, political or ideological gain.

Here is the Michigan State Legislative website privacy statement:

"Types of Information Collected Online
Information collected online is usually defined as being either anonymous information (data that cannot be tied back to a specific individual) or personally identifiable information (data that tell us who you are, such as your name, address, e-mail address).

Anonymous Information Unless you provide additional information, the Michigan Legislature website collects only the following anonymous information as you browse through the website:
The domain name and browser used to access the Internet (e.g., aol.com, if you are using an America Online account); The date and time of visits; The pages visited; and The address of the website visited immediately prior to visiting the Michigan Legislature website We collect this information for statistical purposes(e.g., to measure site traffic) and to help us make our site more useful to visitors.

Personally Identifiable Information You do not have to provide the Michigan Legislature website with personally identifiable information to visit our website.The Michigan Legislature website collects personally identifiable information on visitors in the following ways:

Optional User Registration.You are sharing personally identifiable information when you sign up to become a registered user. When you register, it is not necessary to provide us with either your true name or your e-mail address. We request this information because, if you lose or forget your User ID or Password, this information will assist us in helping you regain access to your account. If you become a registered user, you will have complete access to your account information, and may change or delete any registration information that you choose.
Correspondence. If you contact the Michigan Legislature website by e-mail, we may keep a record of that correspondence as long as needed to respond to your question or to fulfill the stated purpose of the communication. However, we do not collect the e-mail addresses of users who communicate with the site’s administrators via e-mail.

Use of Cookies
The Michigan Legislature website does not use cookies.

Disclosure of Personally Identifiable Information The Michigan Legislature website does not disclose, give, sell, or transfer any personally identifiable information (to the extent given) to third parties, unless: We need to share the information to provide the service or information you have requested; or We are authorized to do so bylaw (e.g., to respond to subpoenas, court orders, or legal process)."

Contrasting the WashingtonVotes.org and MichiganVotes.org "terms of use" with their respective state's official Legislative website's privacy protections points out the lack of privacy protections on the USAVotes websites, which also include MinnesotaVotes.org, KentuckyVotes.org and UtahVotes.org.
From an organizational sense a website like WashingtonVotes.org can provide a lot of valuable information to the sponsors. The site is set up to encourage people to register for specific services, including being e-mailed about specific bills and preparing legislative watch lists and posting comments on bills. The site lets the sponsors know what e-mails are being sent to legislators. It lets them know what bills people are searching for by bill number, keyword or one of 50 categories. It lets them know what bills members of the media are tracking if they register and can track IPO's even if they don't register.

In addition the site let's a right wing think tank prioritize what bills it wants to emphasize to the public. For example in searching by category like environment a series of 60 bills came up. They were not by bill number or date of action. Deciding which bills come up when is a subtle form of controlling access to legislative information.

Likewise, some 25 newspaper buy services of WashingtonVotes.org on voting information on the top five 5 bills each week. Again a right wing free market think tank is determining what is chosen and printed in newspapers.

One has to admit that WashingtonVotes is a clever way for the right wing to try to influence the legislative agenda and information voters access in Washington State. Re-packaging and promoting the information from the official Washington State Legislative website at http://www.leg.wa.gov/ and posting it on WashingtonVotes.org gives them a pulse on what is happening with both constituents and citizens while also controlling information access.

The Washington Policy Center is cleverly using the WashingtonVotes.org website to enhance it's image as a good government group. But its lack of a privacy policy that protects its users from information on them being sold or used to promote right wing causes undercuts its credibility as an unbiased player in the political arena.

Until and unless the Washington Policy Center, WashingtonVotes.org and USAVotes Inc publicly disavow any collecting of personal information and sale or use of such information for either private monetary or political or ideological gain I urge people to not use their website. Almost all of the information is available at the official Washington State Legislative website at http://www.leg.wa.gov/. You don't need to have some right wing snoop group invade your privacy and use or sell information on you to others.

WashingtonVotes.org Lacks Privacy Policy

If you want your communication between you and your Washington State Legislator to be private do not use WashingtonVotes.org because they don't have a privacy policy. If you want your search results for Legislative bills and any other legislative searches to be private and not sold to private parties, do not do your search through the Washington Policy Center's WashingtonVotes.org website. Use the official Washington State website at http://www.leg.wa.gov/ instead.

