This past Tuesday evening, for the first time, the series of Candidate Vetting sessions being held by We The People – Southwest Washington, included the vetting of a candidate for the Washington State Legislature … Brandon Vick, Candidate for State Representative in Washington’s 18^th Legislative District. Although I’ve been very open about my enthusiasm for what We The People is accomplishing with this Candidate Vetting process, the fact that this was their first time vetting a candidate at this level seemed apparent. I’m not sure if this was a “first time” for Vick, in undergoing this sort of vetting, but it seemed that might be the case too. But, to be fair, reporting on this unique (up to now) event is a “first time” for me as well. I guess that just acknowledges that, as a part of the growing “Tea Party Movement”, We The People should be expected to experience some growing pains and as part of We The People, Brandon Vick and I should expect the same. With that understood, let me report what I learned from this vetting session.

As has been my practice, in reporting on these sessions, let me start with my view of this candidate’s “ability to connect with the ‘grassroots’ – i.e. the people who make up We The People.” Although I didn’t see Brandon Vick at the We The People rally, held outside Brian Baird’s office earlier on the same day as this vetting session, I have seen Vick at other We The People meetings and I’ve been around him at other events. At those times, he seemed to come across as an every-day, salt-of-the-earth kind of guy. I think this came through in his vetting session too, in a way that is obviously genuine. In other words, Vick is pretty much of a “grassroots” kind of guy (and that isn’t intended as a pun, aimed at the fact that he works in his family’s landscaping business), so it’s not a challenge for him to connect with other “grassroots” folks.

When it comes to the question of “The candidate’s motives for running?”, my sense is that Vick’s motives have some similarity to my motives for my current involvement in politics. He expressed it as, “fightin’ for values.” I express it as, “being unwilling to stand idly by while ‘they’ continue to ‘flush away’ the wonderful America I was blessed to be born and raised in.” Sort of the same things, mine just has 40 years or so (I think Brandon Vick is in his mid-twenties) of added impetus. Regardless, much like me, Vick doesn’t seem to be in this for himself. He seems to be in it to preserve our great nation, for all of us, as well as for his yet-to-be-born children and grandchildren.

The question of “How well equipped is the candidate to serve?” is the area where the “first time” issues I mentioned earlier seemed more evident. My impression here is that, since We The People is very Constitution-focused – i.e. U.S. Constitution – there’s just more work to be done in getting the vetting process to fit a State candidate versus a Federal candidate. If I’m right, that may have put this candidate at somewhat of a disadvantage. That’s not to say that none of the questioning was meaningful nor that none of his responses gave a positive indication of his preparedness for the office he’s seeking. Overall, I thought the Q&A was productive and that Vick presented himself adequately. A couple of good examples here included discussion of dealing with Unfunded Mandates and the “strings” that can go along with accepting “stimulus money”. But, it did seem to me that some areas were exposed where Vick will need to spend more time. As an example, there was a question about supporting Federal legislation to return some lands to the States. The candidate’s response (paraphrasing) was that he “hasn’t studied it” but “it sounds good.” With all that said, I don’t see anything in Brandon Vick that, in time, would prevent him from becoming well equipped to serve in an elected position.

In closing, let me reiterate, what I said in the first article I wrote in this Candidate Vetting series … “I don’t speak for We The People”. These are my views and just as I don’t mean to speak for We The People, I don’t mean to tell you that my views should be your views. My intent is to share my observations of the results being produced by the relentlessly patriotic work being done by We The People – Southwest Washington and to encourage you to do your part, including giving each of these candidates your scrutiny and arriving at your own conclusions.

Humane Society and PETA Are Liars and Crooks?

The Humane Society of the United States, the subject of a past scandal in Washington State, has been charged nationally with corruption in a civil lawsuit that includes the American Farm Bureau and many other organizations. The plaintiffs even suggest that the Humane Society has engaged in racketeering practices under the RICO act.

