Hot New Bulletin

We now have an alternative to Norma Smith and Michael Scott for the legislature. The write-in candidate, Scott Chaplin, has been too busy working for Doris Brevoort to get back to me, but the very fact that he’s working for Doris says good things.

To vote for a write-in candidate, go to the relevant race (Legislative District 10, State Representative Position 1) and write in on the dotted line Scott Chaplin. Don’t forget to black in the square next to his name.

So now, instead of sitting this one out, I’ll be writing in Scott Chaplin.

On Oct 19, 2016, at 10:28 AM, Scott C <scottc1962@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Marianne,

Scott Chaplin here.  I've met you a couple of times, most recently when Doris Brevoort came to Langley a couple of months ago to meet people in the park downtown.  Anyway, I became a volunteer campaign manager of sorts for her and have also been helping out with some Get Out the Vote activities.

I have a background as an environmental activist, resource management consultant and also as an elected official.  I've been thinking of getting back into politics and Art Huffine of the Island County Democrats has been very supportive - even listing me as their choice as a write-in candidate (without even clearing it with me).  At their last meeting they gave me an official endorsement so I decided to pay the filing fee so that write in votes for me would actually be counted (per state law).

I'll be putting together a platform statement, website and maybe also a Facebook page soon; but in the meantime, I wanted to get on your radar screen so that you might consider recommending me on your bog.  I think that you will find me to be a very Progressive, Green Democrat.

I don't anticipate winning this time around, but I'm hoping to get a jump  start on the 2018 election cycle by getting my name out now; which might also pressure Norma Smith to be a bit more environmentally sensitive.

I grew up in a very politically active household in the 1960s - attending Peace rallies and other events.  During college I had a summer internship at the Solar Lobby (no longer in existence) in

Washington, DC.  During college I worked part time for Greenpeace.  After college I went on to a career helping state and local governments deal with energy, water, and waste management issues.  I served on a White House Office of Science and Technology panel looking into the potential impacts of Climate Change; and also on a "Greening of the White House" team.  I was elected twice in Colorado to a city council position on a platform strongly emphasizing environmental protection and smart growth policies.  One of my proudest achievements is that we were able to stop a big box store from opening up in our little town.

Let me know if you have time to meet.  I don't want to put too much time into this because it takes time away from Doris's campaign - but Art thought it would be important that I at least get the word out so that people have an alternative to the Republican/Libertarian options.  Also, I think I can leverage my candidacy to get some more publicity for Doris.

Thanks for your time,

Sincerely,

Scott Chaplin

cell (360) 632-2851

November 8 general election crib sheet

Welcome to the November 8 general election ballot and recommendations

You’ve all been patient with me. Ballots are (or should be) in your hands already. Its time to vote. Don’t lose your ballot in a pile of junk mail. Remember to turn over the ballot and vote the back as well as the front. While there are thankfully a whole lot fewer candidates than in the primary, there are still a lot, along with a bunch of ballot issues.

As always, here’s the basic information:

Ballots must be returned no later than November 8.

            You can mail your ballot as long as the postmark is on or before November 8. To be sure that happens, get your ballot in the mail before 4:00 pm.

            Or you can drop your ballot into one of 5 special collection boxes at:

            Island County Elections Office             400 N Main Street             Coupeville

            Oak Harbor City Hall                             865 SE Barrington            Oak Harbor

            Trinity Lutheran Church                        18341 Hwy 525                 Freeland

            Ken’s Corner Red Apple                        4141 Hwy 525                  Clinton

            Camano Annex                                       121 N East Camano Dr    Camano

Deadline for dropping in the collection boxes is 8:00 pm on November 8.

For questions, contact  elections@co.island.wa.us

or phone 360-679-7366  M-F  9:00 – 4:00

Throughout the state level office discussions you will find references to “McCleary.” For those of you who are not political junkies or educators, McCleary is the name of a lawsuit settled by the State Supreme Court in favor of schools and teachers, directing the State of Washington to fully fund K-12 education. The state failed to do that and the court slapped it with a $100,000.00/day fine until it comes into compliance. Needless to say, this is doing interesting things to the state’s budget. Repubs are claiming they have already met the McCleary requirements (they haven’t) and Dems are saying there has to be tax reform to raise the kind of money McCleary requires. Which is why you will see much discussion of a state income tax and a state bank.

The crib sheet is arranged in the order which I found on the sample ballot on the Auditor’s website.

I’ve had to break up the crib sheet  because the blog site won’t allow such wordiness in a single post. And I’ve given up on trying to do anything techie. It ain’t me.