One can not accuse WashingtonVotes.org of not warning you. Each page contains a "terms of use" link at the bottom. Here's the language that says your communication with your Legislator is not private and can be sold and given to third parties.

"By posting comments, inputting data, or engaging in any other form of communication on, with, or through the Washington Votes web site, you are granting USA Votes, Inc. a royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive, irrevocable, unrestricted, worldwide license to:
Use, copy, sublicense, adapt, transmit, publicly perform or display any such communication.
Sublicense or transfer to third parties the unrestricted right to exercise any of the foregoing rights granted with respect to the communication.

The foregoing grants shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such communication, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, "

Contrast this with the "Privacy Notice Information " posted on the official state legislative website at http://www.leg.wa.gov/.

"If you use a Representative's or Senator’s email form, the address you provide is used to determine your voting district. The address and content that you submit via the member’s email form are forwarded to the receiving member. Your name, address, and the content of your message are not retained on legislative systems for any other purpose."

The WashingtonVotes.org disclaimer says that

"This site is owned and operated by USA Votes, Inc. and contains material which is derived in whole or in part from material supplied by USA Votes, Inc. and other sources, and is protected by international copyright and trademark laws."

While the site states that,

"USA Votes, Inc. may provide links and pointers to Internet sites maintained by third parties. USA Votes, Inc. does not operate or control in any respect any information, products or services on these third-party sites."

The link to communicate to your Legislator is not identified as an external link but is part of the site. So it is covered by the "terms of use" agreement.

In addition the site can collect information on you when you use other services it has. These include when you use its ability to search:

"..... every bill, amendment, roll call vote and voice vote.
Ability to track all the votes of a particular legislator, or search by bill number, category or keyword.
Ability to view all the bills and amendments introduced by a particular legislator.
Ability to post a public comment, view others' comments, and participate in citizen surveys on each bill.
Automatically e-mail legislators or others about a bill.
Ability to follow action in any one or more of 50 different categories of legislation (such as Education or Land Use or Taxes).
Ability to sign up for e-mail notifications of action on any bill or subject area of interest, including new bill introductions.

The site can also track when you click "to register to vote".

What WashingtonVotes.org is set up to do is collect information on you and your legislative interests and concerns. It is spying on you and your communications with your legislator as well as that of others who use the site. The site is set up to collect information and help in identifying and microtargeting voter's positions on issues and their specific concerns. And it is being done by right wing free market conservative interests.

WashingtonVotes.org states that it is

"a free public service of Washington Policy Center, an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit research and educational organization that does not lobby or endorse candidates"

However there is more to this than meets the eye. The Washington Policy Center is actually part of a national group of so called "free market" think tanks that oppose government regulation and taxes. Former Republican candidate Jack Kemp is quoted on WashingtonVotes ' website as calling them "The Heritage Foundation of the Northwest"

The information gleamed from Washington Votes.org becomes the property of USAVotes Inc. They can use and sell the information they collect on you about your legislative communications and issue searches through the website to others, like the National Rifle Association or the US Chamber of Commerce or marketing research firms that do micro-targeting for conservative causes.

The site allows very detailed microtargeting because a person can search both legislation and legislator's voting records by 50 different categories or by bill numbers or keywords. USA Today in the 2006 election discussed

" the sophisticated microtargeting techniques that have enabled Republicans to find and motivate potential supporters across the country....
Over the past six years, Republicans have become expert at finding them and anyone else with potential GOP leanings, even in states where voters don't register by party.
In a process called microtargeting they collect as much information as possible about voters from public records, Census data and marketing research firms. That's used to create profiles including everything from voting history, job and marital status to where people live, what they drive, what they read and whether they fish.
The end product is a score indicating someone's likelihood of voting, of supporting one party or the other and of being interested in certain issues. Advocates then use that information to determine whom to contact and what kind of pitch to use.

In a press release issued in Jan 2006 by the Washington Policy Center it claimed that WashingtonVotes.org had 1.1 million visits and nearly 5 million hits for the 2005-2006 Legislative session. That's a lot of identifying data.

