Tuesday, December 07, 2010

Finally... Gregoire Calls For Special Session

After jerking around for most of the past month, according to a report in the Everett Herald, Governor Christine Gregoire has finally said she will call the legislature into special session to deal with the budget crisis. Gregoire stated that if the legislature doesn't schedule a session by Friday, she'll do it for them, and it will happen before Christmas.

It seems it has taken her months to gather the courage to face down the state employee unions and force legislators to do what they were elected to. Obviously, the citizens of our state are getting the kind of stellar leadership they voted for.

Thursday, December 02, 2010

Why Won't Gregoire Force The Legislature To Deal With The Budget?

In spite of dire budget warnings for almost a year now from the Governor — and a crystal clear message from the voters — the State Legislature has adamantly refused to deal with what has become a major crisis, the looming $5.7 billion revenue shortfall. And while lawmakers will be in Olympia next week, the Democratic leadership remains uncommitted to a special session to solve the problem because the ultimate sustainable solution is going to anger their biggest supporters — state employee unions.

More than a year of warnings from business, think tanks, pundits, Republicans, political candidates from both parties, and average citizens, that the budget is unsustainable, have fallen on deaf donkey ears. The bottom line is that it appears the Democrats don't have the cojones necessary to make the hard decisions required to fix this problem.

The Senate Republican leadership responded to the Governor's call for budget recommendations and has been willing to help lay the groundwork for a special session, but the Democrats are unwilling to step up and deal with reality. However, since reality isn't enough to prompt the Legislature to take the action they were elected to, the Governor should take the bull by the horns — or in this case the ass by the ears — and force lawmakers to do their jobs.

The Governor should call a special session effective Wednesday, Dec. 8. that would be in effect for 30 days. If lawmakers refuse to quickly balance the budget, she should order large, across-the-board cuts that factor in chief budget forecaster Dr. Aram Raha's dismal take on the future of tax collections, and  have them take effect on Saturday, Dec. 11. If that doesn't get the Democrats off their butts, nothing is likely to.

If legislators don't want to get their hands dirty (and piss off the unions) by doing the job they were elected to, and still refuse to balance the budget, the least they should do in the special session is pass legislation that provides the Governor with the flexibility to make discretionary cuts (instead of across-the-board) to eliminate the projected deficit and leave a reserve.

All I can say is it's a good thing I'm not Governor. They would already be there and they would stay there as long as it took. Can you imagine a legislative session on Christmas day?

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Some Post-Election Commentery

      I have to say, I wasn’t too surprised by the outcome of the recent election. In a previous posting, I predicted the outcome of every race correctly except for one. I believed Kathy Haigh would go down in defeat — and she almost did — winning by a very slim margin.
 
      However, it was the vitriolic nature of comments by some of the right-wing conservatives that I found to be the most disturbing — especially after an observation I made about 26th District Senate challenger Marty McClendon. The bottom line was, the predictions were my observations on the probable outcome, and the forces that would drive those outcomes — NOT endorsements. Even after making this point several times, some of these pinheads simply couldn't figure that out, vilifying me for daring to make predictions that disagreed with their ideology.
 
That said, the biggest disappointment was the defeat of I-1082. This should have been a no-brainer for any thinking voter with a single shred of common sense. All anyone needed to do was look at the money funding the “No” effort — state employee unions and trail lawyers. Opponents of I-1082 outspent the “Yes” campaign by over $2 million, circulating blatant lies designed to confuse and frighten voters. In fact, KING 5’s Ad Watch series specifically called out the “No” campaign’s ads as false.

And who stood to benefit from its defeat? How coincidental — elitist state employees who’ll get to keep their overpaid jobs, and trial lawyers who make their living suing the state — which for the morons out there who voted against I-1082 and never connected the dots — that’s you and me.

The positive outcome was the unprecedented team effort on the part of the business community, which along with its sponsor, the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW), built a unique coalition of thousands of individual businesses, business and trade associations like the National Federal of Independent Business and the Association of Washington Business, and institutional giants like Boeing, which contributed $100,000 to the campaign. It was heartening to see them join with small businesses to publicly support an initiative.