This is a long read, so get yourself some coffee and have at it.

Fair Labor Standards

I-1433  Fair Labor Standards   

Ballot language: Initiative Measure No 1433 concerns labor standards. This measure would increase the state minimum wage to $11.00 in 2017, $11.50 in 2018, $12.00 in 2019, and $13.50 in 2020, require employers to provide paid sick leave, and adopt related laws. Should this measure be enacted into law?

Sponsored by Raise Up Washington  http://www.raiseupwa.com/   I-1433 will raise the minimum wage statewide to $13.50 over a 4 year period, and  provide up to 7 days of paid sick leave and safe leave.

Opposed is the Columbian newspaper http://www.columbian.com/news/2016/oct/04/in-our-view-no-on-initiative-1433/  which claims, as ever, that while “robust minimum wage important concern, but ballot measure goes too far.” Their objection appears to be that Washington already has one of the highest minimum wages in the country, and both Patty Murray and Hillary Clinton said they could see a $12.00/hr minimum and we shouldn’t move too fast. They propose waiting to see how Seattle’s increased minimum wage works before taking it statewide.

Personally, I think people are for the most part paid far less than they are worth to their employers and usually far less than they need to survive in this society.

I will be voting YES on I-1433

Washington Accountability Act

I-1464  Washington Accountability Act                 

Ballot language: Initiative Measure No. 1464 concerns campaign finance laws and lobbyists. This measure would create a campaign-finance system; allow residents to direct state funds to candidates; repeal the non-resident sales-tax exemption; restrict lobbying employment by certain former public employees; and add enforcement requirements. Should this measure be enacted into law?

Sponsored by Yes 1-1464   http://www.yes1464.org/ 1464 would: require political ads to include information about who is actually paying for them; prevent coordination between candidates and SuperPACs; bar lobbyists and public contractors from making big contributions to candidates they are trying to influence; stop the revolving door of government officials taking jobs as lobbyists after they leave office; strengthen enforcement of ethics and campaign finance laws; impose stiffer penalties for violations; allow the public to direct state funds to candidates of their choice; force politicians to focus on smaller donations from more people.

I found an editorial opinion in the Longview Daily News http://tdn.com/news/opinion/vote-no-on-i/article_b1526bfd-a126-56cc-8d59-6b40bdb0567e.html   Their objection is to the financing. Right now out-of-state shoppers in Washington enjoy exemption from our state sales tax. Lucky them. 1464 proposes to close that particular tax loophole and use the money to create a fund which would provide vouchers to all legal residents. Residents could designate which candidates for office would receive each of their 3 $50.00 vouchers. They could not convert the vouchers to cash. I am not persuaded by the Longview paper’s argument that this is some sort of boondoggle. Yes, Longview and Vancouver will no doubt lose market share when Oregonians find it not worth their trouble to cross the river to shop in Washington – although Oregon has no sales tax, so not sure what the incentive to buy in Washington. There is a larger statewide issue here. I like the idea of campaign finance reform.

I like reducing the influence of dark money in politics.

I will be voting YES on I-1464

Extreme Risk Protection Orders

I-1491   Extreme Risk Protection Orders   

Ballot language:  Initiative Measure No. 1491 concerns court-issued extreme risk protection orders temporarily preventing access to firearms. This measure would allow police, family, or household members to obtain court orders temporarily preventing firearms access by persons exhibiting mental illness, violent or other behavior indicating the may harm themselves or others. Should this measure be enacted into law?

This measure is sponsored by the Alliance for Gun Responsibility.  http://gunresponsibility.org/solution/extreme-risk-protection-orders/

Their statement: Extreme Risk Protection Orders will allow families and law enforcement to petition a court to temporarily suspend a person’s access to firearms if there is documented evidence that an individual is threatening harm to themselves or others. The person subject to that order must surrender their guns to police and will not be able to buy, sell, or possess other firearms for up to one year.

The opposition has paid for ad space on Google. https://know1491.org/   Their prime compliant appears to be that an extreme risk order would stigmatize mental illness. The sponsors of this ad do not name themselves, but they do list other organizations and their various positions. The National Alliance on Mental Illness, Washington remains neutral on the issue. American Civil Liberties Union, WA remains neutral. The sponsor in the contacts link, Mr David Combs, includes a disclaimer to the effect that his naming of organizations does not imply their endorsement for his position. His Linked In page says he is a mental health advocate.  I also had occasion recently to speak with someone who is upset at the notion that anyone who wants to harm or stigmatize another could claim extreme risk and thereby deprive someone of his/her right to own a weapon. I understand the argument, but am not persuaded.