Washington State is not alone in this collection of data for microtargeting. USAVotes.org is the brainchild of a Michigan based right wing free market think tank called the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. An identical looking website to WashingtonVotes.org is at MichiganVotes.org. It has an identical "Terms of Use" agreement except for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy owning the information.

Michigan was one of the first states that used microtargeting in elections. They still do. An analysis of the 2006 election by the Michigan Republican Party included the following information:

"Voter Vault and MicroTargeting
More than $250,000 was invested in technological upgrades to the RNC based Michigan Voter Vault file. Microtargeting, we dissected the statewide voter file containing records of more than 7 million voters using a hybrid of political survey and consumer marketing data. The result was a highly effective targeting tool that places those 7 million voters into more than 40 unique segments based upon their likelihood of voting Republican. Furthermore, those 40+ segments are dissected further into both propensity to vote and responsiveness to key issues. This allowed the MRP to highly target the messaging that was delivered to each voter via phones, mail, or in person at their doors."

MSNBC.com in an article on Oct 18, 2006 entitled "Micro-targeting may be key to election" had the following statement:

"Saul Anuzis, chairman of the Michigan Republican party, explained how micro-targeting works:“We have two sets of IDs (voter identifications). We have the Republican National Committee ID that is done on the national level, and then each state has the ability to add what we call ‘affiliation codes.' Each state will take different things they can get information on and add them to its micro-targeting universe.

WashingtonVotes.org and MichiganVotes.org are part of a larger strategy nationwide by conservative right wing groups to collect information on voters. USA Votes Inc, based out of Midland Michigan says on its website that it is "an organization devoted to assisting state-based organizations to launch and maintain state legislative information web sites."

USA Votes states that they use

" the technology developed by the Mackinac Center for Public Policy for their highly successful web site,

MichiganVotes.org. USA Votes is the organization providing the Internet application and technical training to allow organizations to replicate this effort in their state. Our goal is to expand this concept so that all 50 states will have their own “Votes” web sites."

"The network that we are using for sponsoring organizations is the State Policy Network, (

www.spn.org), a national association of state-based, public policy research institutes. We will also be working through local Chambers of Commerce and other nonprofit organizations that support accountability in government."
To date they have set up voting websites in 3 additional states besides Michigan and Washington. The other sites are: MinnesotaVotes.org, and Utah Votes.org, andKentuckyVotes.org

The irony is that the Minnesota State Legislature has its own website just like Washington State does. It's at http://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/legis.asp. Utah also has an official state legislative website at http://www.le.state.ut.us/. So does Kentucky at http://www.lrc.ky.gov/. The Michigan Legislative site is http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(gobsc455dm50ylfejmbvz255))/mileg.aspx?page=home

What the right wing is doing is repackaging information it takes off of the official state websites and then is trying to promote people using the USA Votes websites so they can mine information from citizens using their websites. They promote their websites as a free "nonpartisan" public service and can solicit money to support their collecting data which they can then sell or give to others to do things like microtarget voters for conservative campaigns or candidates or build up membership lists for right wing issue groups.

In Washington state they are also yielding power and exposure by selling information to newspapers. According to their Jan. press release "Twenty-five newspapers around the state have subscribed to the WashingtonVotes.org Legislative Roll Call service for 2007 including The Seattle Times, Seattle PI, Spokesman-Review, Olympian, and Tacoma News Tribune. Each paper will publish the top 5 bills of the week and how legislators in their area voted on them. See examples - Tacoma News Tribune and tmcnet.com

In January a number of newspapers also responded to their press release and gave free promotion to WashingtonVotes' website despite the fact that the Washington State Legislature's website is the source for most of WasingtonVotes' information.

All this helps to give WashingtonVotes more exposure in the legislative arena and get more people to use their website. In addition they are exerting information control on issues by deciding which 5 top bills they promote. They gain more control over state policy exposure and newspapers give up independence by letting a "free market", anti regulation, anti tax right wing think tank decide what the 5 top bills of the week are.

Meanwhile the free to use publicly paid for nonpartisan official state Legislative website is not promoted by many of the news media. It is mostly state taxpayer funded compilation done by the Washington State Legislature and available at http://www.leg.wa.gov/ that is being used by the Washington Policy Center, USA Votes INC. and WashingtonVotes.org to promote and push the visibility and credibility of a conservative right wing free market agenda .

