Podcasts about transportation committee

On the latest episode of the Conduit Street Podcast, Kevin Kinnally and Michael Sanderson are joined by Chair of the House Environment and Transportation Committee, Delegate Marc Korman, for a deep dive into the inner workings of legislative committees in the Maryland General Assembly — how they function, why they matter, and what changes when one takes on the role of chair.In addition to unpacking the committee process, the discussion covers Delegate Korman's move from the House Appropriations Committee to lead one of the legislature's most policy-focused panels. Topics include pivotal local issues like housing production, land use challenges, and long-term transportation funding. The conversation also explores strategies to bolster Maryland's transportation network, including restoring Highway User Revenues, investing in transit, and examining the potential role of regional transportation authorities.Plus, a nod to Delegate Korman's well-known Metro fandom — and how his deep knowledge of trains and transit fuels serious work on regional mobility and transportation policy.Follow us on Socials!MACo on TwitterMACo on Facebook

Many frustrated by the perceived lack of understanding of our nation's maritime heritage requirements want new leaders with fresh ideas, unburdened by legacy entanglements. It is hoped that a younger cohort with military experience, preferably naval, in the House of Representatives and the Senate who bring to the job an additional background in business and industry will emerge to promote constructive change.Today's guest fits the bill perfectly: the new Senator from Montana, Senator Tim Sheehy.Tim Sheehy is a father, husband, combat veteran, patriot, and an entrepreneur. A graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy class of 2008 with a B.S. in History, Tim completed several deployments and hundreds of missions as a US Navy SEAL Officer and Team Leader, deploying to Iraq, Afghanistan, South America, and the Pacific region. Tim was honored to serve alongside many American heroes and was involved in dozens of engagements with enemy forces, earning him multiple combat decorations. Additionally, Tim completed a joint tour with Army Special Operations forces where he was privileged to complete US Army Ranger School and serve alongside the 5th Special Forces Group, 75th Ranger Regiment and other units within US Army Special Operations Command.Tim completed his active duty service as a mini submarine pilot and navigator specializing in sensitive undersea operations. After his active duty service, Tim fulfilled reserve duty as a recruiter and assessor for future naval officers. Tim was honorably discharged from the Naval Reserve in 2019.In 2014, Tim founded Belgrade-based Bridger Aerospace with all of his savings and an all-veteran team. Under his leadership, Bridger Aerospace and its sister company, Ascent Vision Technologies experienced rapid growth and created hundreds of Montana jobs. Ascent Vision Technologies was acquired by CACI in 2020, and Bridger Aerospace went public on the NASDAQ in 2023.Tim sits on the Senate Armed Services, Veterans' Affairs, and Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.SummaryIn this conversation, Senator Tim Sheehy discusses his journey from Naval Academy graduate to U.S. Senator, emphasizing the need for a new generation of leaders in the maritime domain. He highlights the importance of revitalizing the Navy, addressing challenges in shipbuilding, and fostering bipartisan support for maritime strength. The discussion also touches on the need for innovation in naval strategy and acquisition processes, advocating for a shift in mindset towards risk-taking and adaptability in the face of modern challenges.Show LinksOperation Red WingsSix FrigatesThe Fall of KabulTakeawaysTim shares his journey from the Naval Academy to the Senate.The importance of revitalizing the Navy is highlighted.Challenges in shipbuilding and acquisition processes are discussed.Bipartisan support for maritime strength is crucial.Innovation in naval strategy is necessary for future readiness.Quantity in naval assets is as important as quality.A new shipbuilding paradigm is needed to meet modern demands.Risk-taking should be encouraged in military leadership.The Navy's historical context is essential for understanding current challenges.Chapters00:00: Introduction to Maritime Challenges and New Perspectives12:47: Senator Tim Sheehy's Journey: From Navy to Politics18:44: Revitalizing the Navy: Challenges and Opportunities24:37: Acquisition Paradigms and the Future of Naval Strategy

This week, host Ryan Coonerty talks with Connecticut State Senator Christine Cohen. Cohen is a small business owner turned legislator who previously served on her local school board before running for the state senate following the first election of President Trump. In Hartford, she draws on her experiences as the owner of Cohen's Bagel Company  to guide her leadership on various legislative committees, including the Finance, Revenue, and Bonding Committee and the Environment Committee, and now as the Co-Chair of the Transportation Committee. Her impressive record of legislative success includes leading the passage of the Connecticut Clean Air Act, enacting legislation to prevent wrong-way crashes, and securing funding for mental health crisis intervention programs for law enforcement officers. Ryan and Senator Cohen discuss the misconception that Democrats are “anti--business” and how she's pushed back on this by forwarding a pro-business agenda, including crucial work on paid leave. They also talk about the challenges of working in the state legislature at a time when hyper-partisan rhetoric dominates conversations and distracts from serving the people. Tune in to hear Senator Cohen's advice for policymakers who want to focus on solutions and support small businesses in these uncertain economic times.   IN THIS EPISODE:  • [01:04] Podcast producer, Rachel, introduces this episode where Ryan Coonerty interviews Senator Christine Cohen. • [02:03] Senator Cohen's journey from Cohen's Bagel Co to the state senate. • [05:45] Transferrable skills and areas of focus between small business and local government. • [09:02] How Senator Cohen believes the Democratic Party can better support small business owners. • [11:06] Paid family medical leave and her work on the Environment Committee and the Connecticut Clean Air Act. • [15:02] How Connecticut's transportation policy has been affected by the Trump administration. • [19:40] Her state's leadership is working to reduce harm and the value of a bipartisan approach. • [24:02] Mental health support for vulnerable communities and how Senator Cohen has created an impact. • [28:11] What drives Senator Cohen as she moves forward in government.

Health & Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. announces a reorganization and downsizing of his department, calling the current setup a “sprawling bureaucracy; President Donald Trump & Attorney General Pam Bondi announce the arrest in Virginia of a top leader of the MS-13 gang, who they say is an undocumented immigrant from El Salvador; Secretary of State Marco Rubio is asked about a Tufts University graduate student from Turkey in the U.S. with a student visa who was detained in Boston for allegedly for supporting Hamas; President Trump withdraws the nomination of Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) for U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations over concerns about the super-thin House Republican majority and the need for every vote in upcoming legislative battles; President Trump's announcement a 25 percent tariff on imported cars and auto parts is being criticized by virtually every foreign leader. We will talk about it with Brett Samuels. (38) The Hill's White House report; Senate Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee holds a hearing on the investigation of the midair deadly collision near Reagan National Airport between a commercial plane and Army helicopter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), member of the Commerce, Science, & Transportation Committee, Judiciary Committee, Veterans' Affairs Committee, and Armed Services Committee and author of The Mind of a Conservative Woman: Seeking the Best for Family and Country, joined The Guy Benson Show to respond to the recent Signal group chat leak involving top Trump officials. Sen. Blackburn and Guy also discussed her new resolution denouncing domestic terror attacks targeting Tesla owners and dealerships. Blackburn praised the strong work of ICE Boston in arresting violent illegal criminals, including members of gangs like TDA, and called for an end to national injunctions by district judges, arguing they undermine the will of the American people. She also condemned Rep. Jasmine Crockett's vile remark referring to Texas Governor Greg Abbott as "hot wheels" due to his disability. Listen to the full interview below! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On episode 102 of Lunch with Leon, Leon meets Shravan Joshi MBE, Chair of the Planning and Transportation Committee for the City of London, to discuss key transport priorities for the Square Mile, from the successful pedestrianisation of Bank Junction, to the evolution of the vibrant seven-day city ecosystem. The two transport leaders also discuss significant planned office developments in the Eastern cluster, the challenges of creating a sustainable, affordable transportation environment for a young workforce, and the importance of making London a destination of choice for SMEs to grow beyond IPO. 

Join America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio co-hosts Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy with U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn, senior senator for Tennessee and the first woman to represent the Volunteer State in the United States Senate. She serves on the Deputy Whip Team and is a member of the Finance Committee; the Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee; the Veterans' Affairs Committee; and the Judiciary Committee. Senator Marsha Blackburn serves as the Ranking Member on the Commerce Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Data Security and on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law. Before her election to the Senate, Marsha represented Tennessee's 7th Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives. The conversation focuses on the following topics: ✅ President Trump's State of the Union Address, presenting his vision for a Golden Age of America. ✅ Senator Blackburn requiring transparency and accountability, working with FBI Director Kash Patel in obtaining unredacted Epstein logs and other pertinent materials ✅ Senator Blackburn spearheading DOGE Acts to hold the federal government accountable for managing taxpayer dollars. Collaborative efforts with Elon Mask in making the federal government more efficient and slash wasteful spending. ✅ Strengthening the economic partnership between the U.S. and Taiwan. ✅ Senator Blackburn's recently introduced Tax Administration Simplification Act, to provide straightforward, taxpayer-focused improvements to streamline tax filing and payment for individuals and small businesses. ✅ Strengthening US-Israel ties and combating anti-Semitism with new leadership in Congress and the White House. ✅ Making America Healthy Again | Healthy foods and eating habits for a healthier America. Throughout her time in Congress, Marsha has led the fight to hold Communist China accountable. Her in-depth analyses of the Chinese Communist Party's threats to American sovereignty have prompted Congress to examine legislation countering Beijing's malign influence on global supply chains, technology infrastructure, and international organizations. After Beijing took over the once autonomous region of Hong Kong in 2019, Marsha led bipartisan legislation, which was signed into law by President Trump, that prohibits the U.S. export of crowd control equipment to the Hong Kong Police Force. Her bipartisan Open Technology Fund Authorization Act, which supports internet freedom by addressing authoritarian regimes' efforts to censor the internet, was also signed into law. At the same time Marsha has stood up to Communist China, she has worked to bolster the U.S.-Taiwan relationship. In August 2022, she visited Taiwan, met with President Tsai Ing-wen in Taipei, and called to strengthen connections between the U.S. and Taiwan. During this visit, Marsha made her stance clear: Taiwan is a country. On border policy, Marsha bases her approach on the simple truth that until our borders are secure, every town will be a border town and every state will be a border state. In the Senate, she has led the charge to fully fund the United States Border Patrol, restart construction of a physical barrier, impose harsher criminal penalties for drug smuggling, and fight for law and order on behalf of the thousands of women and girls lost to cross-border human trafficking. Further reading: Blackburn, Hassan, Colleagues Introduce the “Patients Before Middlemen Act” to Bring Down Cost of Prescription Drugs (https://www.blackburn.senate.gov/2025/3/health%20care/blackburn-hassan-colleagues-introduce-the-patients-before-middlemen-act-to-bring-down-cost-of-prescription-drugs) Blackburn, Kelly Push for More Federal Resources to Combat Fentanyl Crisis in Tennessee (https://www.blackburn.senate.gov/2025/2/crime/national%20security/blackburn-kelly-pushes-for-more-federal-resources-to-combat-fentanyl-crisis-in-arizona) Blackburn, Schatz Introduce Bill to Strengthen U.S.-Taiwan Partnership, Safeguard U.S. from Communist China's Security Threats (https://www.blackburn.senate.gov/2025/2/china/jobs%20and%20economy/national%20security/blackburn-schatz-introduce-bill-to-strengthen-u-s-taiwan-partnership-safeguard-u-s-from-communist-china-s-security-threats) americasrt.com (https://americasrt.com/) https://ileaderssummit.org/ | https://jerusalemleaderssummit.com/ America's Roundtable on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/americas-roundtable/id1518878472 Twitter: @MarshaBlackburn @ileaderssummit @NatashaSrdoc @JoelAnandUSA @supertalk America's Roundtable is co-hosted by Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy, co-founders of International Leaders Summit and the Jerusalem Leaders Summit. America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio program - a strategic initiative of International Leaders Summit, focuses on America's economy, healthcare reform, rule of law, security and trade, and its strategic partnership with rule of law nations around the world. The radio program features high-ranking US administration officials, cabinet members, members of Congress, state government officials, distinguished diplomats, business and media leaders and influential thinkers from around the world. Tune into America's Roundtable Radio program from Washington, DC via live streaming on Saturday mornings via 65 radio stations at 7:30 A.M. (ET) on Lanser Broadcasting Corporation covering the Michigan and the Midwest market, and at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk Mississippi — SuperTalk.FM reaching listeners in every county within the State of Mississippi, and neighboring states in the South including Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee. Listen to America's Roundtable on digital platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, Google and other key online platforms. Listen live, Saturdays at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk | https://www.supertalk.fm

Matthew Pearl, director of the CSIS Strategic Technologies Program, joins the podcast to discuss all things spectrum, including his recent testimony before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee on spectrum policy, how spectrum impacts our national security, actions that Congress and the administration can take to restore U.S spectrum leadership, spectrum's impact on AI innovation, and more. Read or watch Matthew Pearl's recent congressional testimony on spectrum: https://www.csis.org/analysis/how-spectrum-auction-delays-give-china-edge-and-cost-us-jobs

Republican State Senator Tony Hwang of Fairfield runs down a number of issues, including drunk driving and road rage, that the Transportation Committee is considering in the 2025 Legislative Session.