 One of the shocking facts that emerged was that HSUS was only giving about $2-3 out every $10 contributed to its fund raising to animal welfare, with the balance going to bribing witnesses, paying attorneys to file frivolous lawsuits and just plain outright corruption. In addition many states say they have been bullied and blackmailed by this accused criminal organization. For a look at this accused criminal behavior and the latest news on this subject here is the Humane Watch website.

 This group is the subject of investigations by, I am told, at least 9 state attorneys general around the nation for a laundry list of criminal violations.

 A few years ago the HSUS run Eastside Pet Adoption Center in Bellevue near Crossroads Center was charged with operating a filthy space with animal cage overcrowding which was a major scandal for King County. For many years the King County centers have been the scene of the slaughter of literally thousands of abandoned pets who are killed by lethal injections. King County changed this system with this proclamation. One fact that many Americans are not aware of is that the HSUS is the second largest killer of animals in the USA. The so-called Humane Society is second only to PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) in murdering pets. On top of that PETA is also engaged in many of the activities that the Humane Society is being sued for.

If you look at the bogus TV commercials you want to send these crime ridden organizations money.  Weird world we live in here in 'Obama world'.

Although this past Tuesday evening’s session was the second of the Candidate Vetting sessions being conducted by We The People – Southwest Washington, it was the first session that included the vetting of a candidate for U.S. Congress. The candidate scheduled in this slot was David Castillo.

In order to strive for fairness and consistency with my reports on these sessions, I’ve decided to continue using the same “gauges”, as I have up to now, for making my observations. Since each of the candidates are unique and there are three levels of candidacy involved (U.S. Senate, U.S. Congress and State Legislature), there’s sure to be plenty of variety to the reports but I think the “gauges” I’ve been using are fair, regardless of an individual’s personality or the office they are seeking. These “gauges” are: 

1. Ability to connect with the “grassroots”? As I’ve said before, since We The People is a “grassroots” organization, it’s very important for a candidate to connect with the people who make up the group.
2. Candidate’s motives for running?
3. How well equipped is the candidate to serve? 

Although I think David Castillo deserves credit for participating in the vetting, as well as in the We The People rally earlier in the day, connecting with the “grassroots” is an area where he seems to struggle. It’s not so much that he isn’t trying to connect nor that he doesn’t see where the connections are, it’s more that his attempts just don’t come across as being genuine. Of course, I can’t say that this is due to a lack of sincerity or if it’s just a missing personality dimension but I know I’m not alone in having this sense. During breaks in both events, several others, most of whom I’m not well acquainted with, made unsolicited comments on this aspect to me. And, it seemed annoyingly obvious that the vaunted “Senior Campaign Staff” that Castillo has hired were just aggravating the matter. These are the guys behind the Castillo campaign’s recent ill-conceived robocall attack on fellow-Republican Candidate, Jaime Herrera. I will say that Castillo was using some decent new scripting at both events so I felt like his campaign was getting more bang for their buck with the new scripting but, unfortunately, most of it did come across as being scripted. Further accentuating all this was the bothersome distraction of Castillo getting stage direction from his staff, at the back of the room, throughout the vetting session.

With each of the Candidate Vettings that I’ve reported on up to now, I’ve been able to offer affirmative summary answers regarding “Candidates motives for running?” and “How well equipped is the candidate to serve?” With David Castillo, I don’t feel comfortable doing that. My misgivings here are based on confusing information that Castillo provided during the vetting session and in some cases, the fact that he failed to provide any helpful information. Specifics on this include:

-      The candidate was presented with the circumstance of deciding how to vote when his constituency wants him to vote one way and his party wants him to vote the other way. Then, he was asked what experience he has had that would prepare him to deal with that sort of pressure. While Castillo spent some time acknowledging that this is an important question and he seemed to understand its ramifications, he couldn’t name any experience that he’s had that would help prepare him for this sort of situation.

-      There had been an earlier acknowledgement in the meeting that an audit of the Federal Reserve is desirable. When asked what steps he would take to get this done, Castillo’s only response was “to rally the American people.”

