It would be hard to get fired up about five-term incumbent Rick Larsen, (latest news, according to his web site: “Larsen Expresses Views on Environmental Assessment for the Sea-Based X-Band Radar”), if it wasn’t for the fact that his main opponent, Snohomish County Council member John Koster, is a Tea Party Republican with an endorsement from Sarah Palin and financial backing ($2,800) from the Citizens United Political Victory Fund, a conservative PAC that’s also keen on Tea Party lulus Michele Bachmann and Sharron Angle.
Local archconservatives like Koster too. Larry Stickney, the anti-gay activist who ran the R-71 campaign against Washington State’s domestic partner law, is running Koster’s campaign. (Koster has paid Stickney nearly $20,000 in consulting fees.)
Koster, a property rights advocate in the state legislature back in the late 90s (he consistently ranked at or near 100 percent with business lobby groups and around 7 to 8 percent with the AFL-CIO and Washington Conservation Voters) is in sync with this posse of national and local right-wing stars. He’s also out of sync with his district.
Koster is a hardline social conservative: He labels the immigration reform bill “amnesty”; says “marriage is between one man and one woman” (was that sound bite worth $20,000 to Stickney?); and claims the Declaration of Independence (not, um, the Constitution) mandates that the “express job of government [is] to protect all innocent human life.” (Meanwhile, Koster say he opposes the health care reform bill because health care is a free market concern not one for “government bureaucracy?”)
If Palin’s endorsement and Stickney’s presence aren’t dealbreakers for PubliCola readers (and they should be), here’s one that’s a dealbreaker for PubliCola’s writers: Anti-transit Bellevue Mall developer Kemper Freeman is also on Koster’s list of endorsers.
Incumbent Democrat Rick Larsen is a moderate who leans left, getting high marks from pro-choice groups and the ACLU. Indeed, despite hailing from a swing district, the Northwest corner of the state—Larsen has managed to go all in on key Democratic agenda items: yea on the employee nondiscrimination act, Wall Street reform, health care reform , and cap and trade. And despite his hawkish side, he voted to repeal the Patriot Act.
He’s also a go-to-vote on campaign finance reform and transportation infrastructure.
Tweet
Erica I'm a little worried, you endorsed a moderate. Rick Larsen is a good man… even more surprising.
You folks do realize that this is a primary right? Why simply go with the tired and predictable “Protect that Incumbent” when you could actually go out on a limb and push for change. It IS a primary after all.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
http://www.theleftshue.com/2010/07/larry-kalb-f...
It is a primary, but Rick is the obvious choice. Not only is he the only Democrat officially nominated by the Party, but he has been a tireless advocate for issues that matter to the 2nd. His opposition on the left is out of step with the majority of the district, does not have the political skills necessary to be effective, and, let's just be honest, never would be able to win in a general.
The entire nominating process was rigged to protect the incumbents and evry reasonable person knows that. I'm impressed to know that the majority of the 2nd CD is pro-endless unchecked spending on military budgets. I am equally impressed that the majority of the 2nd CD is in favor of bankruptcy laws that punish the consumers and protect the banks and credit card lenders.
Now, let's really be honest. Democrats are more about securing re-election for their incumbents regardless of their adherence to party principles and less about promoting true Democratic policies.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Wow, you guys love Rick Larsen for this seat so much that you don't even know what Congressrional District he is in. Nice.
Honestly, though, your criticisms of John Koster — a 16-year legislator in this state — focus almost entirely on who has given him money, who his campaign manager is, and how people rate him, instead of how he, you know, legislates?
Do you know even the first thing about doing the job of reporting? It seems like you just Googled him for 15 minutes and picked a few points. And I will address them all:
“He's also out of sync with his district.”
Since you didn't even know what District it was when you first posted this, why should we take your word for it?
And the facts disagree with you anyway: more individuals in the district are giving him more money (since he entered the race in January he's outpaced Larsen by more than $70K), and why the few polls all show him ahead by a significant margin.
“Koster is a hardline social conservative: He labels the immigration reform bill 'amnesty'”
Yep, as most of the District does. (Now, I disagree that it is amnesty, but that's for pedantic reasons, not for substantive ones: the bottom line is that the bill does let people off the hook for violating our laws.)
“says 'marriage is between one man and one woman'”
Yep, as most of the District does, indeed, as most of Washington does, and moreso the 2nd CD than the rest of the state. Also, as Barack Obama does!
“claims the Declaration of Independence (not, um, the Constitution) mandates that the “express job of government [is] to protect all innocent human life.””
Which is, of course, what the Declaration of Independence says (modulo your error in the use of the word “mandate”; Koster didn't say that the Declaration of Independence mandates it, but that it recognizes it as a fundamental truth, which is, again, what it actually says). Read it sometime: we have an unalienable right to life, and the job of government is to secure that right. Pretty straightforward.
And yes, despite your apparent implication, the Constitution does not say this. You will not find any requirement or encouragement in the Constitution for government to protect innocent life. (Except, perhaps, through the Ninth Amendment, but that would be question-begging, because to the extent it is found in the Ninth Amendment, it is referring back to the Declaration of Independence. There's also the 14th Amendment requirement for equal protection of the laws, but that's a little more roundabout.)
“Meanwhile, Koster say he opposes the health care reform bill because health care is a free market concern not one for 'government bureaucracy?'”