In this episode of Transit Unplugged, Paul Comfort interviews Ryan Murphy, the Chair of the City Council's Transportation Committee in Brisbane, while riding one of Brisbane's famous CityCat ferries to talk about the vibrant and evolving transit system in this river city.Episode Highlights:CityCat Ferries: Discover the unique CityCat ferry service that operates along the Brisbane River, connecting 22 stations and carrying about 5 million passengers annually. Ryan shares how this service has become a beloved part of the city's tourism and commuter landscape.Innovative Metro Project: Learn about the groundbreaking Brisbane Metro project, featuring double articulated electric buses designed to alleviate congestion and enhance the capacity of the city's busway system. Ryan discusses the integration of these high-tech vehicles and their role in transforming Brisbane's public transport.Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): Ryan explains how Brisbane's extensive bus network, supported by dedicated busways, serves as the backbone of the city's transit system. He highlights the city's efforts to improve bus-to-rail connections and the significant reforms underway ahead of the 2032 Olympics.Historical and Future Growth: From its origins as a port city to its current status as a bustling metropolis, Brisbane's transit system has continually evolved. Ryan provides insights into the city's plans for future growth, including the Cross River Rail project and the ambitious goals set for the upcoming Olympics.And don't forget to catch Ryan, the city of Brisbane, and all the projects he talked about in the latest episode of Transit Unplugged TV on YouTube: https://youtu.be/M04d9d-xpzkHave your say in the Transit Unplugged listener survey! It only takes a few minutes and we greatly appreciate your help and feedback. https://transitunplugged.com/survey/00:00 Introduction to Ryan Murphy and Brisbane's Transport 00:38 Exploring Brisbane's Ferry System05:14 Brisbane's Bus Network and BRT System07:38 Personal Message from Paul...08:17 Brisbane Metro: The Future of Public Transport12:12 Rail Developments and the 2032 Olympics15:06 Ryan Murphy's Background and Vision16:21 Australia's Public Transport Priorities17:59 Coming up next week on Transit UnpluggedTransit Unplugged is brought to you by Modaxo https://www.modaxo.comHost: Paul ComfortProducer: Paul ComfortEditor and Writer: Tris HusseyExecutive Producer: Julie GatesSpecial thanks to:Brand design: Tina OlagundoyeSocial Media: Tatyana MechkarovaMarketing content, Transit Unplugged Newsletter, & transit puns: Tris HusseyIf you have a question or comment, email us at info@transitunplugged.com.Follow us on social media: LinkedIn - Twitter - Threads- Instagram - FacebookSign up for the...

In this special episode of Transit Unplugged, Paul Comfort and co-host Kelly Chapman highlight the inspiring stories of four remarkable women leaders in Australian public transport. This is the third of five episodes coming from Paul's recent 10-day tour of Australia. Don't forget to also check out Transit Unplugged TV on YouTube for the TV episodes as well.First, we hear from Lauren Streifer, Executive Director of the Public Transport Association of Australia and New Zealand (PTAANZ). Lauren's infectious energy and passion for public transport shine through as she discusses her ambitious goals for the industry, including her efforts to promote sustainability.Next, Jamie-Lee Owen, Chair of PTAANZ's Emerging Mobility Leaders, shares her dedication to championing young professionals in the industry, emphasizing the importance of diversity and mentorship in shaping the future of public transport.Katie Cooper, CEO of Metro Tasmania, brings a wealth of experience from her background in aviation to her current role, where she is leading innovative zero-emission bus trials. Katie's commitment to integrating her aviation expertise into public transport operations is truly inspiring. Finally, Michelle Batsas, Executive Director of Government and Stakeholder Relations at Yarra Trams, discusses her new role and her lifelong passion for trams. Michelle, who was recently awarded the Women in STEM award for mentoring, continues to advocate for female representation in the industry, highlighting the importance of diversity and inclusion at all levels.Tune in to hear these powerful stories and learn about the incredible work being done to promote women in public transport in Australia.Coming up next week we have the final episode from Australian with a special tie-in to the current episode of Transit Unplugged TV from Brisbane. Brisbane City Councillor Ryan Murphy tells Paul all about Brisbane's ferry system, light rail, and how his role as Chair of the Transportation Committee helps promote and support transit throughout the city.00:00 Introduction and Overview of the Episode01:03 Highlighting Women Leaders in Australian Transport06:15 Lauren Streifer CEO, PTAANZ07:20 Jamie-Lee Owen, Chair, PTAANZ Emerging Mobility Leaders10:31 Katie Cooper CEO, Metro Tasmania 14:35 Michelle Batsas, Executive Director of Government and Stakeholder Relations, Yarra Trams36:22 Conclusion and Upcoming Episodes38:19 Coming up next week on Transit UnpluggedTransit Unplugged is brought to you by Modaxo https://www.modaxo.comHost: Paul ComfortProducer: Paul ComfortEditor and Writer: Tris HusseyExecutive Producer: Julie GatesSpecial thanks to:Brand design: Tina OlagundoyeSocial Media: Tatyana MechkarovaMarketing content, Transit Unplugged Newsletter, & transit puns: Tris HusseyIf you have a question or comment, email us at info@transitunplugged.com.Follow us on social media: LinkedIn - Twitter - Threads- Instagram - FacebookSign up for the Transit...

State Senator Charles "Chuck" Younger joined The Extra Mile Podcast: Legislative Session to talk about how he got into politics, his new role as Senate Highways and Transportation Chairman, transportation funding and more.Show intro / introducing State Senator Charles "Chuck" Younger – 00:35How Chairman Younger got involved in politics – 03:34Younger as new chairman of Senate Highways and Transportation Committee – 04:35Things to look for in legislative session – 06:00Some Senate Districts to be redrawn – 10:10Favorite place(s) to eat – 14:20Favorite music/concert(s) – 17:11Show Outro – 18:15

Producer and director Julia Thompson takes on a 48-hour challenge to track down and interview someone who witnessed the iconic September 19, 1985 Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing where Twisted Sister's Dee Snider, Frank Zappa, and John Denver defended their lyrics before Congress and the PMRC. This episode features interviews with: Larry Stein Mark Weiss Chuck Eddie Kembrew McLeod  CREDITS 'You Had To Be There' is a Hi Barr production. Created by Hi Barr. 'Parental Advisory: Frank Zappa, John Denver, & Dee Snider vs. the PMRC' was written and hosted by Julia Thompson. Produced by Julia Thompson and Web Barr. Edited by Julia Thompson. Edit, Sound Mix, and engineering by Vishal Nayak. Original score by Teeny Lieberson.   Artwork created by Dylan Lathrop. Special thanks to our parents, friends and chosen family. And most importantly, thank you to the artists who've inspired us because they had to do it. WANT MORE FROM HI BARR?! Sign up to receive our newsletter. Follow us on Instagram and YouTube. For business inquiries, please email: contact@hibarrmedia.com. Were you at one of the events covered on the show? If so, we'd love to talk! Please get in touch via email and/or social media channels like Instagram or X. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sam Graves will remain chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and that has big implications for a number of trucking issues. Also, what are traffic ticket services, how do these membership-style clubs work and how do you make sure they get the job done? Road Law explains. And a so-called truck-eating bridge dubbed the Can Opener that's located in Delaware, Ohio, is showing up on Google Maps as a historic site. 0:00 – Newscast 10:06 – The truth behind traffic ticket services 25:00 – Truck-eating bridge gets historic status on Google 39:51 – Graves may accelerate issues like truck parking

What does Rep. Sam Graves' return as chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee mean for major trucking issues? Also, brokers are among the most infuriating problems truckers deal with – and that includes their lack of transparency. Then, from a trucking company that helped a trucker in need to a court that made a bad decision on tolls, we'll offer up some Roses and Razzberries. And a California lawmaker is taking aim at CARB's recent updates to its low-carbon fuel standard – something that will increase the price of fuel. 0:00 – What trucking issues will Sam Graves put first? 10:06 – OOIDA makes big push on broker transparency 25:00 – Roses and Razzberries 39:51 – Lawmaker plans to fight CARB fuel standard

This week we dive into the topic of accessible travel as Rob, Ryan, Lis and Steve welcome Robin East, Vice Chair of Independent Living Canada and Co-Chair of the Transportation Committee at Council of Canadians with Disabilities to the show. We discuss a recent incident involving a deaf woman with a service dog being removed from a Porter Airlines flight and highlight systemic issues in airline treatment of service animals, emphasizing the need for better training and enforcement and brainstorm possible solutions including increased public awareness, media attention, and potential class-action lawsuits. Show Transcript https://atbanter.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/at-banter-podcast-episode-407-robin-east.pdf Show Notes Council of Canadians With Disabilities http://www.ccdonline.ca/en/ Independent Living Canada https://www.ilc-vac.ca/ Porter breaks its own rules by kicking deaf woman and her service dog off a flight https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/porter-airlines-deaf-service-dog-1.7363838 AT Banter is brought to you by Canadian Assistive Technology, providing sales and training in Assistive Technology and Accessibility with over 30 years of knowledge and experience. Visit them online at www.canasstech.com or call toll-free 1-844-795-8324 or visit their Assistive Technology Showroom at 106 – 828 West 8th Avenue, Vancouver. Need repairs on your device? Chaos Technical Services offers service and support on almost any piece of Assistive Technology, while also providing parts and batteries. Visit them online at www.chaostechnicalservices.com or call 778-847-6840.

Join America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio co-hosts Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy with U.S. Senator Marsha Blackburn, member of the Finance Committee; the Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee; the Veterans' Affairs Committee; and the Judiciary Committee. America's Roundtable discussion with Senator Marsha Blackburn covers the following key topics: The urgency to address tax reform in America. Will Congress make permanent the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) set to expire in Dec. 2025? If there is a delay, how will the expiration of the TCJA impact America's middle class, entrepreneurs and small business leaders across the nation? Senator Blackburn shares how she and Vivek Ramaswamy have been working over the past few months in tandem with Elon Musk on advancing government reforms. The business leaders have been tasked by President-elect Donald Trump to "slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures” and restructure federal agencies through the newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Sen. Blackburn just unveiled her “DOGE Acts” to cut spending and freeze federal hiring, as well as salaries. As America faces an illegal immigration crisis, Senator Marsha Blackburn's leadership is vital. Senator Blackburn's introduced the CLEAR Act — Clear Law Enforcement for criminal Alien Removal Act of 2024. Find out about the details on how it will enhance Federal, State and local assistance level to enforce immigration laws, to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, to authorize appropriations to carry out the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, and for other purposes. Listen to Senator Blackburn response regarding International Criminal Court's decision to issue a warrant to arrest Israel leaders including the Jewish state's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. You can listen to US Senator Blackburn's conversation with Vivek Ramaswamy on her podcast - UNMUTED (https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/department-of-government-efficiency-doge-with/id1736996395?i=1000678201961) - and watch the video via You Tube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3Mou5Nl4C0). Further reading: The Hill | Blackburn unveils ‘DOGE Acts' to cut spending, freeze federal hiring and salaries (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5025294-blackburn-doge-acts-spending-cuts/) Fox News | Border security Blackburn moves to allow local law enforcement to capture, help deport illegal immigrants (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/blackburn-moves-allow-local-law-enforcement-capture-deport-illegal-immigrants) Marsha Blackburn Introduces Bill Empowering Local Law Enforcement To Help Federal Government Deport Criminal Illegal Immigrants (https://www.clarksvilleonline.com/2024/03/07/marsha-blackburn-introduces-bill-empowering-local-law-enforcement-to-help-federal-government-deport-criminal-illegal-immigrants/) americasrt.com (https://americasrt.com/) https://ileaderssummit.org/ | https://jerusalemleaderssummit.com/ America's Roundtable on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/americas-roundtable/id1518878472 Twitter: @MarshaBlackburn @ileaderssummit @NatashaSrdoc @JoelAnandUSA @supertalk America's Roundtable is co-hosted by Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy, co-founders of International Leaders Summit and the Jerusalem Leaders Summit. America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio program - a strategic initiative of International Leaders Summit, focuses on America's economy, healthcare reform, rule of law, security and trade, and its strategic partnership with rule of law nations around the world. The radio program features high-ranking US administration officials, cabinet members, members of Congress, state government officials, distinguished diplomats, business and media leaders and influential thinkers from around the world. Tune into America's Roundtable Radio program from Washington, DC via live streaming on Saturday mornings via 65 radio stations at 7:30 A.M. (ET) on Lanser Broadcasting Corporation covering the Michigan and the Midwest market, and at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk Mississippi — SuperTalk.FM reaching listeners in every county within the State of Mississippi, and neighboring states in the South including Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee. Listen to America's Roundtable on digital platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, Google and other key online platforms. Listen live, Saturdays at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk | https://www.supertalk.fm

Brian McGrory, head of BU Journalism, discusses Trump's behavior at his latest string of rallies, and the lack of public information available on the death of the State Police recruit.Then we open the phone and text lines to get your election thoughts two weeks until election day. Charlie Sennott, founder of The GroundTruth Project, discusses the killing of Yahya Sinwar and what it means for conflict in the Middle East.Chris Dempsey of Speck Dempsey urban planning & Rep. William Straus, outgoing chair of the legislature's Transportation Committee, discuss transit-oriented headlines on derailments, rail links, congestion studies, and e-bike injuries.For our text question of the day: after decades of ruling the NFL, how have you adjusted to the Patriot's fall from grace?Khalil Gibran Muhammad, professor of History Race and Public Policy at Harvard, discusses the school's decision to ban more than 12 students from the library over a silent "study-in" anti-war protest in objection over Israel's military actions in the Middle East — and the professors who demonstrated in their defense.Almost a fifth of workers in Boston skip their lunch breaks altogether. Are you someone who respects the sacred work lunch break, or are you shoveling food while on the job?