-      In discussion regarding National Security, Border Security and Illegal Immigration; Castillo stated his support for E-Verify. I found this to be surprising because I’d never heard him espouse this approach before. I do know that this was a strong position taken by Jon Russell, a former rival of Castillo’s. Just for clarification, I later re-checked the Castillo campaign Website and found no mention of E-Verify.

-      When the subjects of Income Tax and Fair Tax were raised, Castillo said that he would first support a Flat Tax and then support the repeal of Income Tax. However, he went on to say that this is a position he has just come to within the last six months. This left me wondering where he would end up on this topic and whether his positions on other major issues are still evolving.

-      The final question Castillo was asked to respond to had to do with term limits. Although this question was asked differently than I would have asked it, it was the topic I wanted to ask about, if my raffle ticket had been drawn. Of course, I was interested to hear Castillo’s response. I have to say that I was stunned to hear the answer he actually gave. He said that he is going to term-limit himself … to seven (7) terms?! My first reason for being stunned by this was that, previously in this campaign, Castillo stated that he didn’t support term limits. Again, this involved Castillo’s former rival, Jon Russell. Russell remains a strong proponent of term limits. When confronted with Russell’s position on this at a Pacific County GOP Picnic last summer, Castillo clearly stated that he does not support term limits. I guess now he does. But he thinks seven (7) terms is an appropriate limit?! For heaven’s sake, Brian Baird is only in his sixth term and we couldn’t be more fed up with him!

-      In his closing statement, Castillo attempted to set himself apart from other candidates with his business experience. Unfortunately, he noted that the one business he was involved in had failed. I’m told that it was a business he started during the Dot Com boom and that it went bankrupt. Regardless of the details, I can’t see this as a positive set-apart. Maybe some “Senior Campaign Staff” advised him to broach this before a competitor did but I’m certainly not persuaded to vote for a guy whose only business experience was a failure and otherwise, he’s been a bureaucrat.

As I have done with each of the candidates who have gone through this vetting process, I want to encourage you to examine them on your own. Obviously, I have some very serious concerns about David Castillo’s candidacy and I hope you’ll take my concerns into consideration but I don’t mean to tell you that my concerns should be your concerns. You should give this candidate your scrutiny and arrive at your own conclusions.

Yesterday evening, We The People – Southwest Washington held the second in their current series of Candidate Vetting sessions. Once again, I was impressed with what I saw in this process and once again, I was impressed with the candidate being vetted for U.S. Senate, Chris Widener.

Of course, since We The People is a “grassroots” organization, it’s very important for a candidate to connect with the people who make up the group. One thing that helped Widener in doing this was that he was present, earlier in the day, at a We The People rally held outside the Fort Vancouver office of Southwest Washington’s U.S. Congressman, Brian Baird. In addition to the way Widener joined in with the crowd at the rally and his on-point speech at the rally, I had the sense that folks appreciated the effort required for a Seattle-area-based candidate to fully participate in the rally.

As I’ve said before, key qualities that I appreciate about the We The People Candidate Vetting process are its aim to reveal a candidate’s motives for running and how well equipped they are to serve. Based on this vetting session, here’s how Chris Widener seems to measure up against these criteria:

His primary motive for running seems to be his belief that our federal government is continuing to take our nation in the wrong direction, especially in terms of mounting debt and increasing it’s authority over the States. Furthermore, he sees the U.S. Senator he’s running to replace, Patty Murray, as playing a significant role in our sitting government and their direction.

In terms of being equipped to do the job, Widener seems to have the talent and background needed to do an excellent job. Furthermore, he seemed at ease with and well-spoken on every issue he was asked to address. Ironically, the issue where he impressed me most is one where he may not be in complete alignment with the general attitude of We The People. This regards the 17^th Amendment. In simple terms, this amendment means that U.S. Senators are elected by popular vote, whereas previously, they were appointed by their respective State Legislature. Although many in We The People seem to be in favor of a reversal of the 17^th Amendment, Widener pointed out that it is the current law he would be required to subject himself to and that it has its pros and cons. One con he pointed out is that, if the 17^th Amendment was not in place, our current Democrat-majority State Legislature wouldn’t be very likely to replace Patty Murray.