Personally, I hate guns. Their sole purpose in this world is to kill, hurt, or threaten. I don’t believe anyone should have them except for the very specific purpose of hunting for food. The more we can do to keep guns out of the hands of people likely to hurt/kill themselves or others, the better.

I will be voting a resounding YES on I-1491

Protecting Vulnerable Seniors From Fraud

I-1501     Protecting vulnerable seniors from fraud        
Ballot language: Initiative Measure No. 1501 concerns seniors and vulnerable individuals. This measure would increase the penalties for criminal identity theft and civil consumer fraud targeted at seniors or vulnerable individuals; and exempt certain information of vulnerable individuals and in-home caregivers from public disclosure. Should this measure be enacted into law?

endorsed by FUSE Washington http://fusewashington.org/fuse_2016_washington_ballot_initiative_guide/

Seniors are one of the most common targets for unscrupulous telemarketers and financial scams. Initiative 1501 will discourage identity theft and consumer fraud against seniors and other vulnerable residents by increasing penalties and preventing the state from releasing personal private information about vulnerable people and their in-home caregivers.

Opposed by Freedom Foundation https://www.freedomfoundation.com/blogs/liberty-live/i-1501-isn%E2%80%99t-about-privacy-it%E2%80%99s-about-protecting-the-unions%E2%80%99-monopoly-over-public   which asserts that this is really about “protecting the unions’ monopoly over public information.” Huh? Ok, now I get it. The claim is that protecting seniors is really all about forcing people to join the AFL-CIO or SEIU.  “I-1501 is a thinly veiled attempt to deny everyone else access to the same names, addresses and phone numbers SEIU was given when it filed its own Public Information Request back in 2002 pursuant to forming a new union.”

I have worked with seniors. Some are sharp. Others are gullible. I have had to write those nasty letters to book clubs and magazine subscription desks, and even to the Seattle Opera to cancel inappropriate and expensive subscriptions and purchases. The more we can prevent seniors from becoming prey, the better in my book. The Freedom Foundation’s diatribe against unions is not very persuasive.

I will be voting YES on I-1501

Carbon Tax

I-732   Carbon tax shift                   

Ballot language:  Initiative Measure No. 732 concerns taxes. This measure would impost (sic) a carbon emission tax on certain fossil fuels and fossil-fuel-generated electricity, reduce the sales tax by one percentage point and increase a low-income exemption, and reduce certain manufacturing taxes. Should this measure by enacted into law?

 This initiative is sponsored by Carbon WA  https://yeson732.org/  and would impose a carbon emission tax on certain fossil fuels and fossil-fuel-generated electricity. Sadly, many environmental organizations have opposed I-732 because it does not do everything for everybody. I was very much involved in the early discussions about which initiative to support and what was possible. Several of the large environmental organizations (Fuse WA and Sierra Club) insisted that they were going to run an initiative and that 732 was just not the right vehicle. So we waited – and we almost waited too long because the alternate initiative never happened. So its 732 or nothing.

Here is partner Steve’s response to critics of I-732:   The claim that I-732 is going to “blow a hole” in the state budget is grossly misleading. The respected progressive think tank Sightline analyzed this claim. See http://www.sightline.org/2016/08/02/does-initiative-732-carbon-tax-have-a-budget-hole/ as well as the other articles in their series analyzing I-732 and discussing the disagreement about it.
Sightline’s conclusion is that the supposed budget deficit created by I-732 is at worst 1% or less of the entire state budget. For all practical purposes, this is within the margin of error of budget forecasts.

We can pass I-732 and finally start orienting our economy in a sane way. Tax what we don’t want (pollution) - or wait for an unknown and uncertain effort by the entrenched Seattle-centric “progressive” and green organizations. Really, there is no alternative to which to compare I-732, because the progressive and green opposition has yet to produce anything other than a very long list of “principles” and a requirement that any action must have “buy-in” from every conceivable faction and constituency. Frankly, I’m reminded of so-called revolutionaries in the 1960s who spent all of their time arguing dialectics and scheming against each other instead of ever getting off their butts, organizing people, and getting out in the streets to stop the war and make change. There really is more than a little bit of turf guarding behind the “progressive” opposition.

Of course, the actual ‘no’ campaign is simply using this conflict to hide behind. FYI: the 5 biggest donors to the ‘no’ campaign (run by the Association of Washington Business) are:

Kaiser Aluminum

Ash Grove Cement Company, Inc

Northwest Pulp & Paper Association,

Nucor Steel Seattle, Inc.