The mission of the Maryland Public Service Commission is to ensure safe, reliable, and economic public utility and transportation service to the citizens of Maryland. Today's guests are Chair Frederick Hoover and Commissioner Kumar Barve. Frederick H. Hoover was appointed Chair of the Maryland Public Service Commission by Governor Wes Moore for a five-year term beginning on July 1, 2023. He most recently served as Assistant People's Counsel in the Maryland Office of People's Counsel, representing residential consumers of public utilities, retail energy suppliers and other entities before the Maryland Public Service Commission, courts and federal agencies. Chair Hoover served for more than seven years as director of the Maryland Energy Administration, responsible for coordinating energy policy for the state of Maryland. He subsequently held positions as director of both MEA's Division of Energy Programs and Division of Renewable Energy. He is a former senior director of the National Association of State Energy Officials, where he directed the electricity policy program including the fuel and grid aspects of both transmission and distribution networks including modernization, renewable energy, and energy efficiency. Kumar P. Barve was appointed to the Maryland Public Service Commission in May 2023 by Governor Wes Moore, to fill out a term ending in June 2024. He was later appointed to a new five-year term to begin July 1, 2024. Prior to his appointment, he had served in the Maryland House of Delegates since 1991, holding leadership roles including Chair of the Environment and Transportation Committee, Majority Leader, and Chair of the Montgomery County House delegation. While in the General Assembly he worked on issues including environmental regulation, energy generation and conservation, and greenhouse gas reduction. Notably, he was the first Indian-American in the country to be elected to a state legislature. Show Notes: [2:31] - The mandate of the Public Service Commission is to maintain reliable, safe, affordable, essential utility services to all customers and oversee the impact. [4:43] - Chair Hoover and Commissioner Barve describe how the Maryland Brighter Tomorrow Act aligns with the state's overall energy goals. [9:27] - The energy generation mix is a large complicated process. [12:40] - There's a greater use of digital products to control energy usage in the home. Homes have become more efficient. [13:55] - Eventually there will be a situation where houses, buildings, and cars will be building, storing, and using energy simultaneously. [14:40] - The United States is currently re-industrializing. [17:58] - It is part of their responsibility to ensure that the investments that are made by the utility company are made across their distribution system. [19:27] - Commissioner Barve describes the efforts made and the state's legislature to aid low and moderate income individuals in Maryland. [20:30] - Utility companies do not make money off of selling electricity. [22:38] - Chair Hoover shares the feedback they receive when engaging with utility companies as it pertains to renewable energy. [24:24] - This is an open and transparent process. [26:40] - How have prices evolved over the last decade and where are they trending? [29:55] - Both Chair and Commissioner share what excites them about the work they do. [32:14] - Both share advice to those who are entering the industry. Links and Resources: Maryland Public Service Commission Website

Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), senator from Tennessee, member of the Commerce, Science, & Transportation Committee, Judiciary Committee, Veterans' Affairs Committee & Armed Services Committee, and author of The Mind of a Conservative Woman: Seeking the Best for Family and Country, to discuss the Republican party platform that she helped construct ahead of the RNC next week. Blackburn and Benson discuss some of the criticisms of the platform, like abortion and entitlements, and you can listen to the full interview below. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Yesterday, the HEALTH CARE un-covered Newsletter arrived in my inbox, sporting the headline "Fifteen Years Ago Today I Became a Whistleblower". It was from Wendell Potter who remains a hero to all of us in the US, whether you know it or not. I was fortunate to first interview Wendell on Air America Radio in August of 2009, just two months after he testified before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, pulling back the curtain from around the industry for which he carried water and covered up unethical practices. A few months later, he would testify before the House and became the most important voice for the masses, just as then president Obama was helping to push through the first health care industry reforms in decades. Fifteen years ago. And though things are better for us mere mortals who will, at some point, need medical care, we're still fighting nefarious forces in the health insurance and so-called health care industries as well as in government. And Wendell continues to fight for us. Wendell Potter has been a frequent guest on this program since that first appearance 15 years ago and I'm proud to consider him a friend. I invited him back to today to talk about the problems we're still faced with and to thank him, again, for standing up for us. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/nicolesandler/message

On this week's special episode of Navigating Major Programmes Riccardo Cossentino shares a conversation from his other podcast, A WINning Perspective: The WIN Canada Podcast. Riccardo sits down with three nominees of The Women's Infrastructure Network (WIN) Canada WIN Awards: Divya Shah, Tamara Vrooman, and Kimberly Doran.Despite working in senior roles in a male-dominated industry not designed for them, the panelists have achieved success and professional recognition. They share valuable insights and advice for transforming the industry from dry to progressive, and pose the question: Is it a dumb question or the next revolution in the industry? Along with expanding professional networks and securing sponsorships, these three leaders in major programmes share their hopes and actionables for women, and allies, in the industry.“We're just talking about infrastructure, which is about design and about building things and about the future. Yet, we really need to design our organizations for that future. And what I find is a lot of the time we're trying to put women into roles that were not designed for us…We have to change the way that we design our organizations so that they're fit for the purpose that we want them to serve, which is to get more diverse people, including women into leadership roles, particularly in an area like infrastructure.” — Tamara Vrooman Key Takeaways:The hesitancy of failing, the importance of taking risks as a woman in megaprojectsHow do we empower women to get into decision-making roles; rewriting roles designed for men  Taking mentorship further with sponsorship Divya Shah is the Managing Director at the Canada Infrastructure Bank, leading investments in trade, transportation, and critical minerals. With 18 years in project finance, Divya shapes investment strategies, oversees business development, and manages financial structuring to asset management. She began her career at Infrastructure Ontario during its early days of public-private partnerships, marking her start in transformative infrastructure projects. Tamara Vrooman serves as the President and CEO of Vancouver International Airport, the second-largest international airport in Canada and home to the largest building in British Columbia. With a rich background in banking and finance, Tamara has financed numerous public and private infrastructure projects. Her extensive experience includes roles as the Chair of the Canada Infrastructure Bank board and Deputy Minister of Finance for British Columbia, overseeing Partnerships BC. Kimberly Doran is the Vice President and Geotechnical Practice Lead at AtkinsRéalis. As a passionate advocate for gender parity, she co-founded and chairs the ExcELLEnce Employee Resource Group, dedicated to promoting a diverse and inclusive culture. Outside of her corporate responsibilities, Kimberly is deeply involved in her field, serving as the Finance Director for the Regina Geotechnical Group and participating in the Transportation Committee of the Saskatchewan Association of Consulting Engineers (ACEC-SK). If you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating and leave us a review on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser or Castbox. The conversation doesn't stop here—connect and converse with our LinkedIn community: Follow Divya Shah on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/divya-shah-cfa-4a116b3/Follow Tamara Vrooman on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/tamara-vrooman-1044b425a/Follow Kimberly Doran on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/kimberly-doran-32888196/Follow Navigating Major Programmes on LinkedInFollow Riccardo Cosentino on LinkedInRead Riccardo's latest at wwww.riccardocosentino.com   Music: "A New Tomorrow" by Chordial Music. Licensed through PremiumBeat.DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the hosts and guests on this podcast do not necessarily represent or reflect the official policy, opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of Disenyo.co LLC and its employees.

Senator John Thune, Senator from South Dakota, and member of the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, and the Finance Committee, joined the Guy Benson Show today to discuss the latest on President Biden's failed border policies. Sen. Thune and Benson also discuss November and why Sen. Thune says that polls are looking good for Republicans as election season approaches. Listen to the full interview below! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Beach Pace has spent her career building strong, efficient teams and collaboratively overcoming challenges to serve the community she loves. First elected to Hillsboro City Council in 2018, Beach is currently serving her second term as City Councilor. As Councilor, she has championed diversity, equity & inclusion (DEI), affordable housing, transportation solutions, COVID-19 response, support of small businesses, expansion of job opportunities, and market rate housing. She also serves on the Budget Committee, the Transportation Committee, the 2035 Committee, the Westside Modal Improvements Study Steering Committee, and the Council Creek Regional Trail Committee. In addition, Beach served as a board member of the League of Oregon Cities for three years and is a founding board alumna of the Westside Queer Resource Center.  Beach found her calling in the social change (nonprofit) sector and currently serves as the Chief Executive Officer of Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Columbia Northwest. Her previous experience includes Vice President of Road Trip Nation and service as Vice President and Executive Director of City Year San Jose/Silicon Valley. Before transitioning to nonprofit work, Beach led sales and marketing teams in the public sector.  Beach learned to lead at the United States Military Academy at West Point, where she earned her Bachelor of Science and began her seven-year career with the U.S. Army. There, she served in Explosive Ordnance Disposal as Executive Officer and Commander within the Ordnance branch. Beach also earned her Master of Public Administration from Northern Michigan University.  Beach always finds time for her wife of more than twenty years, Jincy, their two teenage children, and her mother-in-law. Beach boasts her spaghetti-making skills, loves to walk trails in Hillsboro, and she is never too busy to find the fun and positive in everything she does. https://electbeachpace.com City of Hillsboro

Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), member of the Commerce, Science, & Transportation Committee, Judiciary Committee, Veterans' Affairs Committee & Armed Services Committee and author of The Mind of a Conservative Woman: Seeking the Best for Family and Country, joined the Guy Benson Show today to discuss the state of the economy and Bidenomics. Biden continues to tout his strong economy while many Americans continue to feel the squeeze of inflation, and Benson and Blackburn discuss. The pair also discuss the latest on the southern border as the DHS has still not commented on the two alleged Jordanian nationals attempting to enter Quantico Military Base. Listen to the full interview below. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

May 6th was going to be the date that Astronauts Butch Wilmore and Sunni Williams were going to take the Boeing CST 100 Starliner spacecraft to the International Space Station for the first time with astronauts on board. Starliner has undergone a rather stormy development period and is several years behind schedule as a result but NASA, Boeing, and United Launch Alliance (ULA) teams after the earlier flight readiness review were confident that the spacecraft was ready for crewed flight. The mission also marked the first time since Leroy Gordon Cooper's Mercury-Atlas 9 on May 15th, 1963, that a human was going to ride to orbit on the “shoulders” of an Atlas launch vehicle. Even the weather for the attempt on May 6th was 95 percent “go.” Unfortunately, the May 6th date was not to be. A cranky valve on board the Second Stage (Centaur Stage) of the ULA Atlas V kept Starliner on the ground. We explore what exactly happened, put the event in context, and gauge public reaction on various social media outlets. We also take a look at a rather explosive claim from a New York-based NASA contractor, ValveTech, about the component in question and debunk the Company's claims. If you live in North America, did you catch the aurora this past weekend? A Class 4 Geomagnetic storm was the cause, the first Class 4 solar storm warning issued by NOAA since 2005. NOAA called a press conference about potential impacts on Friday, May 10th, calling the event “potentially historic.” What were the impacts here on Earth or did it pose issues for the International Space Station? We discuss. The  US Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee approved the FAA Reauthorization Act which extends the period where the FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) would be limited from regulating the safety of commercial human spaceflight, more commonly known as the “learning period.” Also, the FAA announced public meetings to occur next month to get public comments on an Environmental Impact Study on allowing Starship Super Heavy launches from NASA's Launch Complex 39A. All comments should be submitted by one of the methods listed under "ADDRESSES" in the linked document no later than June 24, 2024. We examine both stories. Tokyo's Astroscale announced that it had conducted the first rendezvous with a spent rocket upper stage in Earth Orbit. The idea is to understand how such an object behaves as a prelude to determining how to dispose of such an object properly. We take a brief look at their plans. All this and more in this edition of Talking Space! Please be sure to let us know your thoughts on the topics we discuss. You can always reach us at mailbag@TalkingSpaceOnline.com. You now also have a way to easily send us a voice recording that we may use on the show: just click on the blue microphone icon at the bottom right of any page at TalkingSpaceOnline.com. Show recorded 05-12-2024. Host: Larry Herrin Panelist(s):  Gene Mikulka, Heather Smith (Mark  Ratterman, Dr. Kat Robison and Sawyer Rosenstein will return) Podcast Editor: Larry Herrin Space Debris – website photo credit: Astroscale  Aurora Borealis -- website photo credit: Dr. Kat Robison NOTE: As of the recording date of the episode, the next launch attempt for Starliner was May 17th. That has since been changed. Due to a stubborn helium tank system leak, the latest date: NET May 25th at 3:09 PM EDT (1909 UTC). This new date is tentative as of this writing, and is subject to change.  

