This morning I was one of many bloggers and conservative activists on a conference call with Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA, 5th CD), Congressman Doc Hastings (R-WA, 4th CD), and Congressman Dave Reichert (R-WA, 8th CD). The topic of discussion was the status of the debate over government-run healthcare, and the possibility that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi would push for a vote this weekend, probably on Saturday.

Each of the three GOP members of congress on the call had to go in and out of the room during the call, as there were votes being taken on the floor.

Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers saluted the many thousands who converged on Washington, D.C. on Thursday, protesting against government-run healthcare and filling the hallways of congress. She said that the "House Call" protests had a strong impact on members of congress, creating quite a buzz and becoming a major topic of discussion among the members.

Congressman Hastings outlined the stark differences in the approaches of the Democrats and the Republicans on healthcare. The Democrats, he said, wanted to centralize control and restrict choices. But in contrast to Obama, Pelosi, and Reid, the Republicans want to utilize solutions based on the marketplace - not based on government. The GOP favors expanding choice and increasing competition to bring down the cost of healthcare and healthcare insurance. Hastings said that Pelosi is trying very hard to twist arms and pressure Democratic members of congress into voting for Obamacare. He said that the actual Democratic vote count was very close and truly in doubt - that the situation was fluid, and that the actual Democratic vote count could literally change from hour to hour.

McMorris Rodgers said that Pelosi is trying to put on a "happy face" in the aftermath of the Virginia and New Jersey elections, where the GOP won by strong margins in states carried by Obama. Lots of Democrats in congress are nervous about risking a vote for Obamacare, but Pelosi knows this issue is a priority for her party and President Obama, so she has to keep pushing to keep it on track.

Both Hastings and McMorris Rodgers confirmed that Eric Cantor, the House Republican whip, has lined up unanimous GOP opposition to the Obama healthcare effort. Not a single GOP member of congress will vote in favor of it when/if Pelosi pushes a vote this weekend.

McMorris Rodgers noted that there are two "hot button issues" that are causing for difficulty for Democrats in swing districts - the use of federal healthcare money to pay for abortions, and access to healthcare insurance by illegal immigrants. McMorris Rodgers said there are 54 Democrats who have expressed concern about federal funding of abortion, and 38 Democrats who have voiced their opposition to the so-called "public option."

Hastings and McMorris Rodgers both indicated that the Democrat healthcare bill would lead to over $700 billion in tax increases. In response to a question, Hastings noted that the bill would add $1.3 trillion to the national deficit, in addition to raise taxes and cutting medicare benefits.

McMorris Rodgers noted that the Democratic healthcare proposal would be partiuclarly harmful to women. She noted that 85% of family healthcare decisions are made by women, but that under the Democrats' proposal, decision-making power would shift from individuals to healthcare bureaucrats and commissioners. She noted that women make up 70% of medicare recipients, and are also the majority of caregivers for elederly relatives receiving medicare benefits. Also, noting that two-thirds of new small businesses are started by women, McMorris Rodgers said that the Democratic proposal was particular onerous and harmful to small businesses. She said if passed, it would block the development of small businesses which are vital to economic recovery, resulting in millions more lost jobs.

Congressman Reichert, who arrived late to the conference call due to business on the House floor, spoke about his efforts to expose the hypocrisy and conflict of interest involved in the endorsement of Obamacare by the AARP. Reichert said that President Obama claims people will be able to keep their own insurance, but that this is not true. For example, the proposed cuts in Medicare advantage would force many senior citizens (currently happy with Medicare advantage) to switch to United Health. And AARP gets royalties related to United Health, leading to the concerns of conflict of interest. He noted that 14,000 senior citizens in the 8th CD are on Medicare advantage.

Congressman Hastings commended the work of Reichert and his staff in challenging the AARP. Hastings sharply criticized AARP, saying it should be looking out for the interests of senior citizens instead of seeking after royalties. And Reichert slammed the AARP for supporting federal taxes on medical devices, noting that this especially hurts seniors and disabled people. Reichert will be meeting with representatives of the AARP on November 18.