One point that Widener made that I particularly appreciated, on the topic of “being equipped to do the job”, is that the right candidate needs to be more than technically “equipped”. His observation is that we have a lot of very skilled people in government but, all too often,  we find that they lack virtue. From what I observed, Chris Widener appears to have that quality of virtue. I see him as a solid candidate for U.S. Senate and very deserving of your consideration.

Washington State’s Economy Continues Its Slide!

In another shock to Washington State’s economy the February unemployment numbers showed that the state lost 6,970 jobs since January and more than 35,780 since December. The U3 number or the number of folks collecting unemployment benefits came in at 365,660 and the newly revised U6 percentage of 19% now shows a grand total of 668,033 unemployed in the Evergreen State.

Also the report had disturbing news about the number of people employed in the state has fallen since January meaning that 22,690 fewer people were employed month over month. Remember that a large percentage of folks that were laid off were NOT QUALIFIED for unemployment benefits but this is the real number of layoffs month over month. The other worrisome data was that 15,720 folks who were looking for a job in January gave up in February. Here is the terrifying look at unemployment U3 numbers by county on a statewide map!

This translates into the U6 numbers for the following largest counties in western Washington. King County 210,747 out of work, Snohomish County some 72,526 folks unemployed and Pierce County jumping from 10.6 to 11.3% for the U3 and 75,520 people out of work for the U6. Here is the full report that was issued today.

Special session Democrats pass spending bills like drunken sailors:

Democrats in the State House passed Bill Number 2561 which proposes to issue $861 million in general obligation bonds (money the state would borrow) to pay for energy retrofitting of schools and other public facilities. Because the bond issue would push the state beyond its 9 percent constitutional debt limit, voters would be asked in November to approve it. Here is more about the Special Session.

What is even more idiotic about this bill from “Fast” Hans Dunshee (not known to be the sharpest tool in the Demo’s shed) is that most school buildings have a limited life span, so energy retrofits are practically useless for more than 75% of the buildings. Energy savings are not even close to 10% of the bill’s cost which is more than $1.5 Billion.

Both Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s have warned Washington State Government officials that any further debt will cause them to consider downgrading the state’s credit rating thus driving up the interest payments on all state bonds and debt.

Just to give my readers an idea of just how dangerous the state’s fiscal affairs are because of this systemic/long term unemployment, I asked the State Treasurer to come forth on the record. What you will read is the e-mail exchange between myself and James McIntyre the State Treasurer followed by another e-mail response to Mr. McIntyre by the former Federal Auditor, founder of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, author of the report on this link and one time gubernatorial candidate Bob Williams. If this doesn’t scare you about what is happening in Olympia in the State Legislature, I don’t know what will.

Bob Clark to State Treasurer James McIntyre: I am hearing that Washington State Bonds are being downgraded shortly due to the enormous debt load that per capita that is more than the debt load on the citizens of California.  Do you have a comment?

Secondly, I understand that the State of Washington, even with the tax increases will be out of cash flow before August of this year. Is that True?

Thanks

Bob

James McIntyre to Bob Clark and Bob Williams: “No, neither comment is accurate.  Last December I notified the Governor and Legislature that:

“While I am confident that you can and will take the necessary steps to meet the state’s fiscal needs…Without added revenue and/or severe program cuts such as those the Governor has proposed, Washington may soon be at material risk of running short of the cash needed to pay its bills…With no improvement in the state’s overall cash position, the entire state treasury could be depleted as soon as September 2010.”

Since that time both houses have produced revenue and budget packages, which when combined with the cash management actions of this office I believe will alleviate any potential cash shortfall.  Of course, this presumes a prompt resolution to the issues of the current special session.

Regarding the state’s credit rating, Moody’s moved Washington’s outlook from “stable” to “negative” in early January, as a result of the forecast decline of roughly $2 billion in revenue subsequent to the enactment of last session’s budget.  It is this is NOT a downgrade, and may be removed once our forecasts stabilize.  Our ratings continue to be AA+ (S&P), AA+ (Fitch), and Aa1 (Moody’s) – one notch below perfect.  Yes, it is true that Washington’s debt load is roughly twice the national median on a per capita basis, but it is not double California’s debt load.  Looking only at long term capital debt, Washington’s per capita debt is about 15% higher than California’s (not including all of their operating debt).