I-1082 was endorsed by 11 newspapers, including liberal titans like the Seattle Times, and Tacoma News Tribune, along with the Spokesman Review, Wenatchee World, Yakima Herald, and the Everett Herald. The Wall Street Journal editorialized in support of I-1082, lionizing BIAW for getting the measure on the ballot. Even the usually liberal Kitsap Sun, supported it. 

However, its defeat underlines the raw power of blatant lies used in negative advertising paid for by big union money with an agenda.

The same held true of I-1100. While opponents — again the state employee unions — knew they would most likely lose this populist issue, they backed a competing initiative, I-1105. They knew when voters are confused, they generally vote "No" on both. And that was the simple intention here.  

I also find it highly offensive that state Insurance Commissioner Mike Kriedler blatantly used the power of his office to help defeat I-1082, regularly issuing press releases trashing the initiative that coincided with other intentional disinformation being distributed to the media. I also think its patently wrong for him to be issuing official statements from his office to the press, like one recently praising the decision of four governors, including our own Christine Gregoire, to file a brief in federal court supporting Obamacare. 

If Mike Kriedler private citizen wants to do these things, that’s certainly his right. He can do them on his own time, and not use taxpayer resources to advance his personal political agenda. However, Insurance Commissioner Mike Kriedler doing so, is nothing more than a violation of the public trust.

I strongly believe the PDC should fine Kriedler heavily and make him compensate the state treasury for the entire cost of his arrogant political transgressions.

Speaking of blatant political lies… the fact our state Supreme Court ruled about a decade or so ago that prohibiting outright lying in a political campaign would violate the First Amendment, has done a major disservice to the voters of this state. 

Imagine the outcome if Christine Gregoire and/or Patty Murray had to actually tell the truth about Dino Rossi and his business dealings, or if the I-1082 and I-1100 opponents couldn’t lie about what those issues were actually about.

 As it stands now, isn't it only a matter of time before some crackpot candidate publicly accuses a political opponent of infidelity, being a drug user, child molester, or something worse, and such a story grows legs because the morons posting anonymously in the local blogs with impunity, run with it?

Friday, November 12, 2010

Concerned About The Quality Of Education?

If you're not, you should be, and here's why...

This video was produced by filmmaker Davis Guggenheim — who is far from some wild-eyed, whacko, right-wing, anti-government crusader. In fact, he’s best known for his work with Al Gore in producing An Inconvenient Truth.



The inspiration for Guggenheim's latest film, which is described as "following a handful of promising kids through a system that inhibits, rather than encourages, academic growth,” stems from his personal experience driving past three public schools as he transported his kids from his home in Venice Beach, Calif. to their private school every day.

Guggenheim takes viewers on a highly disturbing tour of “academic sinkholes” and “drop-out factories" — painful, albeit accurate — descriptions that fit all too many public schools in Washington State. Those terms are a direct reflection of our state’s 30+ percent drop-out rate, where in some districts, half are minority students. This film explores the purely political limitations placed on the number of charter schools allowed in states like ours, where  parents are forced to place their kid’s names in a lottery, so random drawings can determine their educational future. The most touching moments in the film are those depicting the heartfelt disappointment on the faces of the lottery losers.

And this should really scare you... While well over half of our entire state budget is devoted to education, Governor Gregoire’s education commission found for the first time our high-priced education system is producing a generation of students less educated than their parents.

The film acknowledges that high-quality teachers are essential to student learning — a conclusion firmly supported not only by educational research, but common sense. And while educational advocates continually push for increased funding — usually in the form of higher taxes — no amount of dollars will matter if teachers aren't held accountable for our kids actually learning.

Waiting for Superman is a very strong and clearly stated indictment of the role unions play in keeping  our kids shackled to substandard schools. Given the power of the teachers’ union in this state, making that point  takes some extraordinary courage.

It goes without saying teachers' union officials didn't take this harsh criticism too well. Mary Lindquist, head of the Washington Education Association (WEA), the state’s most powerful teachers union, was quick with a venomous response, issuing a dictate to parents, teachers and school board members on exactly how to view this film. She notes that Washington already allows innovation schools — but she fails to point out the "inconvenient truth" that out of 2,250 schools, there are only five statewide. According to Lindquist, those five schools prove there’s no need to end our state’s ban on charter schools.