Rep. Bill Straus, the longtime chair of the legislative Joint Committee on Transportation joins Radio Boston.

In this episode of What's What BR, Brandon interviews returning guest Congressman Garret Graves, discussing the progress and details of a significant bill related to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The bill, aimed at improving the passenger experience and incorporating new technology in aviation, has passed the House of Representatives with strong bipartisan support. They also delve into broader topics such as transportation infrastructure, energy policy, the impact of energy costs on the economy, and the potential for American innovation in solving contemporary energy and transportation challenges. Furthermore, the conversation touches on Graves' potential role in the Transportation Committee, ongoing efforts in coastal restoration, flood protection, and the imperative of a balanced approach to energy that supports both economic growth and environmental sustainability.   00:00 Welcome and Introduction 00:25 The Heat of Louisiana and Congressional Recess 01:07 Diving into FAA Bill Discussions 02:10 Improving Passenger Experience and Aviation Technology 06:11 The Legislative Process and FAA Bill Journey 10:31 Exploring Potential Committee Chairmanship and Transportation Impact 15:37 Addressing Energy Policy and Environmental Concerns 24:08 Innovation, Technology, and the Future of Energy 27:02 Closing Thoughts and Future Prospects

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), member of the Commerce, Science, & Transportation Committee, Judiciary , Veterans' Affairs & Armed Services Committees, and author of The Mind of a Conservative Woman: Seeking the Best for Family and Country, joined the Guy Benson Show live from Texas as she and Guy discuss Biden's border crisis. She discusses the lack of security needed on the southern border, and her and Guy also briefly discuss the TikTok bill. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Join America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio co-hosts Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy with Senator Marsha Blackburn. In 2018, the people of Tennessee elected Marsha Blackburn as the first woman to represent the Volunteer State in the United States Senate. She serves on the Deputy Whip Team and is a member of the Finance Committee; the Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee; the Veterans Affairs Committee; and the Judiciary Committee. She serves as the Ranking Member on the Subcommittee on Consumer Protection, Product Safety, and Data Security and the Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law. Marsha dedicates her public service to promoting opportunities for women and making America a more prosperous place to live. A longtime ally of entertainment industry professionals, Marsha began her career in public service in 1995 when she was named executive director of the Tennessee Film, Entertainment, and Music Commission. Marsha's leadership philosophy is based on her experiences in the private sector as a small businesswoman and author, and as a mother and grandmother. America's Roundtable conversation with Senator Marsha Blackburn includes the following key topics: 1) Illegal immigration. Senator Marsha Blackburn, "Every state is a border state and every town is a border town.” Senator Blackburn's introduction of the Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal (CLEAR) Act, ensuring that state and local law enforcement-officials have the tools necessary to help the federal government deport criminal illegal immigrants from the United States. 2) Israel's right to self-defense against Iran-backed terrorist organization Hamas. Biden administration's failed foreign policy in the Middle East. 3) Illegal immigrants voting in Washington D.C. and local elections in California, Maryland and Vermont. Why are illegal immigrants included in the US Census - to apportion a greater number of seats of Sanctuary cities/states to the US Congress? americasrt.com (https://americasrt.com/) https://ileaderssummit.org/ | https://jerusalemleaderssummit.com/ America's Roundtable on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/americas-roundtable/id1518878472 Twitter: @MarshaBlackburn @ileaderssummit @AmericasRT @NatashaSrdoc @JoelAnandUSA @supertalk America's Roundtable is co-hosted by Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy, co-founders of International Leaders Summit and the Jerusalem Leaders Summit. America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio program - a strategic initiative of International Leaders Summit, focuses on America's economy, healthcare reform, rule of law, security and trade, and its strategic partnership with rule of law nations around the world. The radio program features high-ranking US administration officials, cabinet members, members of Congress, state government officials, distinguished diplomats, business and media leaders and influential thinkers from around the world. Tune into America's Roundtable Radio program from Washington, DC via live streaming on Saturday mornings via 65 radio stations at 7:30 A.M. (ET) on Lanser Broadcasting Corporation covering the Michigan and the Midwest market, and at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk Mississippi — SuperTalk.FM reaching listeners in every county within the State of Mississippi, and neighboring states in the South including Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee. Listen to America's Roundtable on digital platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, Google and other key online platforms. Listen live, Saturdays at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk | https://www.supertalk.fm

Ralph is joined by Tim Judson from the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (N.I.R.S.) to discuss the growing support for nuclear power in Congress, and the persistent myths that fuel nuclear advocates' false hopes for a nuclear future. Then, Ralph pays tribute to Boeing whistleblower John Barnett, who died unexpectedly this week in the middle of giving his deposition for a whistleblower retaliation lawsuit against Boeing. Plus, Ralph answers some of your audience feedback from last week's interview with Barbara McQuade. Tim Judson is Executive Director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (N.I.R.S.). Mr. Judson leads N.I.R.S.' work on nuclear reactor and climate change issues, and has written a series of reports on nuclear bailouts and sustainable energy. He is Chair of the Board of Citizens Awareness Network, one of the lead organizations in the successful campaign to close the Vermont Yankee reactor, and co-founder of Alliance for a Green Economy in New York.Listeners should know that this very complex system called the nuclear fuel cycle—that starts with uranium mines out west piling up radioactive tailings, which have exposed people downwind to radioactive hazards…And then they have to enrich the uranium—and that is often done by burning coal, which pollutes the air and contributes to climate disruption. And then they have to fabricate the fuel rods and build the nuclear plants. And then they have to make sure that these nuclear plants are secure against sabotage. And then you have the problem of transporting—by trucks or rail—radioactive waste to some depositories that don't exist. And they have to go through towns, cities, and villages. And what is all this for? It's to boil water. Ralph NaderIn 2021 and 2022, when the big infrastructure bills— the bipartisan infrastructure bill and the Inflation Reduction Act—were being passed by Congress, the utility industry spent $192 million on federal lobbying in those two years. That's more than the oil industry spent in those two years on lobbying. These are the utility companies that are present in every community around the country. And their business is actually less in selling electricity and natural gas, and more in lobbying state and federal governments to get their rates approved…The utility industry (and the nuclear industry as a subset of that) have been lobbying Congress relentlessly for years to protect what they've got.Tim JudsonFusion is one of these technologies that's always been 30 years away. Whenever there's an announcement about an advancement in fusion research, it's still “going to be 30 years before we get a reactor going.” Now there's a lot more hype, and these tech investors are putting money into fusion with the promise that they're going to have a reactor online in a few years. But there's no track record to suggest that that's going to happen. It keeps the dream of nuclear alive— “We could have infinite amounts of clean energy for the future.” It sounds too good to be true. It's always proven to be too good to be true.Tim JudsonOne of the lines that they're using to promote theAtomic Energy Advancement Act and all of these investments in nuclear… is that we can't let Russia and China be the ones that are expanding nuclear energy worldwide. It's got to be the US that does it.Tim JudsonIn Case You Haven't Heard with Francesco DeSantisNews 3/12/241. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA, has released a report claiming that “employees released into Gaza from Israeli detention [were] pressured by Israeli authorities into falsely stating that the agency has Hamas links and that staff took part in the October 7 attacks,” per the Times of Israel. These supposed admissions of guilt led to the United States and many European countries cutting off or delaying aid to the agency. The unpublished report alleges that UNRWA staffers were “detained by the Israeli army, and…experienced…severe physical beatings, waterboarding, and threats of harm to family members.” The report goes on to say “In addition to the alleged abuse endured by UNRWA staff members, Palestinian detainees more broadly described allegations of abuse, including beatings, humiliation, threats, dog attacks, sexual violence, and deaths of detainees denied medical treatment.”2. Continuing the genocidal assault on Gaza, Israel has been bombing the densely populated city of Rafah in the South. Domestically, this seems to be too far for even Biden's closest allies, with the AP reporting just before the assault that “[Senator Chris] Coons…of Delaware, called for the U.S. to cut military aid to Israel if Netanyahu goes ahead with a threatened offensive on the southern city of Rafah without significant provisions to protect the more than 1 million civilians sheltering there. [And Senator] Jack Reed, head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, appealed to Biden to deploy the U.S. Navy to get humanitarian aid to Gaza. Biden ally Sen. Tim Kaine challenged the U.S. strikes on the Houthis as unlikely to stop the Red Sea attacks. And the most senior Democrat in the Senate [Patty Murray of Washington] called for Israel to ‘change course.'” Hewing to these voices within his party, President Biden declared that an invasion of Rafah would be a “red line.” Yet POLTICO reports that Israeli PM Netanyahu “says he intends to press ahead with an invasion.” POLTICO now reports that Biden is threatening to condition military aid to Israel in response to Netanyahu's defiance, but it remains to be seen whether the president will follow through on this threat.3. POLITICO also reports that CIA Director Bill Burns is calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, saying “The reality is that there are children who are starving…They're malnourished as a result of the fact that humanitarian assistance can't get to them. It's very difficult to distribute humanitarian assistance effectively unless you have a ceasefire.” This is obviously correct, and illustrates how out of touch the Democratic Party is that they are getting outflanked on peace issues by the literal director of the CIA.4. Whether unwilling – or unable – to change course on Gaza, President Biden is paying the electoral price. In last week's Super Tuesday primaries, the Nation reports “Uncommitted” won 19 percent of the vote and 11 delegates in Minnesota, 29 percent and seven delegates in Hawaii, and 12.7 percent in North Carolina. This week, the New York Times reports Uncommitted took 7.5% – nearly 50,000 votes – in Washington State. Biden also lost the caucus in American Samoa, making him the first incumbent president since Carter to lose a nominating contest, per Newsweek.5. In yet another manifestation of opposition to the genocide in Gaza, Jewish director Jonathan Glazer used his Oscar acceptance speech to “[denounce] the bloodshed in the Middle East and [ask] the audience to consider how it could ‘resist…dehumanization,'” per NBC. Glazer's award winning film “The Zone of Interest” examines how “[a] Nazi commandant…and his family…attempt to build an idyllic life right outside the walls of the Auschwitz concentration camp in Poland during the Holocaust.” Glazer said “All our choices were made to reflect and confront us in the present — not to say, 'Look what we did then,' rather, 'Look what we do now.' Our film shows where dehumanization leads at its worst…Right now, we stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation, which has led to conflict for so many people." Glazer was the most forthright in his criticism of the Israeli campaign, but NBC notes “Billie Eilish, Mark Ruffalo and Ramy Youssef wore red pins on the Oscars red carpet symbolizing calls for a cease-fire.”6. Aware that they are losing the public relations battle, pro-Israel lobbying groups like the UJA-Federation and the Jewish Community Relations Council have enlisted Right-wing messaging guru Frank Luntz to help with their Hasbara PR, the Grayzone reports. Leaked talking points from his presentation run the gamut from playing up unsubstantiated claims of systematic sexual violence committed by Hamas to acknowledging that “'The most potent' tactic in mobilizing opposition to Israel's assault…‘is the visual destruction of Gaza and the human toll'… [because] ‘It ‘looks like a genocide'.”7. Turning from Palestine to East Palestine, Ohio Cleveland.com reports that during a recent Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing, National Transportation Safety Board  Chair Jennifer L. Homendy told Ohio's junior Senator JD Vance that “The deliberate burn of rail cars carrying hazardous chemicals after last year's crash…wasn't needed to avoid an explosion because the rail cars were cooling off before they were set on fire.” In a statement, Ohio's senior Senator, progressive Democrat Sherrod Brown, called the testimony “outrageous,” and said “This explosion – which devastated so many – was unnecessary…The people of East Palestine are still living with the consequences of this toxic burn. This is more proof that Norfolk Southern put profits over safety & cannot be trusted.”8. In positive labor news, Bloomberg reports that “About 600 video game testers at Microsoft…'s Activision Blizzard studios have unionized, more than doubling the size of labor's foothold at the software giant, according to the Communications Workers of America.” This brings the unionized workforce at Microsoft to approximately 1,000. To the company's credit, Microsoft has been friendly towards unionization, a marked difference from other technology companies – namely Amazon and Tesla – which have gone to extreme lengths to prevent worker organizing.9. In not so positive labor news, Matt Bruenig's NLRB Edge reports “The ACLU Is Trying to Destroy the Biden NLRB.” In a narrow sense, this story is about the ACLU fighting its workers to preserve its internal mandatory arbitration process. More broadly however, Bruenig illustrates how the ACLU is seeking to oust Biden's NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo – arguing her appointment was unconstitutional – which “could potentially invalidate everything the Biden Board has done.” This is yet another example of the non-profit industrial complex run amok, doing damage to progressive values and opting to possibly inflict economic harm on workers nationwide rather than treat their own workers fairly.10. Finally, according to the Corporate Crime Reporter, “Boeing whistleblower John Barnett was found dead in his truck at a hotel in Charleston, South Carolina after a break in depositions in a whistleblower retaliation lawsuit.” Barnett's lawyer Brian Knowles told the paper “They found him in his truck dead from an ‘alleged' self-inflicted gunshot.” Barnett had gone on record saying “[Boeing] started pressuring us to not document defects, to work outside the procedures, to allow defective material to be installed without being corrected. They started bypassing procedures and not maintaining configurement control of airplanes, not maintaining control of non conforming parts –  they just wanted to get the planes pushed out the door and make the cash register ring.” The timing and circumstances of Barnett's death raise disturbing questions; we hope an exhaustive investigation turns up some answers.This has been Francesco DeSantis, with In Case You Haven't Heard. Get full access to Ralph Nader Radio Hour at www.ralphnaderradiohour.com/subscribe

