1. The state House passed Sen. Jeanne Kohl Welles’ (D-36, Ballard) “Proven Programs” bill yesterday, 67-31. The bill, which already passed the Senate, undoes a 1996 state law that required the state to apply for abstinence-only funding. Thus the term “Proven Programs,” which means “information verified by research in compliance with scientific methods that is published in peer-review journals … and recognized as accurate and objective by expert professional organizations.”
“Abstinence-Only” education did not meet those standards.
2. I talked to Peter Steinbrueck last night. He bitched about Mayor Nickels “unimaginative” land use policy which he said gave way to “butt ugly” density like car courts that turn the public off to increasing density. Steinbrueck, who supports density, complained that all the good design for “walkable, livable, compact communities” seems to happen when designers are able to get exemptions from land use rules. Steinbrueck asked: “Why not write those exemptions into the guidelines?” Steinbrueck spoke to these issues in front of the City Council’s planning commitee on Wednesday. Watch it here (go to the 73:40 mark.)
Re: the $25,000 question (or $300,000 question) about a possible Steinbrueck run for Mayor, he said he would make a decision by the end of the month. He said he wasn’t plagued by “indecision,” but he had to resolve some other issues and opportunities before he could actually make a decision.
3. Morning Fizz was wrong about state Rep. Scott White (D-46, N. Seattle). Yesterday, we characterized the freshman Seattle legislator as “typically quiet” when we reported that he’d taken the “slightly subversive” move of challenging Speaker of the House Frank Chopp (D-43, Wallingford, Capitol Hill) by sending a letter to colleagues that undermined Chopp’s 520 plan (a tunnel option that ups the price tag by $2 billion).
Well, now this letter has come to our attention. Rep. White is apparently the only House legislator who’s put his demand that the House vote on the now-controversial workers’ privacy act in writing, to the Speaker.
4. The League of Education Voters, The State PTA, the Gates Foundation, and a coalition called Stand for Education are lobbying the state Senate hard on education reform—trying to get them to upgrade their education reform bill so it matches the more aggressive House version. However, as a reform lobbyist noted to me yesterday, they haven’t noticed their Washington Education Association counterparts (the teachers union) in Olympia lately. The fear: The WEA has the inside scoop. The Senate has already made up its mind to stick with the weaker bill.
5. King County might actually get some money for transit. A bill authorizing the County to increase property taxes and collect about $25 million a year for bus service is queued up for a vote in the House. It already passed the Senate.
Tweet
OK so Gregoire has publicly admitted that her opposition to the Worker Privacy Act is part of her general supplication toward Boeing. Hence her flip-flop after telling WA State Labor (during the election) that she supported it.
What’s safe-seat, 43rd District, Fremont Public Association co-founder Frank Chopp’s excuse?
Consider that Scott White may just want to get off the hook because Boeing’s lobbyist fingered him as an “Against but will vote Yes on the floor if a vote is taken.”
http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/politics/2009/03/18/worker_privacy_killing_the_bill_let_relu
Go Scott White!!
Carey Moon could make a good run for Speaker Chopp’s seat. If the donors stepped up so she had a respectible campaign budget she’d, at the very least, make him work hard for it and explain to his constituents why he waffles on Democratic principles.
@3
While I believe Carey Moon would make a great public official I don’t think she’s terribly interested in running for public office. Which is too bad, because she’s a natural.
I hope Peter decides to get into the Mayor’s race. I’ve not been all that impressed with the chances of anyone who is currently challenging Nickles.
The only two reasons I can see Peter staying out is either he is truly tired of politics, or he doesn’t think he’ll be able to raise enough money.
So if Peter Steinbrueck has such great ideas for the City’s land use policies, why didn’t he get them enacted during the 8 years he was on the City Council? Given Steinbrueck’s recent tenure as the chair of the City Council’s Land Use Committee, I’d say he has only himself to blame if he doesn’t like the City’s policies.
Jane @ 5,
Well, you can’t say he didn’t try:
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=20104
As someone who watched the whatever council committee deals with land use for about the last ten years, the steamroller that was Nichols was something to behold. Other than Peter, nearly all of the council completely surrendered, out of agreement or idiocy.
I believe most of the citizens have not been paying attention to the important things, just running around and whining about distractions.