Frankly it is a rip off, deceitful and deceptive. The above is my interpretation of what to all intents and purposes appears to me to be a blatant invasion of privacy, a deceitful mining of data for ideological purposes and private gain. I think the Washington State Legislature and the Washington State Attorney General's Office need to look into the operations of WashingtonVotes and determine if there is a deceptive and disguised effort to obtain information for private purposes and use of this data by nonprofit, for profit or partisan microtargeting consulting businesses or groups like the US Chamber of Commerce which is associated with the State Policy Network.

No matter how you interpret it, WashingtonVotes like MichiganVotes and the other websites, have been set up to help further the agenda of the "free market" anti regulation right wing think tanks. Using terms like free and nonpartisan are only a cover for the real purpose of these websites. I urge Washington citizens, organizations, the media, bloggers, political activists and others to not use WashingtonVotes to communicate with Legislators or to promote this site set up to help further the right wing agenda pushed by conservative and libertarian think tanks.

The Reason We Are in Iraq is to "Support the Troops"?

There have been so many "reasons" given by Bush as to why we are in Iraq. But it is a sorry state of affairs when the rationale for Congress continuing to fund the war turns into a debate about who is "supporting the troops" and the Democrats continue to respond to the issue on these terms.

If the issue is really about "supporting the troops", then bringing them home now is the best way to support them. We can certainly do a better job at home than having to supply them with food and weapons half way around the world.

Why is the main stream media and everyone else seemingly buying into the idea that what the debate is about now is "supporting the troops"? Is it because all the other rationales given by Bush no longer make sense and this is his last desperate attempt to try to tug at the heartstrings of America? Why can't someone just tell the Pretender Emperor he has no clothes?

What happened to fighting terrorism or bringing peace and democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan?This war is Bush's war and it has turned out to have been made on false assumptions and false premises and false expectations. But Democrats make a big mistake if they continue to respond to Bush's false pretenses and phony concerns and attempts to re-frame the debate now into a false issue of "supporting the troops".

The debate now should not be about "supporting the troops" and never should have been. Democrats are wrong to engage in Bush's phony attempts to change the debate. Get real. Debate what our goals are in Iraq and what we can or can not do. Whatever happened in the past is done - make your decisions based on the present reality and then act. But what the hell does "supporting the troops" have to do with this?

Debate what we need to do next. Only after you've made that decision and come up with a plan to carry out with a time line do you discuss what you can do to support carrying out the mission. Only then do you discuss how to "support the troops" in their mission. But only after you reach agreement on a plan of action can you determine how to "support the troops".

Bush really is saying, support what I am doing. The problem is Bush choose to ignore the concerns of Democrats and others when he started this war. He chose his own counsel and continues to this day to function in isolation, stubbornly ignoring concerns and suggestions of others, including the bipartisan panel on Iraq that he put together to deflect criticism and then whose recommendations he choose to ignore.

Bush seemingly has no end game or exit plan except to ride things out until his term in office is up. Then he can blame whatever bad outcome there is on the next President. Bush is praying that he will get lucky in the next year and a half but the chances right now seem worse than the odds on winning one of those Mega-Lotteries.

Wisconsin Supreme Court Race Bodes Ill for Washington State

Last week a conservative Supreme Court candidate named Annette Ziegler won election to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. A record amount of spending occurred by both candidates and third parties in a nasty negative campaign. Sound familiar?

According to an opinion entitled "Campaigns Badly Need Cleaning Up" by The Capital Times of Madison, Wisconsin, Ziegler

"was a candidate who spent most of the past year orchestrating one of the most negative judicial campaigns in Wisconsin history, starting with a vicious letter authored by former Lt. Gov. Margaret Farrow and ending with a barrage of TV spots that depicted her opponent as a know-nothing "zero."
An out-of-state outfit called the Club for Growth pumped $250,000 into Ziegler's primary campaign alone to underwrite attack ads on Ziegler's behalf, and even the public relations firm that engineered the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth's slimy campaign against John Kerry in 2004 got involved on her side.
And none of this counts the onslaught by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the experts in negative campaigning, that piled on Ziegler's opponent, Linda Clifford, for the better part of three months."