Hope this helps clarify the situation.

Jim

Bob Williams to Jim McIntyre the State Treasure and Bob Clark Red County: I am really confused by your reply. Your December 10, 2009 letter to Governor Gregoire and Legislative leaders clearly indicates "without significant increases in cash levels, Washington risks finishing fiscal year 2010 with the state general fund in a negative position."  Jim, that is in a little over 3 months.   Your February report indicated that the state general fund had a DEFICIT of $1,492,924,868.67.  That is a very significant cash deficit.   You further warned that "delaying corrective action and underestimating the severity of the problem only serves to make matters worse."  Both of those have occurred and the budget the legislature is considering adopting is balanced by counting on an additional millions of dollars in federal stimulus funds that has not been approved by Congress.

You are further aware that no tax packages have yet passed the legislature and when they do they will not bring in the amount of revenue needed to avoid a cash deficit in the state general fund by June 30, 2010 (the end of the fiscal year).  You also warned that the entire treasury could be depleted as soon as September 2010.  That could still occur due to the overreliance on questionable federal stimulus funds.

Regarding the state's credit rating:

  First the Moody outlook being negative occurred in December 2009 not January 2010. Second, Moody expressed more concerns than you indicated. They are concerned about: -"deeper and longer recession or muted recovery that restrains consumer confidence, leading to prolonged revenue weakness and employment erosion." The National Governor's Association says states haven't hit the bottom yet.

        -"protracted   structural budget imbalance" That situation is worse in both the House and Senate budgets.

        -:"increased reliance on one-time budget solutions."  Legislature compounded this problem in both the House and Senate Budgets

        -"cash flow narrowing, leading to strained liquidity."  Your monthly reports show this is occurring.

        -"failure to adopt plan to cover expenditures once federal fiscal stimulus monies are no longer available" The state has no plan on covering expenditures when federal stimulus funds expire.

Jim, I mentioned a concern to you in an earlier email about our state's debt load. 

        -We have gone from $8.5 billion in outstanding bonds as of June 30, 2003 (DATA Book page 47) to $15.4 billion as of January 27, 2010!   Public Link#1

        - Moody's expressed concern on December 31, 2009, when they talked about our state debt per capita at $2098 being twice the national average. It is now $2,306.38 Public Link #2

        - On top of this, the state has $12.7 billion in bonds authorized but not yet issued as of June 30, 2009.  The amount of authorized but not issued bonds as of June 30, 2005, was $6.3 billion!  - a102% increase in 4 years!!!! Public Link #3

As you mentioned we have a debt load per capita that is 15% higher than California.  Your office's fiscal note (Agency 010) on Rep. Dunshee's bond bill raised serious concerns Public Link #4.  "The increased general obligation bond issuance potentially raises the cost of all capital funding by the state as the state's bond rating would likely suffer from additional debt of this magnitude.  Washington's per capita debt load is now roughly twice the national average."  It goes on to talk about the additional cost that "would be incurred for all state issues- general obligation bonds and COP issues - for the foreseeable future." Several months ago the Governor said she would not sign a bill that would risk the state's credit rating. 

You state debt load overloads the unfunded pension liability and the $7-10 billion unfunded retiree health care liability.  In fact, we cannot find any elected official who knows the current unfunded pension liability due to the big loss that was suffered in the stock market last year.

Jim, do you really believe Moody's will eliminate our negative outlook when they look at the actions of the 2010 legislature?

Do you really believe there is no chance of the entire Treasury being depleted at some time this year?

Thanks

Bob Williams

Response from the Treasurer

Bob-

We are fully aware of our cash and debt circumstances.  With regard to your questions:  (1) yes, it is possible that the negative outlook may be removed once our revenue forecasts stabilize; and (2) it is highly unlikely that the Treasury will be depleted this year.