“The Outcue” is a 21 News journalist perspective of our top news stories.Each week, the 21 News staff, including reporters and managers, will discuss what goes on behind the scenes in covering stories for you - from the newsgathering process to getting the final product on the air, in this new video podcast. In episode three, Assistant News Director J. Breen Mitchell is joined by Senior Digital Content Manager Robert McFerren to discuss 21 News coverage of the East Palestine train derailment last February.We look at the story behind the coverage and discuss our in-depth' 101 West' and what National Transportation Board Chair Jennifer Homendy told us about her concerns about the vent and burn.This week, we also reported on a Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing where Ohio Senator JD Vance asked National Transportation Board Chair Jennifer Homendy about the vent and burn conducted on the five vinyl chloride tank cars during the East Palestine train derailment, which she said lacked sufficient scientific basis, and disregarded temperature data.Turn in every Friday on our YouTube channel or listen to the audio version on all major podcast platforms. The podcast name - The Outcue - is a broadcast term that means the last few words of reporting before the package ends. We hope you enjoy it.

Beach Pace has spent her career building strong, efficient teams and collaboratively overcoming challenges to serve the community she loves. First elected to Hillsboro City Council in 2018, Beach is currently serving her second term as City Councilor. As Councilor, she has championed diversity, equity & inclusion (DEI), affordable housing, transportation solutions, COVID-19 response, support of small businesses, expansion of job opportunities, and market rate housing. She also serves on the Budget Committee, the Transportation Committee, the 2035 Committee, the Westside Modal Improvements Study Steering Committee, and the Council Creek Regional Trail Committee. In addition, Beach served as a board member of the League of Oregon Cities for three years and is a founding board alumna of the Westside Queer Resource Center.  Beach found her calling in the social change (nonprofit) sector and currently serves as the Chief Executive Officer of Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Columbia Northwest. Her previous experience includes Vice President of Road Trip Nation and service as Vice President and Executive Director of City Year San Jose/Silicon Valley. Before transitioning to nonprofit work, Beach led sales and marketing teams in the public sector.  Beach learned to lead at the United States Military Academy at West Point, where she earned her Bachelor of Science and began her seven-year career with the U.S. Army. There, she served in Explosive Ordnance Disposal as Executive Officer and Commander within the Ordnance branch. Beach also earned her Master of Public Administration from Northern Michigan University.  Beach always finds time for her wife of more than twenty years, Jincy, their two teenage children, and her mother-in-law. Beach boasts her spaghetti-making skills, loves to walk trails in Hillsboro, and she is never too busy to find the fun and positive in everything she does. https://electbeachpace.com City of Hillsboro

NOTE: This interview first aired last summer, before the October 7 attacks on Israel by Hamas.With Adam Schiff running for U.S. Senate, his Los Angeles area 30th district congressional seat – which stretches from Burbank and Glendale and Sunland Tujunga down to Hancock Park and West Hollywood – is up for grabs for the first time in twenty years. There is a wide field of candidates running for the seat in next year's election, and we are going to talk with the major candidates, one on one and in-depth, on What's Next, Los Angeles.In this episode, Mike talks with Laura Friedman, who has represented the Burbank/Glendale area in the State Assembly since 2016. In the assembly, she is chair of the Transportation Committee, and policy chair of the Progressive Caucus. Prior to her election to the assembly, she was a councilmember and mayor of the city of Glendale.

John A. Rathke, PE, SE, FACEC – Wisconsin Vice President and Principal, Mead & Hunt, Inc. Chair-Elect, 2024-2025, Chair 2025-2026 John Rathke is a Vice President and Principal at Mead & Hunt, Inc., in Wisconsin. He completed his term as Vice Chair on the ACEC Executive Committee at the Annual Convention in June 2023. John was previously inducted into the College of Fellows in 2019. He has served on the Planning Cabinet from 2021 to 2023, responsible for determining metrics to measure progress in achieving the ACEC Strategic Plan Goals and to explore whether ACEC is devoting enough resources to the water and energy markets. The latter ultimately resulted in the forming of a new Energy Committee to focus on the engineering business of the energy market. John is active on ACEC's Transportation Committee and Risk Management Committee. He has served as National Director and ACEC/Wisconsin Chair-Elect, Chairman of the Board, and Nominating Committee Chair. He holds a BS in Civil Engineering from the University of Wisconsin–Platteville.