In a separate article it is noted that besides the $1.7 million spent by the two candidates

"The race saw unprecedented spending by third parties. Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the state's largest business lobby, spent $1.45 million on ads supporting Ziegler and criticizing Clifford, according to Clifford's campaign. "

So is it any surprise that today a group of legislators in Wisconsin started circulating for co-sponsors a bill for public financing of state campaigns?

Any of this sound even more familiar now? Last year Washington went through a similar attack by the Building Industry Association of Washington and out of state money to try to elect right wing ideologues to the Washington State Supreme Court. We also saw record spending by special interests. We fared much better than Wisconsin but unfortunately the Washington State Legislature has done nothing to address the expected impact of large amounts of independent expenditures in future elections when the public is over the shock impact of last year's races.

The Washington State Legislature this session has chosen to ignore public financing for judicial races as well as other state wide races. The reason is mainly that Legislators are also the recipients of large contributions spent by independent PAC's in their own races. Speaker of the House Frank Chopp visualizes how such unlimited independent expenditures can be used to benefit his Democratic agenda and further solidify his caucus numbers. Republicans see it as their way back into power in the future.

They have however chosen to ignore the fact that we now have two separate and unequal campaign finance structures set up in our state that discriminate against the average citizen contributor. By limiting individual contributions directly to a candidate's campaign committee, while allowing unlimited contributions by special interest groups, individuals and out of state funders to so called "independent PAC's", candidates lose control of their own campaigns and can be vastly outspent by outside interests.

One simple solution to end this segregated campaign system is to extend the present $1400 contribution limit per election for donations to major statewide candidate campaign committees, including Supreme Court Justices, to all campaign committees supporting or opposing a candidate. Whether given directly to the candidate or indirectly to a PAC, everyone is limited to the same $1400 contribution to support or oppose a candidate in a campaign.

The other solution to try to limit special interest mega-spending is to enact public financing for campaigns. Washington Public Campaigns attempted do this with a strong grassroots push to get the Washington State Legislature to pass legislation like Arizona and Maine have for all statewide candidates and North Carolina has for State Supreme Court races. Governor Gregoire supported a trial program for Supreme Court and Appellate Court races. The Washington State Legislature held hearings but ultimately passed nothing.

Bush Gives Democrats and Kerry the Finger

Knowing that the Senate was not going to confirm his choice of Swift Boat Funder Sam Fox to be the Ambassador to Belgium, President Bush appointed him and two others to posts using the Congressional recess to make interim appointments. Considering the strong Congressional opposition to the President's choices, Bush just gave the finger to the Democrats and John Kerry.

Consider the following exchange in the Senate between Senator Kerry and Sam Fox as recorded by Bob Geiger:

"Kerry: Let me ask you about that. On August 5, 2005, John McCain called the SBVT "completely nauseating, dishonest and dishonorable." McCain pointed out "it's the same kind of deal that was pulled on me" when he ran against Bush in 2000.

On August 15, John Warner, Republican chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and former Navy Secretary said "I can speak to the process, that we did extraordinary careful checking on that kind of medal, a very high one, that it goes through the Secretary. So I'd stand by the process that awarded Kerry that medal and I think we best acknowledge that his heroism did gain that recognition. I feel he deserved it

."He was then, incidentally, in the Navy -- he signed my award.August 8, 2004, General Tommy Franks called the smear boat attacks "vitriolic and hyperbole."

On August 7, 2004, Mike Johannes the Republican governor of Nebraska says the ads were "trash."

Now these are Republican leaders. These are the leaders of your own party. President Bush said that he thought that my service was honorable and they shouldn’t be questioning it. Yet, even when your own candidate does that, you saw fit to put $50,000 on the line to continue the smear.

My question to you is why? When you say you couldn’t have known -- these were people very publicly condemning it. How could you not have known?

Fox: I guess, Mr. Senator, when I'm asked I just generally give. "

Fox withdrew his name from consideration after the hearing but George Bush also likes to just give to his friends. "Here's an ambassadorship Sam. Thanks for doing the dirty work," Bush silently is saying to himself.