Meanwhile, Washington’s more than 100,000 private and home-schooled children generally receive a higher quality education, yet receive no public money. Charter public schools, if or when they are allowed in Washington, would offer the rest of our kids the same opportunities.

Waiting For Superman is showing at the Historic Orchard Theater in downtown Port Orchard beginning on Friday, Nov. 12. If you have kids, you owe it to them to see it.

Monday, November 01, 2010

A Very Thought-Provoking Video

This clip has been sent to me by several people, and I thought it was worth sharing. It's quite thought provoking, about what it means to be an American and why.

It's about 9 minutes long, and well worth your time.

Wednesday, October 27, 2010

Public records show L&I lied to legislators

L&I officials told lawmakers they did not know what 2011 workers' comp rate should be, documents prove otherwise
Judy Schurke, Director of L&IA public records request by Senator Janéa Holmquist (R-Moses Lake) and Representative Cary Condotta (R-Wenatchee) has revealed officials with the state Department of Labor & Industries (L&I) lied to lawmakers about the workers’ compensation rates employers will pay for 2011.

Senator Holmquist and Representative Condotta asked L&I Director Judy Schurke at a Joint House and Senate Commerce & Labor Committee Work Session what the “indicated rate” is for 2011 after L&I announced they would not release the indicated and proposed workers’ compensation tax increases until after the November 2 election. The indicated rate is the rate necessary to cause annual revenues to equal the annual expenses. The proposed rate is the rate L&I will actually charge employers. The two usually differ because L&I uses reserve funds to “buy down” the often astronomical indicated rate to one more acceptable to businesses.

The business community supporting Initiative 1082 cried foul, arguing L&I is playing politics on the public’s dime by breaking with the agency’s long-standing tradition of providing employers with the workers’ comp rates they will pay the upcoming year on the eve of an election in which voters will have the opportunity to end L&I’s monopoly on workers’ comp. Business owners rely on the information to plan their company’s budget.

Senator Holmquist and Representative Condotta agreed with frustrated businesses and demanded L&I tell them the rates businesses would pay in 2011. Representative Condotta said, “you [L&I] have the numbers. You’ve done the work. You know what the rates are…I’d like those numbers.” Testifying before the legislative Committee, L&I Director Schurke responded, “we don’t have those numbers.”

Yet documents obtained via the public records request prove otherwise. The documents L&I handed over include a chart with the 2011 indicated rate clearly redacted. Also, I attended a meeting of the state's Mayors early this year where the Governor's Chief of Staff Jay Manning told us L&I would need a minimum of a 30 percent increase to remain solvent in 2011.

“Obviously Labor & Industries has known for months what the indicated rate is for 2011,” said Patrick Connor, NFIB/Washington State Director. “These new documents prove it,” he added. “L&I has been caught red-handed lying to the Legislature, and the only explanation is they are desperate to hide the indicated rate because it shows what we’ve said all along — a massive tax hike is coming.”

The lack of transparency and corrupt actions of L&I officials — lying during legislative testimony — is precisely why the business community overwhelmingly supports I-1082. The agency is clearly run amok and considers itself accountable to no one; not elected legislators, and certainly not taxpayers.
 
For more information on I-1082, visit www.SaveOurJobsWA.com and www.JobsNotLies.com.

Monday, October 18, 2010

A Constitutional Convention? A BAD Idea

Today, I received the following in an email from several different people...

The Time Has Indeed Come!
Governors of 35 states have already filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them.  It only takes 38 (of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention.

This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on. 

An idea whose time has come!

For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress.  Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for  sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest was to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform .. in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law.

I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop.

A Constitutional Convention - this is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.  And, with the advent of modern communication, the process can be moved along with incredible speed.  There is talk out there that the "government" doesn't care what the people think.  That is irrelevant.  It is incumbent on the population to address elected officials to the wrongs afflicted against the populace...you and me. 
Think about this...

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified!  Why?  Simple!  The people demanded it.  That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.

Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.

I'm asking each addressee to forward this Email to a minimum of twenty people on their Address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that  really should be passed around.

Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States "
You are one of my 20+.   Keep it going.


MY OPINION...
While I understand the frustration which has spawned such passion,  I believe this is a monumentally BAD idea — at least now...