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Seattle Times City Hall reporter, David Kroman! Crystal and David dig into why Seattle is putting less money into new affordable housing project this year and how this week's launch of a second social housing initiative by House Our Neighbors may be appealing to voters wanting to see progress on the issue. Next, they discuss the pressure on Mayor Bruce Harrell to deliver results now that a City Council friendly to his agenda has taken office and how the new Council's relative inexperience was on display at initial committee meetings. Finally, the show wraps up with a troubling story of the for-profit Tacoma immigration detention center refusing to allow state inspectors access after hundreds of complaints about the facility's poor conditions. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, David Kroman, at @KromanDavid.   Resources Harm Reduction in Rural Washington with Everett Maroon of Blue Mountain Heart to Heart from Hacks & Wonks   “Why Seattle will fund fewer new affordable housing projects this year” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times   I-136 Let's Build Social Housing | House Our Neighbors   “Seattle's social housing developer proposes payroll tax on ‘excess earners'” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times   “New Social Housing Initiative Would Tax Business to Fund Up to 2,500 Over 10 Years” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger   “A council of allies in place, Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell feels pressure to deliver” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times   “Watch: New Transportation Committee gets intro from SDOT, CM Kettle puts foot in mouth” by Tom Fucoloro from Seattle Bike Blog   @KromanDavid on Twitter: “Councilmember Rob Saka: "Ideally I'd like to have an across the board auditing of the entire city budget, but I am mindful that that is very costly and a time intensive activity. It's not practicable or feasible this year."”   “State inspectors denied entry to privately-run immigration detention center in Tacoma” by Grace Deng from Washington State Standard   Find stories that Crystal is reading here   Listen on your favorite podcast app to all our episodes here   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and our Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday topical show, I welcomed Everett Maroon of Blue Mountain Heart to Heart for a conversation about how the opioid epidemic has impacted rural communities in Washington, the damaging role of stigma, what harm reduction is, and why it's so important. Today, we're continuing our Friday week-in-review shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show, and today's co-host: Seattle Times City Hall reporter, David Kroman. [00:01:22] David Kroman: Hello. Thanks for having me. [00:01:24] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Thanks for being here. Well, there is - been a decent amount of news this week. We will start off talking about news you covered about why Seattle is funding fewer new affordable housing projects this year. What's happening and why are they seeming to step back here? [00:01:45] David Kroman: Yeah, it's interesting, and I would say kind of concerning for the general affordable housing landscape. So back to as far as 2018, Seattle has always made these annual announcements of how much money they're going to be putting towards affordable housing. They pair it with federal tax credits and private donations, but it usually ends up being over $100 million a year. Last year, for example, it was $147 million - I think it was about that the year before. This year, the award is only $53 million for new affordable housing projects - that stands out because voters just passed a new housing levy that's triple the size of the one before it. There is still money - less money, but there's still money - coming in from the Mandatory Housing Affordability program. And there's also the JumpStart payroll tax, which is supposed to go towards housing. So all those things together would suggest there's a lot of money for new affordable housing, but the problem is that a lot of the projects that the city has funded in the past are struggling with their finances. The combination of interest rates and some wonky details about what loans they're on mean that these 70 projects or so that are in the works, or at various stages of development, need something in the order of $90 million to prop them up. So it's a frustrating reality for people in the affordable housing world because they want to be building new housing, they want to be putting new units on the market. But because of just the nature of construction industry and where interest rates are at, a lot of that money is getting sucked up into basically paying for housing that we thought we'd already paid for. [00:03:17] Crystal Fincher: So does this money that is usually allocated annually - does it only go to the construction? Does it ever go to propping up other projects? Did this happen by surprise for the city? It doesn't seem like it was telegraphed that it would be this much of a hit. How did this change come about? [00:03:36] David Kroman: Yeah, the Office of Housing always helps out with operations and maintenance, and they see that they have a certain obligation not to just fund the construction, but to make sure that the buildings that they're helping fund function properly and can actually house people. I don't think it's uncommon that they go back and help out buildings that they'd already funded. As far as I know, though, it has never gotten to this size. It was telegraphed actually a few months ago - their initial announcement of how much money would be available suggested that it was going to be quite a bit smaller. I think people thought there were some more technical explanations for that. But what's really happening - in affordable housing, there's basically two loans that these affordable housing buildings get. There's the construction loan, which is what they get to put up the building. And then there's their final loan that they convert to once they've leased up enough of their units and are bringing in enough rent - because, despite the fact that it's affordable housing, the calculations that the banks make around these still require that they're collecting some level of rent from their tenants. Usually that process takes two or three years for them to convert from their construction loan to their final loan. But for a lot of reasons, they're just having a really hard time doing that. They're having a harder time filling their units - I think that's probably worth following up on why that is exactly. And then they're having a harder time collecting rents - some of that does go back to some of the pandemic era policies that were intended to stabilize people in their rental apartments. So they're not able to get to the point where they can get off of their construction loan. And that is a really bad loan to be on for a long period of time, just because the rates and interest rates on those are way higher. And so I think that reality is just coming to pass this year, that basically every single one of these projects is functioning on a construction loan. But if the Office of Housing didn't go back and help them weather this storm, then we're looking at a much worse problem, which is affordable housing buildings that have already been built and people are living in them - but them just basically going belly up or needing to be sold. And so kind of a rock and a hard place for the Office of Housing - they have a choice of spending on new buildings or helping out the buildings they've already funded. The choice in some ways is fairly obvious because you don't want to lose these buildings you've already built. But it does mean that future projects take a fairly significant hit. [00:05:48] Crystal Fincher: Well, it does look like that and it's important to keep these projects moving and healthy so that they don't go belly up or cause a large amount of destabilization in the market. But looking forward, especially with this hit to new affordable developments in an already-crisis level situation with housing affordability, the need for more units to be added - what kind of long-term impact does this look to have? Are we looking at a similar situation next year where we could be looking at a further hit? Is this a permanent injury to affordable housing funding, at least for the short to midterm? [00:06:28] David Kroman: Yeah, it's a good question. I'm not sure, but I do know that something fairly material would have to change between now and next year to make sure that this isn't a problem anymore. The number of units in a building that have to be leased up and collecting rent is like 90%, so it's really high. It used to never be a problem, but it seems like a lot of these buildings are hovering around 80% occupancy/rent collection. So unless the City has some trick up its sleeve for making sure that these buildings are 90% leased up and the people who are in them are paying that rent, it sets up a situation that is out of the City's hands because these are banks making these calls on whether or not they qualify for these cheaper loans. It's not like the City can pass some law that requires the banks to give them a cheaper loan. And so my guess would be it's not a problem that will go away in a year and probably will come up again this time next year. In the past, this has just never been a problem because, unfortunately, affordable housing is in such high demand that banks have never even thought twice about whether or not an affordable housing development would hit 90% occupancy and payment. The deeper concern here is that as banks see that that assumption is maybe not holding up as well, they might be more hesitant to write these loans in the first place. The only sort of cold comfort, I guess, is that this is not really a specific problem for affordable housing. I used to cover transportation - any transportation project is having these massive cost overruns and problems with construction projects too. And so maybe there's a little more leniency on the part of the financers because they understand that this isn't just some negligence on the affordable housing providers part, it's just the reality of the construction industry right now. But that doesn't mean that it's going to start being cheap anytime soon. [00:08:13] Crystal Fincher: Right - that's almost the takeaway. Everything about building housing right now seems expensive and growing more expensive. Inflation has definitely hit every element of it and interest rates are higher than they used to be, and just everything seems to be contributing to a higher overall cost. And so that's a challenge that we're going to have to figure out how to deal with, especially as it would be one thing if this were 15 years ago - We need to make plans because this is going to become a problem if we don't address it appropriately. But this now is a problem, a major problem, crisis level, where from the legislature to different cities are all acknowledging that we do have to build more residential units - at minimum - in addition to a variety of other policies, in order to prevent rents and housing costs from continuing to skyrocket. So here we are again, but not enough money is currently budgeted to go around. Is this a money issue? I know there's also a big budget deficit that they're in the process of beginning to deal with. Did the money just run out? Is this a matter of priorities? [00:09:21] David Kroman: Yeah, there is one lever I think that the City could pull and is pulling that could actually help this a little bit, which is one of the problems is the permitting timeline - for anything really, but affordable housing included - it used to be a year and a half basically just to get all the permits. There has been some legislation passed recently to exempt some affordable housing projects from design review in an effort to speed things up. That could help because then you're not sitting on a piece of property without actually being able to do anything with it. But yeah, it is a money problem because what it is at the end of the day is just things are costing more. The problem is every time there's a property tax levy in Seattle, the specter of levy fatigue is raised. So far, Seattle voters have never hit that - they have handily passed pretty much every property tax levy put before them. But there is, to an extent, an upper limit on how much in property taxes Seattle officials are going to feel comfortable asking voters to fund affordable housing. And if more than 50% of their money is going towards projects that they already thought had been funded, suddenly the political scenario starts to feel a little more fraught. Meanwhile, the other two funds that the City relies on for affordable housing are also no longer guaranteed solid funds. The Mandatory Housing Affordability pot - that depends on there being a lot of development in the City of Seattle. And of course, we've seen permits for new development plummet, which means there's just not going to be as many contributions from private developers toward affordable housing. And then the JumpStart payroll tax, this new city council is thinking already about this $230 million budget gap that you mentioned, and are not the friendliest to the idea of a business payroll tax. And so shifting the JumpStart tax from pure housing purposes to basically budget relief is very much on the table. And I think nonprofit housing developers understand that. So the problem is that in addition to the housing levy, which is robust and large, not going as far as they had hoped, combined with these other two sources of funds either declining or perhaps being repurposed for political reasons, in general, creates a lot of uncertainty among nonprofit housing developers. [00:11:23] Crystal Fincher: It does. We will continue to follow this. Thank you for covering that so comprehensively. Well, and that leads into news this week that House Our Neighbors launched a new social housing initiative, basically Part 2 of their initiative process that they talked about before. What is House Our Neighbors? What did the first initiative do? And what are they launching with this initiative that they just filed? [00:11:51] David Kroman: House Our Neighbors is the political side of Seattle's new social housing developer. 2023, they ran an initiative that set up this public developer that was theoretically going to take money and then either buy or build buildings. On its surface, it sounds a little bit maybe like Seattle Housing Authority, but their focus was going to be on mixed income or housing for not necessarily the poorest residents - 80% to 120% AMI. The idea being that if you're trying to raise a family in Seattle, it's really difficult because it's very, very hard to find two-, three-, four-bedroom affordable apartments. This would fill that gap that they see is missing between the market and government provided subsidized housing. The complaint or pushback on the last initiative was that there weren't any funds to do any of that work. That was intentional on the part of the people who ran the campaign because there are concerns about violating the state's rules against having multiple subjects in one initiative. So this new initiative that they're running would be that second step. It would provide a funding source via a tax on businesses with employees earning more than a million dollars. Their hope is to raise $50 million a year and buy or build around 2,000 units of social housing. I don't know that their announcement was coordinated with the Office of Housing's affordable housing announcement, but the two things certainly are related to each other. [00:13:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, definitely. And with social housing, it's designed to be permanently affordable, government-owned, mixed-income housing that insulates itself, basically, because it's not part of the private market - where we just got done talking about all of the factors causing price increases in the private market. But because this is public, government-owned, it can move forward with a different model that is conceivably more insulated from market forces, in addition to not having profit pressure attached to it - helping to keep it more affordable with mixed incomes where people paying into the pot help fund the affordable housing for everything else. This did pass in the City of Seattle. And as you said, this was a two-part initiative process. The first part was on whether we were going to establish this public developer. And now comes the time to fund it. So when it comes to funding, what is the funding mechanism? And why was this chosen? [00:14:15] David Kroman: Yeah, the funding mechanism is similar to the JumpStart Tax that we were talking about before, which is it focuses on companies that have an employee making a million dollars or more. And I think the thought behind this - if you think back to the contentious Head Tax debate, which was targeting overall revenue of a business and trying to tax that, that became really contentious because you have businesses like grocery stores that have really high revenue, but super thin profits. So when you have Uwajimaya, for example, testifying against this tax as a beloved local business, people get kind of queasy about it - it basically failed because of that. The argument here is we're not really focusing on the overall revenue. We're focusing on whether or not they have employees that they're paying over a million dollars, because that suggests - if you can pay somebody a million dollars or more, you should be paying some tax on that. And it's a marginal tax, so the first million dollars of that person's salary are not taxed - it's everything above that that is taxed. The City's payroll tax exempts grocery stores and healthcare businesses, or at least healthcare businesses have waiver for a few years. This one doesn't do that. This targets any business that's paying people a million dollars or more. The exact number of businesses that that includes is a little murky. They relied on a couple past legislative efforts at the state and city level to come up with their calculations. If it passed, we'd get a little more sense of who would actually have to pay this tax, but that's basically how it works. [00:15:33] Crystal Fincher: So what they're referring to is an 'excess earners' tax, and it'd be a 5% marginal payroll tax. As you said, if they had an employee making $2 million, the tax would not apply to that first million. It would only apply to the one million above that at a rate of 5%. They're estimating with that revenue source, they could acquire or build 2,000 affordable units over 10 years. What is the timeline for this initiative now? What do they have to do in order to qualify and get it on the ballot? [00:16:06] David Kroman: They have set 30,000 signatures as their goal, and they want to get it by June - because if they got it in by June, that would leave the current city council no choice but to put it on the November ballot. And anybody who's trying to do a more left-leaning progressive initiative wants to get their measure on the November ballot because turnout in Seattle is going to be probably 80% - it's a presidential election - and the progressives of Seattle figure that more turnout favors them. So the goal is November '24. But they said that if for whatever reason they didn't get there, they would run it anyway at a later ballot date. I just think politically, that would be a little more challenging for them. [00:16:40] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, definitely. They just filed the initiative. So that process for the initiative to be approved, get to the signature gathering process will be commencing. How does this fit in, in the general overall landscape? Tiffani McCoy, who's the policy and advocacy director with House Our Neighbors, talked a little bit about this happening because there is either not a plan or a deficit in the ability to deliver the amount of housing we need and the type of housing we need at scale. [00:17:11] David Kroman: Yeah, it fits in because the affordable 80% to 120% AMI - there is just not really anybody interested in doing that right now. There have been some one-off projects around the city where a developer, out of the good of their own heart, has said that their building is going to be affordable to a certain level - workforce housing. But you're really relying on individual developers being interested in doing that. Usually those come with time limits, so they guarantee it for 30 years or 40 years or something like that. And then as we talked about before, there's Housing Authority and Office of Housing - it's a small lane, but there is a lane for 0% to probably 60% AMI. But when voters are approving a property tax levy, they're not quite as interested in building housing for people who are making up to $80,000 a year. But when you're looking at how expensive it is to live in Seattle or what the median income is, those people are having a hard time finding places to live and especially raise families in Seattle. And so that is more who this effort is targeted towards, which is fill that gap between 0% to 60% AMI and then 200%+ AMI housing, which there's just not a lot of people out there building that kind of housing right now. [00:18:21] Crystal Fincher: Right. And that matters so much because that is related to a lot of the staffing shortage talk that we hear about, whether it's teachers or bus drivers or healthcare workers or - across the board, we're hearing about workforce shortages, particularly in the City of Seattle and surrounding areas. And a big piece of that puzzle is that people just can't afford to live in the areas where those jobs are. It's way too expensive. So you have people moving further and further out, making it harder to commute in for a job, or just finding a job elsewhere outside of the city. And so housing affordability is an important element in just these conversations about our overall economy, including workforce strength and availability. It is absolutely related to those challenges. So once they made this announcement, the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce immediately make a statement that opposed it. I don't know that this opposition was necessarily surprising, but it was an immediate reaction. How did they respond? [00:19:30] David Kroman: No, not surprising at all - they took the JumpStart Tax to court. They clearly don't like payroll taxes on businesses. Their argument was they supported the Housing Levy and they support some level of voter-agreed-upon property tax to build housing for the poorest people. The Chamber's line, and this has been their line and that of other businesses since at least back to 2017 when the first Head Tax debate came up, is this all comes down to supply. That the real issue is that Seattle is zoned in a way that you just can't add more supply, especially in the 60% or whatever it is of the city that's zoned for single family homes. So their argument is you are asking businesses to try and address a very small part of a much larger illness. And in so doing, you're not going to get us to where the city actually needs to be. And at the same time, you're going to materially hurt these businesses at a time when it has been, at least for some of them, sort of a difficult period. I think the counterargument is it has not actually been that difficult of a period for businesses like Amazon. And if you're paying somebody over a million dollars, something must be going okay for you. But I think the Chamber's position does kind of go to this point, which is - you're talking about a symptom when the real cause is just that we have built a system that doesn't allow for new housing construction. [00:20:42] Crystal Fincher: Yes, and it would be less ironic if they didn't seem to also oppose a lot of the rezoning and necessary new construction for that. But I guess it's a comfortable position to be in when you can just oppose things that seemingly have to do with each other. But I do think that's part of the reason why this passed in the first place. This passed after several years of seeming opposition and defeat of efforts to make things more affordable overall, including housing, especially those that are funded with taxes. And that has been a big point of contention between the Chamber and other folks there. The Chamber traditionally takes a - Hey, just don't tax us approach. A lot of their financial support of candidates in elections seems tied to their willingness or unwillingness to tax business. So this has been a long-standing divide that we have here. But I wonder if they've ever wondered if that long-standing hesitance to do that, in the face of skyrocketing costs borne by the regular residents of Seattle and surrounding areas, might have something to do with the alternatives becoming more popular to the point where they pass this in Seattle. So it'll be interesting to see how formal and robust the opposition to this initiative is. But it does seem like this is an alternative that the residents of Seattle are looking at. And as we look forward, especially if the JumpStart Tax is raided for the general fund, some of the other mechanisms that the legislature is looking at right now don't end up coming to fruition - this may be one of the only avenues where it looks feasible that something can actually happen, that there can be funding for, and that we can start to make up some of the gaps that are reopening here in some of the other areas. How do you see the prognosis for this moving forward? [00:22:42] David Kroman: Yeah, I think you're right that this is a lot of voter response to an intractable problem. I think it is true that the underlying problem is supply - I think that's hard to dispute at this point. It's just there are a lot of people coming into the city and just not enough housing for them. And so then, therefore, even old, run-down housing is being competed for - rich people are outbidding people of lesser means for housing that you would not necessarily associate with rich people. A lot of that is enabled by the fact that most of the city - it's just cast in amber and there cannot be any added density. So at a time when the city's population is growing, you've got certain neighborhoods in Seattle where the population is actually decreasing, and I think that is what is driving a lot of rent increases. I think the reaction, though - the problem is now, the struggles are now - and so it's all well and good to diagnose the deep problem and look back at what the city should or shouldn't have done, or what the city should be doing to help this problem in 10 or 15 years. The city could upzone across the entire city tomorrow, and the construction environment - as we just talked about - means it's pretty unlikely that you're going to see a huge influx immediately of new housing and density because it's just not a great time for building new stuff. And so I think that then causes people to look for alternative options. And this is one of them, which is a more direct taxation to construction that is divorced from - well, not entirely divorced because we talked about the problems facing the nonprofit housing world, but more divorced from market forces that, again, perhaps should have been addressed a long time ago. But even if they were addressed tomorrow, would take years, decades, perhaps, to really show meaningful improvements in the affordability of Seattle. And so I think that is why these solutions