As I mentioned recently, we sought to endorse candidates for Tuesday’s primary that had taken a strong stand for transportation issues. We even asked for recommendations.

In a sad statement about our State, we didn’t find much in the way of candidates to endorse. We refuse to endorse candidates about whom we can’t say anything positive, except that they’re not as bad as their opponent. So instead, we’re going to release anti-endorsements, candidates you should most definitely not vote for because of their retrograde position on transit.

As an officially non-partisan blog, we’ve stripped away our feelings about other issues to focus on their position on transportation and land use. We also aren’t bothering to evaluate races, like Attorney General, that don’t really matter for transit. So bear that in mind. Hope you didn’t mail your ballot in already!

Governor: We’ve broken down before why Dino Rossi‘s transportation plan is probably unconstitutional, hostile to transit, and almost certainly dead on arrival in Olympia. Nevertheless, his plan at least shows that his heart is in the wrong place. Mr. Rossi gains our anti-endorsement.

41st District Senate (Mercer Island, Newcastle, Bellevue , Renton): Bob Baker‘s website has a stream of Kemper Freeman talking points and misleading factoids.

We simply need to apply the free-market principles of choice and find ways to accommodate more lanes of road. Period.

Yes Bob! Roads are a free market paradise, not subsidized like those rotten transit riders! Because buses stuck in traffic and cars stuck in traffic make for an infinite universe of “choices!”

Read it: it’s so bad it’s good. Needless to say, Mr. Baker earns our most emphatic anti-endorsement.

41st District House (Mercer Island):  What is it with Mercer Island?  The threat to their precious express lanes (which will be fully replaced by one HOV lane in each direction before the rail goes in)?

Rep. Judy Clibborn has fought the installation of rail on I-90, which would effectively kill light rail to the Eastside.  You would think a city that would be among the first to get rail service wouldn’t have so many of these kinds of characters.  Anyway, Clibborn gets our anti-endorsement.

10th District Senate (Camano Island): I don’t know if we have any readers out there, but Mary Margaret Haugen was the driving force behind governance reform this year. She gets bonus points for claiming that her constituents “don’t even know who their Sound Transit representative is,” which makes sense because her constituents lie outside the Sound Transit district and therefore don’t have a representative.

Sample Afghan Ballot from Wikimedia Commons. Good candidates all, but I wonder what their positions are on Sound Transit 2?

8 Replies to “STB Anti-Endorsements”

  1. It’s too bad for your anti-endorsement that Judy Clibborn is running unopposed in the primary.

      1. There’s no one else from any party running for her position, so there’s no choice even with the top-two primary—and presumably, no choice in the November election either.

  2. Yeah obviously if roads didn’t need subsidization, Prop 1 last year would have looked exactly like prop 1 does this year…

    1. Whether Judy Clibborn has an opponent or not is inconsequential. I think the point of having anti-endorsements is to illustrate just how bad many of our lazy incumbent legislators are, especially on issues too complex for the casual observer to figure out.

      So, for instance, the press isn’t very likely to cover Rep. Clibborn’s obsession with stopping light rail across I-90. But, thanks to the internet, it’s not hard to find archived video and the like. Why, just two months ago, HA reported on this:

      And this article appeared the other day:

      Fewer drivers could bring relief to clogged roads, Clibborn said, but the state expects to see a drop in gas tax revenue.

      “It’s a double-edged sword,” she said.

      The state relies largely on gas taxes to fund road projects.

      Hm, so now shifting people out of their cars and into transit is a bad thing. OK, then. But, as usual, it gets worse. Keep in mind, Clibborn supported a measure double in size last year; she seems only willing to support transit when roads and freeways can ride light rail’s coat-tails:

      Lumbert said he supports a $17.9 billion measure Sound Transit plans to put on the Nov. 4 ballot. The proposal aims to tackle bus, train and light-rail projects in Snohomish, King and Pierce counties during the next 15 years, including bringing light rail to Lynnwood.

      The measure is similar to a proposal, which failed in 2007, partly because it was tied to road projects.

      The price tag is gigantic, Clibborn said. People are scrambling to deal with the slow economy.

      “I’m skeptical whether this is a good time for this,” she said.

      If you are a light rail opponent, and want to keep those HOV ramps open for solo Mercer Island drivers (half the Seattle Times’ Editorial board), NO TIME is a good time for light rail. It’s a new excuse every time.

      Last year, Clibborn blamed light rail for tilting the balance of the Roads & Transit package towards the transit side. Of course, Clibborn totally ignored the HUGE revenue stream injected into WSDOT with the nickel and 9-cent gas tax increases when making the comparison. We are talking billions for roads, never ending taxes, and all kinds of project delays.

      But, in the world of the pavement-friendly eastside Democrat, we aren’t supposed to add up the costs of new roads. Only transit.

      Clibborn is a transit opponent. It’s time somebody calls her out on it. I am glad Martin took the first step. Next stop: Frank Chopp.

Comments are closed.