The reason is simple — the socialists are in power. But more importantly, THEY are in control of the bureaucracy, NOT the politicians. And just in case you didn't know it, control of the bureaucracy is where the REAL power lies. To paraphrase Joseph Stalin, it isn't the people who vote that count, but the people who count the votes — as Dino Rossi found out firsthand in 2004. These unelected "public servants" are the day-to-day rulemakers, and its their decisions by which ALL our laws, from the most mundane things like traffic tickets, to land use — and everything in between — are interpreted and implemented.

A Constitutional Convention would open up the ENTIRE Constitution to being re-written, and would be the perfect opportunity for the socialists to DICTATE a new, ideologically-driven agenda for America. If you think Obama is bad, and disagree with what Congress has done, the opportunity for socialists to rewrite the constitution would be our worst nightmare. One election — even if the Republicans take power of both houses of Congress in November, isn't enough. They need to take control of the bureaucracy as well — and that isn't an election year change, but a total cultural shift, that will take YEARS — if not a generation or more — to accomplish. It won't happen in one election cycle, because politicians come and go with regularity. Look at the "Reagan Revolution," and look at where we are today

So while I wholeheartedly agree that Congress has vastly exceeded the boundaries our founding fathers intended, I think a more prudent course of action would be to continue to elect people who will change the system from within, because a Constitutional Convention anytime in the near future is a battle that America as we know it, will lose. It's one that will bring down the America we know, the America we want, and the America we want to become. It will change our nation beyond repair to where the entitlement mentality becomes embedded in our culture (much like France) even more so then it already has, and do away with all the things that have made this the greatest nation on earth.

Saturday, October 16, 2010

New Policy on Comments

I want all our readers to know that we now a new policy when it comes to commenting on posts here. You have the ability to register, or post anonymously. However, anonymous posters will have to sign their name to their comments — the same as you do to have a Letter to the Editor published. If you're going to comment, you're going to have to have the intestinal fortitude to sign your name to your opinions. It's just that simple.

What has made this necessary is the uncivilized, and purely vitriolic nature of some recent comments from people posting anonymously disagreeing with some the opinions expressed here. I believe that level of discourse is totally uncalled for, and the nature of any debate will be much more civilized if people have to actually sign their names to what they write. 

I have a pretty thick skin — something necessary in the line of work I've spent most of my adult life doing — and it's grown even thicker since entering politics. So I can handle disagreement, and I can certainly hold my own in a debate. What I have no patience with is people who result to name calling, personal insults and threats when they can't make a rational argument to defend their dissenting opinion.

The catalyst for this change was the post about 26th District Senate candidate Marty McClendon's references to his son in his campaign. A number of posters felt I was wrong to express the opinion that I didn't mind him mentioning his son's leukemia, as I believe it gives people a sense of who and what Mr. McClendon is, and the challenges his family has faced, but felt he overplays it during Q&A interludes. 

Disagreement is fine within the bounds of civility. And it wasn't even the vitriolic name calling, but threats against my family and our personal safety that got completely out of hand. Some of it was obviously driven by the fact I expressed the opinion that I believe McClendon isn't going to beat Senator Derek Kilmer. It seems most of the rudest name callers took more offense to that, then what I actually said about McClendon mentioning his son. 

These same posters seemed to have completely ignored the statement in the second sentence of that post that those were my personal OBSERVATIONS about the PROBABLE outcomes — and they were NOT endorsements for any candidates. The truth is, some of the folks I'd personally like to see win, and think we'd all be better off if they did, probably won't, while I don't believe some incumbents I'd like to see defeated, will be.

So the bottom line is, from this point forward, if you want to disagree with me, that's fine, and debate is still openly welcomed. But you're going to have to demonstrate you have the the courage of your convictions, by simply signing your name. Is that too much to ask? I don't think so. 

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Political Sign Wars vs. Southern Women

We just had an interesting new experience with a Democratic sign volunteer.

Those of you who know my wife Dee, know she is the model of decorum — the stereotypical Southern Belle. Besides being genteel and charming, she also possesses the same traits many Southern women are brought up with — the steel magnolia qualities of kindness, and good manners, coupled with confidence, and strength of character and spirit.

So a typical smug, self-righteous, Northwest liberal doesn't stand a chance against people like Dee — as one found out the hard way today.