that the Chamber doesn't like - because they are not market solutions, they are taxation solutions on their clients and the people that they represent, but that becomes more appealing because people want to make some immediate progress in the next year. [00:24:38] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well, we will continue to follow that story and the initiative and see how it goes. I also want to talk about a piece that you wrote this week about Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell, titled, "A council of allies in place, Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell feels pressure to deliver." I think that pressure is an appropriate response - a number of commitments or what he ran on two years ago still has a lot of areas for improvement. I don't know that anyone feels that the type of progress that was indicated or promised has actually happened. But some of that was in his telling because he didn't have a great working relationship with the council - even though they have very distinct roles and responsibilities. But he's saying now, and part of what he said during the campaign - if we have a better working relationship, we could accomplish more. What did this story uncover, what did you talk about, and where does he stand on what he's accomplished and what he's looking to accomplish? [00:25:37] David Kroman: Yeah, I think it's perhaps not quite exactly like having a one-party President, House and Senate, but it's something like that. Because at least since I have been watching City Hall, I would argue that there has been no mayor who, at least on paper, has come into a more favorable political environment than Bruce Harrell does right now. Because he endorsed five people for city council - which I don't think Durkan or Ed Murray dipped that much of a toe into the political scene, so that alone was a big jump into playing politics - and then all of them won. And then he gets this bonus of another one of his opponents, Teresa Mosqueda, leaving to go to the King County Council. So basically he gets six new friendly people on the council, banishes all but Councilmember Tammy Morales as clear opponents to his agenda. And then more than that, if you've been watching the committee meetings in city council this year, their agenda items are what is the Seattle Department of Transportation and what does it do? They are just getting their feet under them. They are still trying to find where the bathroom is. Meanwhile, Bruce Harrell has been in City Hall for 14 years. So all of that added together means there is nothing in his way to basically do what it is that he has envisioned for City Hall. The question is - can he or will he do that? And also it kind of puts to test some of the narratives that were created around what the previous council was at fault for doing. Some of those I think could end up being true, but also I think some of the problems that we're talking about here - fairly complicated and don't just boil down to who exactly was on the previous city council. For example, police recruitment. The mayor has said he wants to grow the department to 1,400. It's a real question of whether the police department is ever going to be back to 1,400. But there's no longer the boogeyman of "Defund the Police" to fault for those challenges - now the rubber meets the road. Can a council that has explicitly said it wants to hire more police officers actually do that? And then if it doesn't, I will be curious to see how voters respond. Will they give him the same level of scrutiny that they gave the council the last few years? That will be interesting to watch. [00:27:35] Crystal Fincher: That will be interesting to watch. I do also find it interesting, from the perspective of his allies that we heard during the campaign, of stuff like "Defund the Police" and blaming some of the inability to achieve what they said they wanted to achieve on that, as if the council had been hostile. But if we look - particularly over the past two years - the council didn't pass up an opportunity to fund the hiring of more police officers. Functionally - policy-wise, budget-wise - they allocated all of the money that was asked for, they allocated bonuses related to that, yet they still ran as if this council was somehow hostile to that issue. It seemed, to your point, like the creation of a boogeyman that didn't exist, and certainly not since he's taken office here. Did that strike you as genuine reasons or reasons that really would have impeded him taking action on some of his priorities that he seemingly talked about? Well, it was because of the council that I couldn't. But on an issue like police funding, where council did provide the funding for that, where council did provide everything that was asked for to do that, yet there still wasn't progress - does that rest on the council or was that another issue? [00:28:51] David Kroman: Yeah, I think if you ask him and you ask the current council, they acknowledge - Sure, they didn't literally defund the police by 50%. And what they did "defund" was mostly a shuffling of the decks.decks -moved parking enforcement to SDOT for a while and they moved 911 to Community Safety. So the police department's budget shrunk, but those functions just moved to a different department. I think they acknowledge - yes, that they didn't cut them. But policing is an incredibly competitive recruiting environment. And I think their argument is. And I do think - yes, they didn't literally defund, but they were pretty public about some of their comments around the police. And I think that that probably had an effect on certain police officers' willingness to stay at the police department and others' willingness to come to the police department - can have a whole debate about the merit or harms of that, but I do think that probably played a factor. But at the same time, I think that there's a lot else going on around that issue of police recruitment that transcends just conversations around "Defund the Police" and what the previous city council did or didn't do. The mayor's office has had a budget for marketing for a couple years now. As far as we know, the recruitment environment has not improved. And so I think there are a lot of technical details that will slowly come out over Harrell's administration that show that the problems - while I do think that whatever the city council's previous image was, made probably a difference around that - I think there's a more complicated story around the mechanics of what recruitment actually looks like. [00:30:17] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I tend to think that there's a more complicated story around the mechanics of recruitment, particularly because several surrounding departments, including those with staunch supporters of hiring police, of funding police, are also experiencing challenges with hiring. It's hard to find a department around that isn't saying that they're experiencing staffing problems. So it seems to go deeper, in my view, than just that. Can I absolutely say that their willingness to examine the budget four years ago had nothing to do with this now? No, I can't. Certainly conservative elements in talk radio and Fox News continue to make a lot of that and characterize "defund" as a current dominant thought, which I think is just demonstrably false. On top of that, just on that issue, with the understanding and the knowledge that even if you were to hire an officer today, it's going to be a year plus before they can actually be deployed on the streets because of their need to train and go through their requirements. Is there a plan in the interim? We're two years into Bruce Harrell's term now, and it doesn't seem like - okay, barring that, what are we doing? I don't want to say no plan. They introduced a limited partial trial of a co-response model for behavioral health through his new CARE Department. There is that going on in a limited way - would love to see that expanded so it's at minimum around-the-clock, but certainly more than a handful of officers and responders involved there. Certainly in the area of public safety, I think a lot has been examined there. Were there any other issue areas, whether it's homelessness, the City's environmental plans, economic development within the city, that he talked about wanting to deliver or work on in his next two years? [00:32:10] David Kroman: Harrell - I think he's going to be dripping these out slowly. But the thing that I would say stood out to me the most was his comments about the City's relationship to the county. We had seen some comments of his about, specifically the City's relationship to the King County Regional Homelessness Authority, leak out unintentionally over the last two years. Fairly clear that he took a skeptical eye toward that body. But now I would say the big change now that he has this friendly council and basically full control of the City Hall is he's no longer saying those things in private. He's being fairly public about - he has a skeptical view of the King County Regional Homelessness Authority. And he has a skeptical view of the amount of money that the City of Seattle is giving that body and whether it is doing what he wants it to do. He said basically the same thing about Public Health Seattle King County, which I thought was interesting. I had never heard that relationship come up as one that needed additional scrutiny. But he said that when it comes to the issue of fentanyl, that basically he thinks Public Health Seattle King County should be doing more, and he was wondering why they're not doing more. And so as far as specific policies or legislation he might introduce, I don't have a great read on that just yet. But I do think - and I've heard this from the new council members too - I wouldn't be surprised if we see a fairly dramatic rethinking of how the city and the county work together on some of this stuff. [00:33:25] Crystal Fincher: Interesting. Certainly, it seems like there might be some budget implications attached to that. That might be another reason why we are talking about this now, as the City looks to trim a couple hundred million dollars or make up for a budget deficit of over $200 million that they're facing. Has he been responsive, or did you get a chance to talk about some of the seeming inaction on some of those areas? There certainly seemed to be a number of promises as he walked in and optimism from a lot of people as he took office that - Hey, you're someone with a different vision who's looking to move forward on a variety of things, talking about One Seattle and the vision that he has for that. Has that resulted in or materialized in anything? Is he talking about doing anything specific with that? I think a lot of people are wondering just kind of overall what his plans are. [00:34:17] David Kroman: Yeah, I think so far this has not been the most policy-heavy mayor's office by any stretch. I think back to the Murray administration - before, of course, everything else came out - but that was an office that pushed super hard for the task forces around $15 an hour and housing affordability, the HALA committee, and they would lock people in a room and make them work it out. This is not that office. What we have heard from him is a lot of messaging and, I think, an effort to do perhaps not systemic things, but pushes around certain homeless encampments or priority policing around Third Avenue or 12th and Jackson. And it's kind of these hits and sort of giving a general message about what kind of mayor he is. I think he would perhaps point to some of the rules - tree canopy legislation or things like that. But I don't know that you can point to the first two years of his office and call it a major policy-heavy term. I think there's going to be more pressure on him to be a little more policy-minded in the next two years, because as we just talked about, he's not going to have to do nearly the amount of negotiation with this city council as he would have had to do with the last one. If he comes down to them and says - I think this is really important, we got to pass this. - pretty good chance he's going to get it passed without, there's going to be tweaks and I'm sure there's going to be some nods towards pushback or accountability. But at the end of the day, this is a city council that has kind of adopted the mayor's own One Seattle slogan. When he was on city council, too, I don't know that everyone would have pointed to him, as a city councilmember, as the most policy-driven. He had certain things that he focused a lot on around policing, or he was the one who pushed the hardest for body cameras. And he's pushed hard for some police technologies like ShotSpotter and things like that. But when he was on city council, he wasn't taking the lead on a lot of big, big policy swings. And so far, I would say that's mostly been true for the first half of his term. It's just he's going to have to show some big policy swings, I think, for these next two years - because I do think he's hyper-conscious of his own reelection campaign, is my sense. We didn't talk about that specifically, but I think he's interested in running for reelection. I think it's assumed he will run for reelection. And so he's going to have to build a case for himself to voters in two years from now. [00:36:28] Crystal Fincher: Definitely. I also want to talk about some of the firsts that we saw this week. We saw the Seattle City Council conduct their first committee meeting. The Transportation Committee, chaired by Councilmember Rob Saka, held its first meeting. As you talked about, it was very Intro to or Transpo 101, because these are a lot of new members who are not familiar with the way this functions, who are still just getting their bearings underneath them for how City Hall works, how legislation works, what SDOT does do. They are all very new and are not even coming into this with a policy background in the area that may help. So this is really starting from Step 1 here. What did we hear during this committee and outside of the committee - statements from members of the council this week? [00:37:19] David Kroman: Well, a few things that stood out to me. One, it's starting to hit home a bit that this is just an incredibly green city council. This is two-thirds of people who have not held elected office before - that's not to say that they have zero experience. Maritza Rivera, for example, was a department head, so she has spent some time in City Hall. But at the end of the day, some of the questions they're asking or getting briefed on are things like - What is the Sound Transit Board? Who decides where the West Seattle to Ballard stations go? - things like that. Not to say that they don't know those things, but that's the level that we're at right now in their committee meetings. So that was one thing that really stood out to me, which is - they don't have a lot of time to figure out a lot of these big problems. We're already a month in to the year because they had to spend the first month appointing a new member. Council President Nelson didn't schedule any committee meetings during that time. So it's February and we're doing the briefing meetings. I think that's going to be something to watch. We also heard, I would say - let's call it some acknowledgement of the reality of the situation. On the campaign trail, we heard a lot of talk about "auditing the budget." We really heard it in the applications to fill the vacant council seat, this phrase "audit the budget, audit the budget." It was never super well defined what they actually meant by audit. We heard from Councilmember Saka that a literal audit of the entire budget is something that would take a really long time and be really expensive. And he acknowledged that they're not going to do that, at least not this year. So that raises some questions around what they actually meant when they were saying we were going to audit the budget and how that is materially different from what happens every year with the budget - which is you review what you can, and cut where you think you can cut, and fund what you want to fund. So that was interesting - just there's a certain reality that comes with moving from being on the campaign trail to being in office. [00:39:06] Crystal Fincher: There is a reality about moving from the campaign trail to moving into office. Speaking personally and speaking as someone who is a political consultant, has worked with plenty of candidates. This is something that you hope candidates would have an understanding of while they're running. This is directly related to what their plans are going to be. Certainly, Rob Saka and other councilmembers were asked plenty of times on the campaign trail how they were planning to deal with this looming budget deficit. And part of the background of this is that, "Well, we need to audit the budget" issue - never sound credible or serious to a lot of people because, overall, just a citywide budget audit is not the thing. But as you said, the budget process is what that is. The budget process is continually reviewing, understanding, approving, modifying - what this funding is, how effective the funding has been - that's all part of the standard budget process of the City every year. And so a lot of it seemed like they were trying to avoid talking about what their plans were. They were trying to avoid taking a stance on particularly the progressive revenue that would be needed to close a budget hole like this. And the mayor put together a Progressive Revenue Task Force that came out with options that may seem doable - asked about those, the move from a lot of the candidates, especially the moderate to conservative ones, was to say - I don't know about that progressive revenue, but we really need to audit the budget before we do anything else. We need to take a look at exactly what's being spent where and see if it works and that kind of stuff. But I think we're arriving in another situation where if you actually come in with a plan about what you want to accomplish, that's one thing. If you're coming in trying to avoid talking about what you want to accomplish, that becomes really hairy - trying to contend with and explain once you're actually in office. So now the one thing that people heard you talk about, which seeing response certainly online following these comments, was - Hey, the only thing he talked about was doing audits. And now he's saying that - Well, they can't really do that, we're walking it back, it's not practical or feasible. One, that seemingly could have been something that when people pointed that out on the campaign trail, maybe they should have taken that to heart and come up with a more realistic plan. But also now that we're here, it just seems like maybe there wasn't the kind of understanding related to what they were saying. I hope future candidates look at that and take that under advisement. I hope voters look at that and again, look at the types of answers that you're getting - even though they may sound good in a soundbite, are they actually realistic? Will they actually get done what you want to see happen in the city? Or is it just a line that people are tossing out in order to avoid talking about something else, or because it sounds good as a soundbite? [00:41:57] David Kroman: Yeah, I would say this, though, about the budget. I don't want to sound like I'm defending the City's budget process too much because - it takes you a little while, but it's very easy to see where dollars are allocated, theoretically. It is much, much more difficult to know if those dollars are actually being spent in the way that the city council budgeted them for. We've seen this actually crop up in conflicts between the city council and the mayor's office, which is city council will budget a certain amount of dollars and the mayor's office - not this mayor's office, past mayor's offices - just won't spend it because it wasn't part of their priority. And I think you can look to that conflict and generalize it out a little bit. I don't know that there are great mechanisms to show for sure that when the city council puts money towards a certain thing, it's A) going to the thing that it was supposed to, going out at all - I do think there are probably some amount of dollars that are dedicated and not being spent for whatever reason. I don't think it's corruption or anything like that. It's just staffing and permit timelines or whatever it might be. And then of course, the final question of - So it's gone out the door, is it doing what it was intended to do? I think those are all questions that are probably worth asking. And I'm not sure are always asked in the fullest sense every year during budget. And so I agree that the use of the word "audit" was incredibly fast and loose on the campaign trail. Because when you say "audit," that implies something pretty specific. We have a Washington State Auditor. We have a City of Seattle Auditor. And they do audits, or you can hire people to do an audit. It's clear that audit in the most literal sense of the term is not on the table here because that costs time and money. Close scrutiny of whether the dollars that the City has allocated are being used in the way that people said they were going to - sure, I can buy that a little bit more. I don't know how you bring that more into the process than what's already there. To the new councilmembers' credit, I think there is room there to shed a little bit more light on that end of the budgeting equation than has been done in the past. [00:43:50] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, definitely agree with that. I think you raise a really important point. It's hard to do it comprehensively - doing a deep dive into everything is a challenging thing. I do think that those questions do need to be asked frequently, especially on these high priority items. We definitely have a number of examples in the Durkan administration where they just refused to spend money - if council funded something and it wasn't aligned with the priorities of the mayor's office, the mayor's office just wouldn't spend that money in some instances or would look to divert that money to another area that wasn't one of their policy priorities as they've identified. So certainly just because money is allocated, does not mean at all that it's being spent at all or spent effectively. And I hope council does take seriously their responsibility to make sure that what they intend to happen as they set forth does happen and that money isn't just sitting there - that should be working for the residents of the city. But we'll certainly see what happens there. Last thing I want to talk about today was a story that was really concerning about a for-profit ICE detention center in Tacoma blocking health and labor inspections. What happened here? [00:45:04] David Kroman: Yeah, this was news to me. It looks like the state had tried to pass a law that basically increased access to the ICE facility - a privately run jail, basically - for people who have come into the United States. Because, as we know, there have been a lot of complaints about that facility over the years, but it's always been a little bit of a he-said, she-said situation because there's just such limited access in a way that - not to say that the state or city or county jails are in great shape, but lawmakers have an eye into those places and can see what's going on in there. They just don't with this facility because it's private. And so this bill was supposed to allow that access, but it seems like the GEO group that runs the prison is fighting them super hard on it in court and even barring people from entering. And this is pretty new to me - it seems pretty concerning - something that if you were a lawmaker, you might want to follow up on. [00:45:52] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, these complaints, there were hundreds of complaints - over 200 just between April and November of last year - stuff like insufficient food, misuse of solitary confinement, clothes rarely laundered and returning when they were supposedly laundered wet and dirtier than before, detainees with mental health issues being refused clean clothing. Medical issues, including stroke, paralysis, asthma, internal bleeding. One instance, a detainee with a broken arm was only given ibuprofen and not a cast for days after the incidents. When you talk about the types of violations that can happen when you have people who are 100% under your control, who you control their access to everything - the possibility of denial of that is egregious and atrocious. And so you do have to follow the laws of the state. Representative Lillian Ortiz-Self is trying to work through legislation to ensure that the state can inspect and examine what is happening here so it gets out of the world of he said, she said, and to ensure that they're following the laws of our state. And they've refused. So it is really concerning. A law was passed in 2021 aimed at shutting down the detention center by 2025, but that was ruled unenforceable. It just really is scary to think about - that we have these facilities responsible for people's care, basically, while they're being detained just seemingly unaccountable to anyone, with really catastrophic impacts on people who are jailed or detained here in this situation. And sometimes I'll hear people very flippantly - If they didn't want that to happen, then they shouldn't have done something to land in there in the first place. One, I think it might surprise people, the amount of seemingly innocuous things that can land someone in there. But regardless of how they landed in there, these are still people in the care of the state. And the detainment is what has been called for there, so they're being detained. But that doesn't mean that abuse, neglect, mistreatment is in any way justified. It is never justified. And I just think that we need to look at these things seriously. And when we hear about facilities, with the responsibility on behalf of the state, where they can control people's access to the necessities of life, that we should hold a higher standard than the average private company out there. And it really is just infuriating to me that we seemingly land in these situations where we have people being mistreated and they just seem to not care about the law - it's about the profit - and regardless of how people suffer at their hands in the process of it, I just - these types of stories really get to me. [00:48:54] David Kroman: Yeah, and I think it's why people are so concerned and looking for ways to get more eyes on the private prison industry - just because it is a constitutional right that people, even incarcerated people, have healthcare and food and not inhumane conditions, but just a little harder to make sure that it's not happening when the prison doesn't necessarily need to answer to the voters. [00:49:17] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. Hopefully that is something that will change soon. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, February 9th, 2024 - it's my mom's birthday today, as we're recording this February 8th. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host today was Seattle Times City Hall reporter David Kroman. You can find David on Twitter at @KromanDavid, that's K-R-O-M-A-N, David. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter at @HacksWonks. You can find me on all platforms at @finchfrii, with two I's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical shows delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, please leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