Yes. Exactly right. Again, this is the view of most people in the District. (A reminder: this is District 2. Although, you'd be wrong about most of this in District 3, too, which is even further to the right.)
Chad, how was it rigged?
As to bankruptcy laws … of course the people who irresponsibly go bakrupt should be “punished” (that is, held responsible, which isn't really punishment at all) for it. If they are not held responsible, then we encourage bankruptcy, which leads to weaker banks, more financial instability, and so on.
Obama, Pelosi, and most of the rest of the leftist liberals were in favor of this, too. It's one of the few major acts of the federal legislature in the last couple years I mostly agree with (not that this should serve as an endorsement for Democrats
.
As to endless spending on the military, I am with you there, Chad. Not all the way, of course, but I do think we spend a lot of money we don't need on programs and equipment, and, probably like you, I think we should get out of Afghanistan, and not escalate as we've done under Obama.
I am for a very strong military, but I think we need to be much smarter about it, and not kowtow to Boeing and other companies. But you have to admit, Chad, that when our politicians do that, they are just following Keynes, which even leftists seem to like: it's not HOW money is spent, but THAT it is spent. So what if it is on a wasteful program? Keynes says you just gotta keep that money flowing.
I understand you would rather keep it flowing on non-military spending, but when our electeds can give Keynes love AND shore up their military and local political cred, it's a win-win-win.
The one who is out of synch with his district is Rick Larsen. He supported Obamacare even when all of the polls showed the US public didn't want, nor need, this costly, ill-conceived program jammed down our throats.
Then he had the audacity to stand up in the Mount Verno Town Hall meeting and state that we can keep our insurance plan and our doctors, which is a complete mistatement of the truth.
Rick supports the job-killing “Cap and Tax” plan, that will raise our electric bills by an average of $1700 per year by 2025, and will not require China, India or Brazil to do a single thing to control their own emissions, thereby giving them a tremendous competetive advantage and forcing US jobs to flow overseas. And the alleged reduction in global temperatures because of this bill is less than .1 degree Centegrade (by 2050). Now that's a tradeoff I can live without!
When Sarah Palin endorsed John Koster, Rick Larsen put out a press release stating that now all of this “out-of-state” money will begin flowing into the Koster campaign. But a fact check done by the Everett Herald showed that about 65% of Rick Larsen's funding already comes from out-of-state PACS, whereas 98% of John Koster's funds come from Washingtonians. And Rick refuses to give back $24,000 in contributions from Charlie Rangle's PAC.
Rick Larsen is a carreer politician, having not had a real job, other than lobbyist and politician. John Koster, on the other hand, is a third generation dairy farmer, who know what it takes to create a budget and stick to it, or lose the farm. John is also renouned as a budget watchdog as well as a tax cutter during his three terms in the Washington State House, and in his current job on the Snohomish County Council. I'd say we need a lot more people like John Koster who is concerned about confiscating and spending other people's money, and knows they can spend it better than the government.
I could go on and on, but clearly, the best candidate to represent us in District 2 is John Koster! It's time for Rick Larsen to get a real job, or go to the back of the unemployment line! Oh, I forgot, Rick's pension is fully vested and funded by “we the taxpayer”, so he may not have to get a job quite yet.
re: “Then he had the audacity to stand up in the Mount Verno Town Hall meeting and state that we can keep our insurance plan and our doctors, which is a complete mistatement of the truth.”
OMG, the audacity of telling people what's true as opposed to what they might want to hear instead! No wonder the right loves Big Mainstream Media Fox News so much.
As most insurance is covered by private employers, something you should know if you're also going to cite poll results as gospel, the Healthcare bill won't change anything for them. The employer will still be the one making the business decisions for healthcare for their employees.
re: “Rick supports the job-killing “Cap and Tax” plan, that will raise our electric bills by an average of $1700 per year by 2025, and will not require China, India or Brazil to do a single thing to control their own emissions, thereby giving them a tremendous competetive advantage and forcing US jobs to flow overseas.”
*citation needed.
A clump of cells is not “innocent life” no matter how fervently you pray for it to be so.
Also, I fail to see how people purchasing a product on the open market from competing privately or shareholder owned companies runs counter to the free market system. Care to elaborate?
“A clump of cells is not “innocent life” no matter how fervently you pray for it to be so.”
Shrug. YOU are just a clump of cells, no?
And what about a clump of cells that has a functioning, beating, heart and detectable brain waves? That happens in he first trimester, when there are no restrictions on abortion. Is that an innocent life? I think so.
And honestly, I don't see how it is necessary to explain the fact that government control of a market is the opposite of a free market. Do you really think it is necessary to explain it? Coz I can.
“OMG, the audacity of telling people what's true as opposed to what they might want to hear instead!”
But it's **not** true. All insurance plans must comform to the new rules within a few years. The grandfathering is time-limited.
That said, in fairness, when Larsen said it, he was referring to the original House plan, where the grandfathering was “permanent” (it didn't expire until the plan chose to change, if I recall). However (again, IIRC), unlike the final bill, the House grandfathering didn't cover “catastrophic-only” plans, so people under those plans would have been required to change their insurance. Larsen falsely claimed otherwise.
“As most insurance is covered by private employers, something you should know if you're also going to cite poll results as gospel, the Healthcare bill won't change anything for them.”
Not true. It will likely make rates go up, and definitely force compliance with government-mandated rate windows; it will change what services our plans offer (in some cases for the worse); and so on.