For those of you unfamiliar with the location of the Wet Apple office, it's on one of the busiest corners in South Kitsap. Because of its visibility on a main thoroughfare and four corners with a stoplight, it's also a prime location for political signs. We have traditionally allowed candidates whom we support — and even some, but not all, we don't particularly like — to put up signs there, as long as they ASK. Ones who put them up without asking, quickly find out they are dispatched to our dumpster with some immediacy.

As Dee returned to the office from an appointment, she saw a volunteer for Sumner Schoenike — the Democratic candidate running for the 26th District House against Jan Angel — pounding a sign in on the corner. To be fair, Schoenike has asked a couple of times if he could put up a sign, and we have told him no.

Dee politely told this guy that he needed to remove it, which he initially refused to do. Dee told him again, in stronger terms, that he needed to not only remove the sign, but he needed to remove himself from our property as well. He started yelling at her, waving his hammer in a threatening way, and demanding to know why.

Dee stood firm, telling him we don't support Schoenike because he has made it very plain he strongly supports a state income tax, and like most small businesspeople, we don't. At that point, the guy started yelling even louder at her, saying he was a health care worker, and that if we didn't vote in an income tax, thousands of people were going to die. By now, people at the stoplight, were rolling down their windows to see why this guy was waving a hammer, and screaming at a woman who refused to be intimidated.

Long story short, by the time Dee finished with this guy — never raising her voice, and standing her ground — he had packed up his sign, his hammer, his attitude, and a Larry Seaquist sign, and was muttering to himself as he slinked away fuming, but with his tail tucked firmly between his legs. When Dee told me what happened, after I stopped laughing, I made it a point to call Larry and let him know who took his sign.

But I have to wonder if such an impolite moron actually learned a lesson about messing with Southern women, or if he was just glad to get away with his testicles still intact. And I hope Sumner Schoenike learns he needs to have more polite people volunteering for him, because this guy is doing him more harm than good.

Monday, October 04, 2010

Handicapping The Election

With the general election only days away, I'm going to gaze into my admittedly cloudy crystal ball and make a few predictions on the outcome. Please understand these are NOT endorsements — either by me personally, or the Business Journal — but rather unscientific assessments of the candidate's chances, their campaigns, and how they will fare based on pragmatic observations of the economic climate, established voting patterns, and a whole lot of other factors — including gut feeling.

I have also updated some of the comments as new information has come to light, and will continue to do so as we get closer to election day if it's necessary.

U.S. Senate: This is one that could go either way. However, poll numbers show that Republican Dino Rossi is aggressively on the rise, and if he can raise enough money to get his message across on enough TV stations statewide, he could pull it off. Murray's blatantly dishonest TV ads, as noted in both  Seattle Times and Tacoma New Tribune editorials, have worked against her as well. If Democratic incumbent Patty Murray does win, it will be by a slim margin.

U.S. Congress — 1st District: Democratic incumbent Jay Inslee will win in a district dominated by liberals. His challenger, James Watkins, is a fiscal conservative, but the bottom line is this is a heavily Democratic district, and unless there is a major philosophical revolt, the numbers are against him.

U.S. Congress — 6th District: Norm Dicks of course. Due to the state of the economy and the mood of the country, coupled with the president's policies and rapid shift to the left, perennial Republican candidate Doug Cloud probably has his best shot ever at Norm, but Dicks is still going to win , and win comfortably — although not by the usual huge margin he's used to. I'm sure Norm is paying attention to the message his constituents are sending him.

State House — 23rd District: Democratic incumbent Sherry Appleton has been AWOL from the campaign trail, but will still prevail. She has the benefit of incumbency, name familiarity, tons of state employee and other union and special interest money at her disposal, as well as her usual strong tribal support. Republican Pete DeBoer would make a terrific legislator — he's pragmatic, a successful businessman, and has government experience based on his years with the Port of Kingston. However, based on the sheer number of Democrats in that district, coupled with the traditional Democratic funding sources supporting Appleton, his chances of actually winning don't bode well for him. Too bad for Kitsap.

State House — 23rd District: Christine Rolfes will go back to Olympia for another term. If she had an  actually credible opponent, she might have a fight on her hands. However her opponent, James Olson — AKA BainbridgeClearCut in the local blogs — has probably pissed off more people he hasn't even met then he actually knows personally.