As the conference call came to an end, Congressman Hastings emphasized the critical importance of bloggers and activists in disseminating information, especially to seniors and especially in the western Washington congressional districts. "This bill can be beaten," Hastings said, urging protesters and activists to go "full power ahead."

Congressman Reichert concluded the meeting by urging an effort to reach out to seniors, noting that the Democratic bill would be an "absolute travesty" for America's senior citizens.
 

KIRO talker Dori Monson nailed it with this evaluation of Tuesday's election here in Washington:

This may be the most singular one-party state in the nation.

New Jersey and Virginia voted for Obama a year ago - but for Republican governors tonight... Liberal Maine rejected gay marriage... Blue-state California voters earlier this year rejected tax increases...

But in Washington, our one-controlling-party mentallity rolls on.

King County government is facing a $54-million deficit - and one of the people who got the county into that financial mess has been elected Exec - because he's a Dem.

Init-1033 restricting the growth of government? Rejected.

Gay partnerships? Supported.

Huge property tax increase in Seattle for low income housing? Of course! Seattle never saw a tax increase the voters didn't love.

I evaluate each race and issue on its individual merits (I supported Ref-71 - everyone other endorsement I made on the above races lost). But despite national trends favoring Republicans, in Washington the vast majority of voters are robots. Every Democrat wins. Every expansion of government passes. Every liberal cause prevails.

The unions chased Boeing out of the state - and every winning candidate paid tribute to their big-money union support. Our unemployment rate is well above the national average. Our state is facing another multi-billion dollar deficit. King County has a $54-million deficit. Seattle a $40-million deficit.

Why wouldn't we stay the course? Election Day was business as usual in our one-party state.

Remember, Governor Gregoire made this astonishing statement over a month before Election Day:

I've told them [Democratic legislators] come on in and convince me that's [raising taxes] the right thing to do and that people will support it. At some point the people, I assume, don't want us to take any more cuts. I'm already hearing about 'why did you cut education?' Well there aren't any options

Many political observers were stunned that Gregoire would reverse her "no new taxes" stance so close to the election and felt that she was handing a win to Tim Eyman on a silver platter.  Wrong.  The Governor knows her liberal Pugetopolis base well and counted on the fact that I-1033 would be outspent some $3 million to none by wealthy liberal opponents of I-1033.  More importantly, local elected officials throughout the state, both Republican and Democrat, joined in the scare-it-to-ya chorus against I-1033.

"At some point the people, I assume, don't want us to take any more cuts."  Don't you think that is the takeaway from Washington voter's rejection of I-1033?  It certainly will be among Democrats in Olympia.  It already is at the Northwest Progressive Insititute, which proudly proclaimed that "Collapse of Tim Eyman's Initiative 1033 proves that teabaggers are just a fringe."

Now, I don't think even Democrats are stupid enough to introduce new taxes in an election year, but if Washington Republicans don't make significant gains in the legislature in 2010, look out for the next biennial budget coming up in 2011.  Labor unions and other left-wing advocacy groups have made it clear they will tolerate no further cuts to their pet programs and the state will have to address what will likely be a $2-3 billion plus budget shortfall by that time.  Those groups will point to the I-1033 vote and say Washingtonians are finally ready for that dreaded state income tax.

Hey, you were warned.  We get the government we deserve.

Earlier this year, the marble halls of the state capitol echoed with dire predictions of death and doom as lawmakers cut several billion dollars from the state budget.  "People will die," Rep. Eric Pettigrew (D-Seattle) famously quipped in defending a proposed tax hike.

By the time they passed a budget lawmakers claimed they had dug deep into state spending and trimmed all the fat before cutting into vital state programs.  Apparently they didn't dig very deep.