In addition Bush appointed two others to positions that were opposed by Democrats for good reason. As the New York Times notes today in an editorial entitled "No Recess from Bad Appointments", the other two appointments are just as objectionable to reasonable people and out of tune with what America needs now. The NY Times says "All three are extraordinary bad appointments - and three more reminders of how Mr Bush's claim s of wanting to work with Congress's Democratic leadership are just empty words"

"...the appointment of Susan E. Dudley to the Office of Management and Budget, where she will review regulations from major federal agencies before they are issued. Ms. Dudley has made no secret of her hostility toward government regulation, criticizing everything from fuel economy standards for light trucks to a national drinking water standard for arsenic, arguing that the market will almost always suffice. This makes her just right for this administration but wrong for consumers and the environment.

Similarly, Andrew Biggs, the president’s choice to be deputy commissioner of the Social Security Administration, is a champion of partially privatizing the program he is being sent to administer. The agency dispenses checks to beneficiaries and traditionally provides factual information on the state of the program. But under this president the agency has become increasingly politicized, using questionable arguments and projections to support Mr. Bush’s drive for private accounts. As a lower ranking official in the agency, Mr. Biggs was in the thick of that politicization. His appointment is a sure sign that Mr. Bush intends to keep using the agency as a propaganda machine to push a privatization scheme that has little public support."

Again and again we see the blind dogmatism of the Bush/Cheney/Rove and Republican attempts how to run the country to benefit corporate America . Forget Republican promises and words to the contrary- look at their actions. They speak louder than any words coming from the White House.

Majority Rules Blog Wins a Neiwert Award

Last fall we wrote a number of posts about the attempt of the Building Industry Association of Washington's attempt to buy their self anointed candidates seats on the Washington State Supreme Court. They were unsuccessful.

Today we were honored to receive a David Neiwert Award given by the Northwest Progressive Institute to progressive bloggers. Click on the link to see awards given to other bloggers. Our award was for "Most Valuable Explanatory Reporting "for our series of articles on the Washington State Supreme Court races in September and November 2006.

"The regional blogosphere continues to grow at a rapid pace, and in 2006, the Northwest netroots community was fortunate to be joined by an experienced activist who is a veteran of many past campaigns for progressive policy solutions. Steve Zemke, who in 2003 founded MajorityRules.org, launched a new blog early in 2006 and found a key niche covering issues not receiving prominent exposure in other blogs. Most significantly, in the summer of 2006, Steve maintained a consistent and unyielding focus on judicial races targeted by the right wing Building Industry Association of Washington. He profiled the incumbent justices and judges under attack, urged readers to donate to help their campaigns, dissected campaign expenditure reports from the Public Disclosure Commission, and explained how judicial races work (if there are only two candidates running in the primary, the election is decided in the primary and only one candidate goes on to the general). The right wing effort to pack the courts was ultimately a failure and we commend Steve for his efforts to mobilize the community and inform the public."

A Question of Character - Groen Kicks Justice Alexander and Washington Voters in Groin 7/12/2006

Two of Three Washington State Supreme Court Races to be Decided in Primary 8/1/2006

Time to Change Washington's Law on Judicial Races 8/17/2006

Walking for the Building Industry Association of Washington 8/18/2006

Record $1.3 Million Spent so far to Elect Groen to Washington State Supreme Court 9/11/2006

Groen Supporters Violate Public Disclosure in their intent to Deceive and Hide who They Are 9/12/2006

Majority Rules Blog Files Public Disclosure Commission Complaint Against Groen Supporters 9/14/2006

Text of Complaint Filed Against Groen Supporters by Majority Rules Blog 9/14/2006

BIAW and Cronies Out to Slaughter Alexander, Anoint Groen to Supreme Court 9/14/2006

Early Primary Results Give Justice Alexander Slight Lead 9/19/2006

Contributions to Washington's PAC's Need to be Limited 9/20/2006

Vote for Susan Owens for Washington State Supreme Court 11/04/2006


Post Script to Washington State Supreme Court Races - April 2007

Washington State dodged the heavy artillery attack by the BIAW in Sept and Nov. 2006 but because of that the lessons seem to be forgotten already.

The Washington State Public Disclosure Commission choose to ignore the complaints filed by MajorityRulesBlog and others. The Washington State Legislature heard bills sponsored by Washington Public Campaigns to provide public financing for Judicial races as well as all statewide races but choose to let the bills die. Tightening up spending by PAC's that allow avoidance of campaign spending limits placed on candidate committees also saw no action by the Washington State Legislature.