All the best,

Jim

To the Treasurer from Bob Williams:

Jim, If you are "fully aware of our cash and debt circumstances" what are you doing about Rep Hans Dunshee's $861 million new debt bill that passed the House today (3/16).  This could easily damage our state's credit rating (your own office sounded a warning on this bill).

 Bob

Washington state taxpayers are suffering from a serious cycle of abuse…let's call it Battered Taxpayer Syndrome. The cycle is predictable. We work and pay taxes. They take the money, get drunk, beat us up, manipulate a little language until we quiet down a bit and then start over again. This is the pattern established after a few decades of one party rule. How does one get a restraining order on these people?

As the bruises set in from the drubbing we got over I-960, the legislature is cranking up the cycle of abuse with their special session due to start Monday. After weeks of releasing ghost bills, (bills with just a tittle and number, but no text), shutting down and obstructing opportunities for public comment and shamefully staging public hearings with the socialist freeloading brats from Evergreen State, I am feeling somewhat desperate on how to escape this cycle. Can the citizens call a restraining order on the democrats?

It turns out one of the ghost bills was a proposal to institute a state income tax on "high earners." It gets better. Senator Lisa Brown, who has for years been trying to convince us that if we really know what's best for us we would all support a state income tax, proposed that a version of this ghost bill be presented to the people for a vote on November's ballot. The people would be allowed to weigh-in on this bill by answering one simple question that will appear as a referendum: "Should the state reduce the sales tax and institute a 4.5% income tax on high earners?"

What does this mean? It means that Olympia democrats are doing what they always do: inciting class warfare to get what they want. What will really happen if the voters answer "yes" to this question? After a year or so the sales tax will go back up (because they will tell us that orphans are lining the streets and grandma is eating dog food) and the state income tax will expand to include "middle-high income earners," until it eventually includes everyone who works. They are counting on our gullibility and guilt to get more money to fund the commitments they've made to their interest groups. This is the manipulative part of the abuse.

Perhaps even more beguiling is why they bother to put this legislation on the ballot for public vote. They just repealed an initiative (I-960) that we passed three times and one that they attacked and challenged in court four times. Why would we believe that they actually care about the will of the voters anyway?

But what about all the cuts to services and programs that the legislature has had to make? Aren't the poor getting turned away for much needed services as it is? The dirty little secret is that our legislators, in spite of the wailing and tearful speeches, have increased spending by $1.3 billion for the 2009-2011 budget! That is not a typo--the total spending for the next budget includes new spending for new entitlements and programs.One example is a new middle class entitlement for pre-k education. Read more about the legislature's Enron-style budgeting in this State of the State Report by the Evergreen Freedom Foundation.

Add to the increased spending the fact that legislators are counting a one time federal stimulus payment (that we are projected to get in 2011) as revenue available to help cover this new spending. That's a little like deciding you can afford a more expensive mortgage based on your 2011 tax refund. Last year lawmakers balanced the budget by using a one time $3 billion federal stimulus payment, while keeping and increasing budget obligations.

They are devising ways to increase your taxes (reducing your take home pay) to fund increases such as state employee benefits and salaries. State employees received a 25% increase in their salaries between 2005-2009, even while they earn an average $5,302 more per year than their private sector counterparts. Funding these premium benefits on the back of taxpayers is unsustainable.

One option suggested and practiced by several states, is to contract out to private companies some of the services provided by government. It's a better deal for the taxpayer and keeps services operating more efficiently on a business model, rather than on a bureaucratic model. The Governor had the option of declaring a state of emergency (which they often do with spending bills that require more taxes, but are loathe to do when it comes to cutting their spending). By declaring a state of emergency (given that we are operating on a path toward certain bankruptcy), the Governor would be allowed to renegotiate state employee contracts. 

They won't consider this option….state employee unions play the role of abuser's mistress. She gets the flowers and expensive penthouse apartment, while we get to pay for it.

Now a special session is under way. They are not in gridlock about spending cuts, but on which taxes to increase.They can't decide whether to aim for the gut or to haul off and bitch-slap us. And so the cycle of abuse continues.