While making cuts to health care subsidies, education, and corrections, lawmakers decided to continue spending money to promote tourism.  Perhaps Rep. Pettigrew was afraid people would die if the state didn't create a special map showing tourists where to find Twilight hot spots in the town of Forks:

That's right, because Washington is "home of the exciting Twilight saga," the state is spending our money to promote Forks as THE place to be for the show's aficionados.

Promoting tourism is a good thing (though I would argue it is not a function of government--let the businesses that will profit spend their money to promote tourism), but can lawmakers seriously expect their constituents to believe they're prioritizing spending when they continue to fund stuff like this?  When I go to a townhall meeting and my legislators look me in the eye and say "there's nothing else to cut" in the state budget, this comes to mind as a perfect example of why they should spend less time meeting with lobbyists and more time actually reading the state budget and evaluating agency functions.

By the way, if you're inclined to snipe back in the comment box with the shopworn line that funds used for stuff like this could be "dedicated funds" or "special grants" or whatever, think again.  This comes right from the state General Fund (see page 19 of this document from the state's Office of Financial Management, and spend some time digging through http://fiscal.wa.gov/).  This is a line-item appropriation that could have been cut to use the funds elsewhere.

The Tea Party Express rolled into the Puyallup Fairgrounds last Friday (October 30th) and lots of people showed up to welcome it--nearly 5,000. Did the local media cover it? The only coverage on the web that I've found is this clip, probably taken from someone's cell phone. ntil I found this mea culpa from the Tacoma News Tribune reporter John Henrikson that includes an even better videoclip.

Attorneys for The Seattle Times were successful Monday in arguing for the lifting of a restraining order that had prevented King County from complying with the newspaper’s request for documents thought to contain information about possible inappropriate behavior by Councilman Dow Constantine toward a female County employee, now known as Jane Doe. Constantine is running for the office of King County Executive against opponent Susan Hutchison. The judge’s ruling to release the hold on these public documents came on the eve of the final day of balloting in that election.

Red County broke the news last Friday that the Times had filed a legal challenge to the restraining order filed by attorney Tyler Firkins to prevent the release of documents regarding Jane Doe.  Judge Michael J. Trickey quashed the earlier restraining order, ordered King County to release all documents relevant to Ervin’s request (providing that the information that could reveal the identity of Jane Doe was redacted), including lifting the cover off the two-page note that had already been supplied to Ervin by the County. By way of Sound Politics, the note that has been at the core of this story can be viewed here.

The two pages of notes from July 27, 2009 made public by Monday’s ruling revealed that Jane Doe did have at least one meeting with a supervisor to discuss uncomfortable feelings she had about a series of interactions with Dow Constantine. The notes describe Doe’s account of an incident between her and Constantine that took place in a bar coinciding with a going away party for a co-worker. The supervisor’s notes indicate that Doe said she and Constantine sat together, shared food, and the councilman bought Doe drinks. Doe says Constantine commented on her attractiveness while also suggesting that she consider a position in his office.

On another occasion, a few weeks from when Doe stated the incident at the bar occurred, Doe said that Constantine made a comment in the workplace about her appearance that she felt crossed a boundary.

The supervisor’s notes are explicit that Doe was willing to sign a statement to the effect that she would not bring an action against the County and that she did not feel her employment was affected by any of the alleged incidents involved Councilman Constantine. However, the details disclosed to the supervisor made impression enough that they were discussed with Tom Bristow, then the interim chief of staff of the King County Council. The notes indicate the following conclusion resulting from their conversation:

Risk to the Council/agency - probably greater risk by conducting an investigation that could reduce the likelihood that other people wil [sic] come forward and trust that their experiences will be judged fairly and accurately. .

Although the note’s author and Bristow concluded that the facts did not support conducting an investigation, it was written down that “Ellen will document in case a further incident occurs. Tom may talk to member – probably after recess.”

Ellen Petre, Council Administrator, was one of two Council employees put to the axe this September, two months after the notes were made.

In a videotaped interview with KIRO television’s Essex Porter last week, Constantine said that “it would be easier” for him if the contents of the County’s documents were available for public inspection. Dow, it looks as though, on Election Day, you’re going to get what you asked for.

With less than 24 hours left to go in the King County executive race between Susan Hutchison and Dow Constantine, the latest SurveyUSA poll commissioned by KING 5 showed Susan Hutchison trailing Dow Constantine, 53-43. A more detailed cross-tab of the responses, collected between October 30 and November 1 from 614 likely and actual voters in King County, can be viewed here on SurveyUSA’s Web site. SurveyUSA claims a plus or minus four percent margin of error in its method.

The Constantine campaign today is attempting to use the SurveyUSA poll  –  and the recent Washington Poll — in the same way the hawkers of weight loss miracles use before and after shots as “evidence” of cause and effect. If the poll does end up reflecting anything close to the final vote count, it will be proof positive for the Democrats that an avalanche of special-interest funded attack mail and negative ads has been worth the dollars funneled by liberal causes.

But the SurveyUSA and Washington Poll surveys should not be placed parallel to earlier polling, or even the data released previously by SurveyUSA. In past samples, only the single issue of candidate preference was put before voters, while in this eleventh hour snapshot the idea of party affiliation was the subject of two out of the four questions. According to SurveyUSA, the four questions asked by its callers were:

1. If the election for King County Executive were today, would you vote for ... (choices rotated) Dow Constantine? Susan Hutchison?
2. Do you view Susan Hutchison as a Republican? A Democrat? Or an Independent?
3. When you think about voting for county executive, how important is it for you to know the candidate's party affiliation? Very important? Somewhat important? Not very important? Or not at all important?
4. When did you decide who you would vote for in the general election for mayor?

Although questions are rotated (not asked in the same order to every person surveyed), the accuracy and usefulness of polling can become diffused and depreciated when the overall scope is diversified as appears to be the case in this latest SurveyUSA effort.

It is worth noting that The Washington Poll released last week that showed Constantine taking a large lead also asked multiple questions including those focused on other races and ballot issues, and was difficult to put much faith in because of the results came from oversampling King County within a statewide sample. Jim Miller raises some interesting points to ponder about the oversampling claims of The Washington Poll in his prediction post at Sound Politics.

The presence of the fourth question concerning the mayor’s race (we are left to assume it is the Seattle race between Mike McGinn and Joe Mallahan the survey implies), and the comparative sample sizes between it and the headline question about which candidate voters prefer to be the next County executive, could be a reason to view the most recent SurveyUSA results with skepticism. While 614 responses were used to report a 53-43 prognostication of a Constantine victory, the sample size in the question concerning the mayor’s race was 526. The ratio of Seattle’s voting population to that of the surrounding county is roughly 1 to 2; Seattle voters are approximately one-third of the total in King County. If the sample size used for the mayor’s question was a subset of a larger group of responses that was demographically representative, we would expect to see the sample used for the first question be closer to 1,000, not just north of 600. SurveyUSA confirmed by e-mail that the smaller sample was taken from within the 614 used for the Hutchison-Constantine choice question, indicating a large Seattle bias in the polling.

Of course, the ultimate measure of the poll’s effectiveness will be the results of the actual vote count. As of 8:00 p.m. Monday evening, the King County Elections Office was reporting that only 24 percent of all ballots had been received. (You can check daily statistics here.) Both candidates will be getting out the vote in earnest from sunup to sundown tomorrow to mop up the remainder of the 56 percent participation expected by County election officials. This is the first year in which King County elections are conducted entirely by mail-in voting. All ballots must be postmarked by tomorrow (November 3^rd) in order to be counted.

For the address and hours of your nearby post office, check the USPS Web site. Ballots can also be dropped off several 24-hour drop boxes in locations around the county. To find the one nearest you, check this page on the King County Elections site.

If you haven’t already voted make absolutely sure that you do and encourage friends, family, and co-workers to do so as well. Exercise your right to choose King County’s direction for the future.