Western Petroleum Marketers Association

Climate deniers all, and fossil fools.

New information is coming out practically by the minute and I can't keep up with it. I may well post updates as more comes to light.





Back to my own opinion (as of 10-17-16):

I listened to a rather heated debate between Duncan Clausen of Carbon WA and Jeff Johnson of the Washington State Labor Council. Johnson asserted that yes, climate change is real and we really do need to do something about it, but nobody supports 732. He agreed that we needed to put a price on carbon but again, 732 is not the way to do it. He claimed that charging a tax on carbon would not decrease the amount of fossil fuels being used. He said the price would simply be passed on to consumers and the pollution would be exported. He said energy intensive industries don’t like this. He gave the usual argument about not having an alternative source of energy in place to take up the slack as fossil fuels are reduced.

Duncan Clausen countered that pricing carbon was really the only way to reduce its use, and 732 is the first tool to make that happen. A state mandate was passed in 2008 and it is not being met. 732 went to the legislature this year and they punted and said they wanted to see the issue on the ballot. Ok, now its on the ballot. Climate change is the single biggest issue of our times and this is a policy which we can put in place now, rather than waiting for someone to come up with something better someday.

It is painful to see the environmental community divided like this. I have checked the positions of the pro and con groups and find the con groups, many of whom I have supported and worked with for years, acting like spoiled children because its not their proposal on the ballot. We have to start somewhere – and they have to grow up.

Here’s how this will work. A tax will be levied on fossil fuels at the wholesale level, starting at $15.00/ton of CO2 emitted and increasing incrementally to $100.00/ton by 2059. It is understood that the cost will indeed be passed on to consumers. To offset that cost, the state sales tax will be reduced by 1¢. There will also be tax rebates of up to $1500.00/year for low income households. And the B&O tax, acknowledged to be one of the most regressive in the US, will be reduced or eliminated for manufacturing. The intent was to create a revenue-neutral measure, one which shifts the burden from consumers to fossil fuel generators & suppliers. And behind all of this is the intent to reduce the generation and use of fossil fuels in Washington.

This system has been in place in British Columbia for a while now and it seems to be working. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_carbon_tax  The graph in the referenced article shows that petroleum consumption in BC has declined significantly since 2008 when the carbon tax went into effect. Bottom line: we have an example before us and 732 is modeled on that example.

Out of a sense of fairness, here’s a link to KUOW’s piece on the issue http://kuow.org/post/should-carbon-emissions-be-taxed-washington-voters-will-decide

We have to start somewhere. Waiting for something better someday maybe is just not an option.

I will be voting a resounding YES on I-732

Repeal Citizens United

I-735   Repeal Citizens United                  
Ballot language: Initiative Measure No. 735 concerns a proposed amendment to the federal constitution. This measure would urge the Washington state congressional delegation to propose a federal constitutional amendment that constitutional rights belong only to individuals, not corporations, and constitutionally-protected free speech excludes the spending of money. Should this measure be enacted into law?

 Sponsored by WAmend.org  http://www.wamend.org/   I-735 would urge a federal constitutional amendment that limits constitutional rights to people, not corporations. Corporations are NOT people.  Money is NOT speech. All political contributions must be regulated and made public.

Most people are aware of the Supreme Court’s horrible decision in Citizens United, which declared that corporations are persons and have the rights of persons, including the right of free speech. It then went further to claim that the Koch Brothers’ businesses spending $1 million to buy an election is exactly the same in the eyes of the law as J Q Public getting up on a soap box in the town square. Right.

The only way to right this very great wrong is to amend the Constitution of the United States, no easy task. Among other things, it requires ratification by 2/3 of the states. I-735 would in effect say that if and when the time comes, Washington will ratify such an amendment. It also asks Washington’s congress members to raise the issue in Congress.

I’ve been watching the utter devastation of the electoral system in the US since Citizens United. This needs fixing and I-735 is part of that fixing.

I will be voting YES on I-735

Advisory Votes

Two advisory questions will be on the November ballot, as well.
Be aware that these advisory votes have no effect. They are merely advisory. This is yet another example of Tim Eyman making life unnecessarily difficult, confusing, and expensive. The rather ominous language is very specifically dictated in the initiative Eyman rammed through. That closing language “costing  $X for government spending.” means that someone has made an estimate of how much the tax or fee will actually bring in to the state. Think of it as Bizarro language: it is exactly the opposite of what it looks like.