Unfortunately we can expect a repeat of unlimited spending by special interest PAC's, like those put together by the Building Industry Association of Washington, in the next judicial election cycle.

Washington Public Campaigns would be wise to run their legislation as an initiative to the people considering that Washington State Legislators seem more intent on preserving special interest PAC campaign spending than on controlling it because they are frequently the beneficiaries of the current system of such spending.

Bush Going Backward on Environment says John Kerry

John Kerry and Teresa Heinz Kerry spoke passionately last night at Seattle's Town Hall regarding "this moment in time". Using their recently written book entitled "This Moment in Time" as a stepping off point, John Kerry and his wife spoke about their ongoing concerns regarding real threats to the future of "Mother Earth."

John Kerry derided the Bush Administration for going backwards on dealing with environmental threats to our future and said that it was "intolerable." Citing environmental concerns today as broader than global climate change with its impending threats, he said we are "facing tipping points on a series of issues" dealing with the environment.

Citing Bush's "shameless attack" on the environment, he gave a series of examples. In 19 states you can't take your kids fishing. Some 44 states have advisories against eating fish and in some 44 rivers and harbors you can't fish or swim. Bush's "Clean Skies" legislation actually allowed 5x as much pollution than if the law had been left intact. Our major fisheries are all over fished. The "polluter pays" cleanup legislation was abandoned by Bush. Roadless areas were opened to new roads and cutting. The list is numerous.

The incentive for the Kerry's to write their book was to give people hope and to write about what individuals across the country have been doing despite the wanton assault by Bush. The book details stories of people fighting to protect our future. The book ends with a series of things individuals can do to help, noting it is important to act because the US contributes 25% of the global pollution contributing to Global Warming. And if we hope to get action on reducing China's threat to build a new coal plant every week, we must be sincere in reducing our contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.

Citing that 928 peer reviewed scientific studies point to man's impact on global warming and not one peer reviewed study speaks to the contrary, Kerry says the prudent thing to do is to apply the "Precautionary Principle." If all these studies are wrong and we still acted on them, at the worst, we would have a cleaner world and be energy independent . But if we don't act on them and they are right we will have "a catastrophe."

Teresa Heinz Kerry described her work on what I consider one of the unacknowledged sleeper threats facing us. That is the cumulative impact of all the different chemicals that we have released into the living environment that have unforeseen impacts and consequences. Of some 80,000 different chemicals produced for the market, only 10,000 have been vetted by the FDA as to safety. And this speaks nothing to synergistic effects or impacts of random combinations of chemicals.

Sewage treatment does not remove minute quantities of most chemicals. For example, medicines people take eventually wind up in the water supply, in either the original form or altered form. Heinz Kerry noted for example the reported presence of chemotherapy waste in one study and the presence of Prozac in London in another, appearing in water. Birth control chemicals and other chemicals that affect reproductive behavior in humans also impact other living species. Yet there is little attention being paid to these chemicals accumulating in the environment and their long term impacts.

Heinz Kerry said that one of her life lessons is that if you don't do certain things to protect yourself when you know there are potential consequences you will pay the price. From her childhood in Africa she learned it's common sense not to go into the stream with piranhas when its feeding time. She said it is frequently blind arrogance and greed that contribute to needless suffering. Using the Precautionary Principle she said means we look at the facts and work to prevent or mitigate potential harm and disaster.

John Kerry and Teresa Heinz Kerry may not be in the White House but they are living their principles and passions by acting on them. We are all fortunate to have such caring individuals continuing to do public service for the world by speaking out and writing books like "This Moment in Time: the New Pioneers on the Environmental Frontier."

Teressa Heinz Kerry and Senator John Kerry - Tonight at Town Hall

The Kerry's will be at Town Hall tonight in Seattle to discuss their new book,

"This Moment on Earth: the New Pioneers on the Environmental Frontier"

The talk will start at 7:30 P.M., on Tuesday April 3, 2007,

at Seattle's Town Hall

8th and Seneca

Directions

Tickets $5 at door

The Kerry's were on KUOW this morning from 9 A.M. to 10 A.M.

Click on the Weekday program audio link to hear the program.

To order a copy of the Kerry's book click on the links below: