Anyone else notice the ‘no on mass transit’ campaign is running against last year’s ballot measure? The P-I article from yesterday links to the ‘no’ campaign’s website which is exactly the same as the website from last year. And the P-I puts up with this for what reason? If the ‘yes’ campaign’s website was still promising roads, I doubt they would have tolerated it, so why is the P-I letting the ‘no’ campaign pretend they still have the Sierra Club’s support?
It’s offensive, and dishonest. The fact is, Sound Transit listened to the voters. Virtually all of the polls after the election showed that the roads and the cost were the two main factors for ‘no’ votes. But this time around, the package costs half as much as the package from last year, and the roads are completely absent. It’s not the same package by any means whatsoever. The agency and the board listened to the voters’ concerns and drafted a new proposal that doesn’t include roads and isn’t anywhere near as expensive. So why is the ‘no’ campaign running against the proposal from last year?
The only reason I can gather guess is that the ‘no’ campaign has barely a leg to stand on. The environmentalists are with the campaign this time around, despite the ‘no’ campaigns lies and the proposal is not nearly as expensive, despite the ‘no’ campaigns lies. We need to keep the ‘no’ campaign from getting away with this misinformation. Their only chance to win is to pretend that 2008 is still 2007, but with the public’s changing views on climate change, gas prices and the economy, we all know it’s different. Let’s not let them get away with it.
If they’re accepting donations and monetary contributions as a political campaign, there are certain rules about what you can post. This is one of those “against the rules” things. I doubt they’re one of those grassroots “no” campaigns.
However, we can’t do anything about it. It’d have to be the Sierra Club.
Andrew,
I’m not sure if you saw this or not..
# Opponents:
NoToProp1.org
P.O. Box 1115, Seattle WA 98111
e-mail: info@notoprop1.org
Co-chairmen: Developer Kemper Freeman, former State Supreme Court Justice Phil Talmadge and Snohomish County Councilman Gary Nelson.
Web site: http://www.NoToProp1.org (Note: the Sierra Club opposed last year’s ballot measure but supports the one submitted this year. The Web site is to be changed to reflect this.)
@2
Yes, the PI ran a correction, but Andrew’s post about the NO campaign’s bait and switch (to last year’s campaign) is right.
The desperate NO transit camp wants voters to believe this year’s measure is last year’s measure. It’s not. And that means Kemper Freeman and the NO mass transit gang don’t have much of anything to run with this time. (Sound Transit listened to the voters: The measure is billions cheaper than last year’s and it comes without roads expansion—which is why the Sierra Club is on board this time, not opposed as Kemper Freeman’s website pretended.
The one thing the anti-mass transit folks are trying to hype is that the light rail package doesn’t spend enough on buses (although, actually, the measure doubles express bus service). Arguing that a light rail package should be rejected because it doesn’t have enough buses is like not buying an ipod because it doesn’t come with a CD changer.
Having not been here for the 1996 vote, and not being able to find detailed info on the Sound Transit website, I don’t know if the no campaigns claim that Sound Move is billions over budget and years late is true or not. Obviously, I suspect it is false, but most voters probably wouldn’t go out of their way to find out. It would be sweet if one of you guys could do a breakdown of what Sound Move was supposed to accomplish vs. what it actually has, where it is in terms of budget and time line, and what things have changed and why. If this has already happened somewhere could someone provide a link?
The billions over budget argument is hilarious, the ‘no’ campaign wants it both ways.
They say “it’s $157 billion dollars!”, taking inflation-adjust year-of-expenditure dollars. But when the compare the costs from the 1996 proposal, the use the number from back then, ignoring inflation completely, and then declare the project billions over budget.
I see this as a positive sign: the no campaign is so disorganized they can’t even scrape up the resources to keep their web site up to date!
“It’s offensive, and dishonest”
Ummm, dishonesty is what anti-rail activists thrive on.
Check out John Niles’ comments about “never ending taxes” on this thread: http://www.crosscut.com/politics-government/16663/The+campaign+for+Sound+Transit+will+be+'going+Facebook'/
It’s no coincidence Niles works for the people who are hell-bent on trying to disprove Evolution.
It’s also no coincidence Karl Rove visited Kemper Freeman when he came to town a couple years ago.
That link didn’t work out too well. Maybe this?
http://www.crosscut.com/politics-government/16663/The+campaign+for+Sound+Transit+will+be+‘going+Facebook’/