Advisory Vote No. 14                        House Bill 2768         
Ballot language: The legislature extended, without a vote of the people, the insurance premium tax to some insurance for stand-alone family dental plans, costing an indeterminate amount in the first ten years, for government spending. This tax increase should be:

The Taxation of Stand-Alone Dental Plans Advisory Vote asks voters whether to repeal or maintain a tax on certain dental plans whose premiums are $25 to $50 per member per month,

With the Bizarro admonition in mind, this is a measure we have seen year after year, introduced by the dentists’ lobby. Most businesses pay B&O tax. These dentists do not and they are instead asked to pay a tax on insurance premiums paid for their services. They’ve been trying to get out from under this equivalent tax all this time. Just suck it up, dentists, and pay your fair share.

I will be voting to MAINTAIN this tax.

Advisory Vote No. 15                        Second Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2778 
Ballot language: The legislature imposed, without a vote of the people, certain limitation on the retail sales and use tax exemptions for clean alternative-fuel vehicles, costing $2,000,000 in the first ten years, for government spending. This tax increase should be:

The Modifying Tax Exemption Criteria for Alternative Fuel Vehicles Advisory Vote asks voters whether to repeal or maintain a sales tax exemption on the first $32,000 of the purchase price of qualifying new alternative fuel vehicles.

This one has to do with promoting clean cars, mostly electric. There is a sales tax exemption for buying a non-fossil fuel car. This proposal limits that exemption to the first $32k of the purchase price. The MSRP can be no more than $42,500.00. Sorry, still gotta pay tax on a $100k Tesla.

It sets a most peculiar limit on the exemption, namely 2 months after Dept of Licensing determines that 7500 eligible vehicles have been titled since 7-15-15 –  or 6-30-19, whichever comes first. Why? Got me.

Primary opposition to this bill (already passed and in effect) is that it excludes a lot of cars which cost more than $42,500.00 but which provide far greater range (mostly BMW and Tesla) and that limiting the exemption to cheaper cars provides no incentive to continue research and development on better electric cars. I sympathize with BMW and Tesla, and want to see them continue their research. I hope we can amend the limits at some future date, but for now something is better than nothing, and I suspect a whole lot more people are buying Nissan Leafs than are buying BMWs or Teslas.

Since my favorite environmental organizations, along with Nissan and GM favor it,

I’ll go with a vote to MAINTAIN this tax.

Proposed Amendment to the State Constitution

Senate Joint Resolution No 8210
Ballot language: The legislature has proposed a constitutional amendment on the deadline for completing state legislative and congressional redistricting. This amendment would require the state redistricting commission to complete the redistricting for state legislative and congressional districts by November 15 of each year ending in a one, 46 days earlier than currently required. Should this constitutional amendment be:
Approved
Rejected

As you know, the federal government conducts a census every 10 years. One reason for that census is to readjust congressional district boundaries to reflect changes in population. Redistricting is a very politically contentious issue, as the size and shape of districts can often determine which party will win that seat. Washington established a Redistricting Commission in 1983. There is a very specific protocol for how and when commission members are chosen. This amendment would tighten the work schedule of the Redistricting Commission. The votes in favor in both the House and Senate were unanimous – for what that’s worth.

The Advancement of Date for Completion of Redistricting Plan Amendment was designed to move the deadline for the completion of redistricting for state legislative and congressional districts from January 1 of each year ending in a two, to November 15 of each year ending in a one.

I am not at all sure of the implications of this, but to the extent that it prevents mischief by Redistricting Commission members with too much time on their hands, I think I favor it.

I will be voting a slightly puzzled APPROVED on the proposed amendment.