State Senate — 26th District:
Incumbent Senator Derek Kilmer will easily win. For the most part, he has voted the wishes of his constituents, including opposing the repeal of I-960 and the state budget. From a personal standpoint, let me say that Kilmer has been a terrific friend to the City of Port Orchard. His opponent, Republican Marty McClendon, has not shown a great grasp of the issues facing the 26th, the state, or much else. He speaks in non-specific sound bite platitudes, because when pressed for facts, he usually gets them wrong, and does it with an arrogant attitude besides. On another personal note, I've also found his blatant use of his young son's leukemia as a campaign sympathy grabber to be offensive. I wouldn't wish that on anyone, much less a child, and my heart goes out to the McClendon family for their strength of character in dealing with it. But this should remain a personal family issue.

State House — 26th District: Incumbent Jan Angel should return to Olympia in an easy victory. Based on what I've seen of her opponent, Democrat Sumner Schoenike, he appears to be an avid supporter of bigger state government and a state income tax to pay for it. That kind of thinking doesn't resonate too well in the 26th. Also, Schoenike hasn't shown a very good grasp of the issues facing the district because he hasn't lived there long enough to actually understand them.

State House — 26th District: This could go either way. Democratic incumbent Larry Seaquist has done a good job for the 26th, and like Kilmer, has voted the wishes of his district for the most part, opposing the budget and the repeal of I-960. And as a Democrat, he's also been a breath of fresh air about the ferry system and all that's wrong with it — including the stranglehold the unions have on it — a bold position for a Democrat. His opponent, Republican Doug Richards, is an engaging, likable, thoughtful, pragmatic challenger whose primary numbers are a rightful concern for Democrats. This race will be won or lost on the doorstep, depending on how many doors each candidate can knock on between now and election day.

State Senate — 35th District: Incumbent Tim Sheldon will win handily. Nothing more to say about it.

State House — 35th District: Democratic incumbent Fred Finn should win. He's done a good job, voting pragmatically and thoughtfully, usually doing what's right, as opposed to what the traditional Democratic constituencies that bankroll the party in a highly liberal district demand. His opponent, Linda Simpson, can work a crowd, and has lots of enthusiasm, but smacks of being way too close to the radical right for the voters in that district.

State House — 35th District: Republican challenger Dan Griffey will upset longtime incumbent Kathy Haigh in a fairly close matchup. Haigh has always voted with the liberal majority in the legislature and makes no apologies for it. She touts her support for education, and was bought and paid for by the teacher's union long ago. However, Griffey's message about fiscal responsibility and less regulation in a district decimated by environmental regulatory overkill relating to its main employer — the timber industry — and suffering some of the highest unemployment levels in the state, is resonating deeply.

Kitsap County Commissioner: Another one that could go either way. I personally work with incumbent Democrat Josh Brown on a number of local boards, and it's no secret that when he was elected, at 24 years old I didn't support him, and was in fact, very vocal in my non-support. That said, in working with him, while we don't always agree on things, I have found Josh to be a quick study, smart, pragmatic, and usually prepared for whatever is coming his way. His challenger, Abby Burlingame, who spent time on the staff of the Washington Policy Center, is also very smart, personable, quick on her feet, and not afraid to reach out when she needs help and/or information. At 31, she has both business experience and what seems like an extraordinary amount of common sense. Bottom line: Kitsap isn't going to get hurt no matter who wins this one.   

Kitsap County Prosecutor: Democratic incumbent Russ Hague will win re-election over challenger Bruce Danielson in a squeaker. The legal establishment has closed ranks behind Hague — in spite of his self-inflicted shotgun blast to the foot over the Kitsap Rifle and Revolver Club lawsuit. To many voters, that suit has all the appearances of a personal vendetta against a constitutionally-savvy non-lawyer who has kicked Hague's ass in court three times in the past decade. But in spite of the thousands of local gun owners who view this as nothing more than a personal vendetta, the shear number of local Democrats will pull it out for the incumbent.

Kitsap County Coroner: Republican Greg Sandstrom should win easily. There's no reason to make a change, and most voters are pretty apathetic about this anyway.

I will handicap the ballot initiatives in a separate post in the next couple of days