President/Vice President

            Donald J Trump/ Michael R Pence    R

            Hillary Clinton/ Tim Kaine     D

            Alyson Kennedy/ Osborne Hart                    Socialist Workers’ Party

                                                                                   swp2016campaign@gmai.com

                                                                                   646-922-8186

            Gloria Estela La Riva/ Eugene Puryear           Socialism & Liberation Party

                                                                                    seattle@pslweb.org

                                                                                    206-367-3820

            Jill Stein/ Ajamu Baraka                                Green Party

                                                                                  hq@jill2016.com

                                                                                 801-303-7922

            Darell L Castle/ Scott N Bradley                 Constitution Party

                                                                                 info@castle2016.com

                                                                                901-481-5441

            Gary Johnson/ Bill Weld                            Libertarian Party

                                                                                PO Box 4422 Salt Lake City 84110

Like many of you, I’ve just suffered through the endless barrage of Trump/Hillary news, along with the first and second presidential debates. Absent, of course, were all but 2 of the candidates. I’m going to cop out and not even bother with all those minor candidates. We have a full-fledged crisis on our hands and there is no room for waffles, votes of conscience, or anything else, including ‘sitting it out’. The choice is, sadly, between a new-Dem centrist and a narcissistic woman-hating Fascist. I have a visceral hatred for Fascism, so there really is no choice. I wanted so much to be able to vote for Bernie. That new-Dem centrist sabotaged my guy. If there were any way to do so, I would not vote for her. I would perhaps, write in Bernie or vote for Jill Stein. This year we don’t have that luxury. We vote for Hillary or we watch our world disintegrate around us. Frankly, I am very afraid the fascist and his enablers will steal the election – again.

I’ll be holding my nose and voting for Hillary Clinton/ Tim Kaine.

US Senate

Chris Vance              R         info@chrisvanceforsenate.com

https://chrisvanceforsenate.com/

The R machine candidate. He had a campaign reception with Carly Fiorina.

education: WWU, BA in Political Science.

Former state rep, King County Councilman, WA State R chair.

issues:

1.     Reducing the national debt, growing the economy, saving Social Security & Medicare by capping discretionary spending and reforming entitlement programs. Pro-growth tax reform. No limits on military spending. Increasing Social Security contribution cutoff, increasing retirement age, adopt the ‘chained CPI’, raise Medicare eligibility age, expand means testing for Medicare.

2.     Climate. against carbon taxes or cap & trade, promote new energy technologies.

3.     Free trade is good for the world. Very pro- TPP.

4.     Health insurance. Wants to reform Obamacare and let the insurance companies design their own plans.

5.     Immigration. Better border security. After that’s done, a path to legal status for those who have been here a long time, have had no run-ins with the law, are willing to pay a fine, and undergo a background check. A guest worker program (remember the braceros?). A better visa program for highly skilled workers from overseas.

6.     Security. “We must spend what it takes to maintain our nuclear deterrent and conventional forces . . .”  “the United States must assemble a coalition to destroy ISIS.”  Obama was terribly wrong to make a deal with Iran.

7.     Second amendment. Banning semi-automatic weapons would be unconstitutional.

8.     Abortion. The people of Washington have spoken. He will continue to block funding, but will not vote to ban it.

9.     Marriage. He won’t try to overturn the law, but will vote to protect churches and non-profits who have a different view.

10.  Marijuana. Legal in WA, illegal federally. He will respect the agreements which allow that.

He’s got the classic R philosophy and positions, all of which I despise.

           

Patty Murray             D                                 campmail@pattymurray.com

www.pattymurray.com

Incumbent, 4^th ranking Senate Dem, sits on very influential committees: budget; health, education, labor and pensions; veterans affairs; appropriations.

I disagree vehemently with Patty’s support of TPP, but am right there with her on most other issues.

I’m not seeing a specific issues list on her campaign website, which bothers me, but some of the news items she cites are: Patty and Maria Cantwell have introduced a bill to prevent mining in the Methow headwaters. Helped pass an equal pay resolution for the UW Women’s team soccer stars. She’s been pushing the House (which needs a push or two) to fund Zika virus research – which I understand is on the verge of passing. She’s working on how to deal with student debt. Began her career as a citizen lobbyist for environmental and education issues.

Her issues:

~supporting agricultural production and agricultural communities

~Environment: helped create the Wild Sky Wilderness, expansion of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, designation of Pratt and Middle Fork rivers and Illabot creek as Wild and Scenic.

-       Worked on funding for Puget Sound cleanup and the Salmon Recovery Fund.

-       Pushed for regular funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which finances federal land acquisitions.

-       Worked to create the Hanford Reach National Monument, protecting 51 miles of the river for salmon spawning.

-       Supports a permanent ban on offshore drilling.

-       Shaking loose Hanford cleanup funding.

-       Working on climate change.

-       Protecting public lands. Ensuring funding for the National Park Service and the Forest Service.

-       Defending the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act from legislative attacks.

-       Her Earth Day pledge was to support climate action.                                    

~ Strong supporter of women’s reproductive rights.

~ pushed for background checks for gun purchasers.

There’s a ton more on her senate website http://www.murray.senate.gov/public/ but I’ve got a deadline and you can look for yourself.

Endorsed by FUSE Progressive Voters.

I’ll be voting for Patty Murray.