Now in the midst of his sixth year in the House, Rep. Bill Ramos makes a return visit to Capitol Ideas today. Bill chairs the House Committee on State Government and Tribal Relations, and has seats on the Transportation Committee and the Community Safety, Justice, and Reentry panel as well. That makes for a busy session, but today he stopped moving long enough to bring us up to speed on his priorities for the session and how his key bills are faring in this short, jam-packed legislative session.

Mayor Michelle Wu spoke in front of legislature's Transportation Committee, pushing for MBTA Commuter Rail stops to be more equitably priced. WBZ's Kim Tunnicliffe reports.

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and Founder and Editor of The Needling, Lex Vaughn! Crystal and Lex dive into the new year's headlines with a debate over Space Needle NYE drone shows vs fireworks, a rundown of new Washington state laws taking effect, and a discussion of why it's important to look past a poll's summary headline. They then chat about the new Seattle City Council taking office, a lawsuit against the City of Burien over its homeless camping law, and a new entrant into the Attorney General's race. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Lex Vaughn at @AlexaVaughn.   Resources RE-AIR: Ending Youth Incarceration with Dr. Ben Danielson of AHSHAY Center from Hacks & Wonks   “The new Washington state laws taking effect in January 2024” by Laurel Demkovich from Washington State Standard   “Poll: Washington voters want to spend more — while cutting taxes” by Donna Gordon Blankinship from Crosscut   Crosscut - Elway Poll | 2024 Legislative Preview    “Tammy Morales, Rob Saka To Chair Key Council Committees During Pivotal Year” by Ryan Packer and Doug Trumm from The Urbanist   “Seattle politics shift as City Council gets new members, president” by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times   “New City Council Elects Former Conservative Outcast as President” by Hannah Krieg from The Stranger   Council Vacancy | Office of the City Clerk   “Unhoused people sue Burien over new homeless camping law” by Anna Patrick from The Seattle Times   “Update: Eastern WA attorney who fought gun laws, COVID mandates plans run for state AG” by Eric Rosane from Tri-City Herald   Find stories that Crystal is reading here   Listen on your favorite podcast app to all our episodes here   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday topical show, we re-aired an important conversation I had with Dr. Ben Danielson, director of AHSHAY Center about ending youth incarceration. Today, we're continuing our Friday week-in-review shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and founder and editor of The Needling, Lex Vaughn. [00:01:20] Lex Vaughn: Hey, nice to be back. [00:01:21] Crystal Fincher: Hey, great to have you back - excited to have you back. I don't know that I'm excited to talk about everything on our list today, but we've got to get through it. But I do- [00:01:33] Lex Vaughn: There's a lot. [00:01:34] Crystal Fincher: There's a lot. And so - first show of the new year - we just had New Year's Eve, New Year's Day happen and we welcome that in in the greater Seattle area with a big Space Needle fireworks show. This year, it was a drone show pre-show and then a fireworks main show. And this year, there was a bit of a challenge with it - it was a smoky, hazy, kind of unintelligible soupy mess. What did you think about it? [00:02:09] Lex Vaughn: I was like, what is this? It's 2024 - did someone read like the last part of the year backwards, like 420, and go - This is a 420-themed New Year's Eve celebration? I don't know - it was funny. I mean, I was celebrating out-of-state with family, but I immediately was getting messages from people like - Did you see this? Did you see this? I mean, honestly, I think that - I know that a lot of people are flipping out and going like, Something needs to be done - but this is Seattle. Come on - you know that the Space Needle thing doesn't always work as planned and that's part of the fun. And the look of it was definitely fun this last year. [00:03:01] Crystal Fincher: You know, it was interesting - weather is always, always a factor in anything that happens in this region, whether it's 4th of July celebrations or New Year's Eve. I think for me, I have just been, I mean, I'm someone who has traditionally loved fireworks for most of my life and has enjoyed them. Yes, 100%. But I also, especially over the past couple of years, contending with the smoke generated by fireworks - not on New Year's Eve, but you know, July 4th, mostly, but I guess the neighborhoods on New Year's Eve - the fire hazard associated with it, which is definitely worse in the summer than it is in the winter. It just seems like now we have the option for drone shows and those seem like they're a bit more resilient - they don't create smoke. And part of the challenge of this current show was the way that the fireworks and the smoke interacted with the atmosphere, kind of making each other worse, making visibility worse. And it just seems like, okay - I am ready to move on from fireworks and to move on to drone shows. They seem like they can do everything the fireworks shows do and more. And it just seems like given where we are at with our climate, given where we are at with the volatility of just Seattle weather period, that it seems like it makes more sense to me to do that. But you know, I don't know if that's an option moving forward. You know, I don't know what's gonna happen with that. I'm not in any way affiliated with that. So it'll be interesting to see, but I wish we could move beyond fireworks personally. [00:04:38] Lex Vaughn: I'll never be over fireworks. I want that - well, I don't know - it's like, I know there's a lot of debate over it. But I also think any attempt to lessen fireworks only increases fireworks. So honestly, the best plan for reducing fireworks all over a region is always like a big, you know, show that people can watch. And when I, you know, go back to my hometown in California for New Year's or July 4th - that city stopped doing a central fireworks show. And what happened is just a proliferation of fireworks all over the city. There's just like a fireworks show going on everywhere all night. So I always think it's worth it to have one big show or you're gonna get that. [00:05:31] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I do think that a big show that the community can come to is important. In the absence of that, people are definitely going to celebrate on their own. I'm just thinking the big show can be a drone show. We saw a pretty successful pre-show - I thought - [00:05:45] Lex Vaughn: The drone show is a good backup. I mean, especially in Seattle, 'cause it's like, you know, you might be excited about a show and then, something about the weather happens and it's - Oh, you're not gonna see anything. So it's like the drone show is the only thing that can be guaranteed if it can move to a little space where it's free from smoke or clouds or whatever. [00:06:09] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well, also wanna talk about a few more things this new year is ushering in, and that's a number of new state laws taking effect as of January 1st. One of them includes marijuana testing and changing in how that can be used by employers. Under the new law, employers are blocked from conducting drug tests for cannabis when making hiring decisions. They can still test for other drugs before hiring and they can still test employees for cannabis in certain situations, like after accidents or if they suspect someone's impaired. There are also some exemptions for companies that need to test for federal requirements and other workers potentially - including police, airline crews, corrections officers - may still have to test. But it's a pretty significant change in just kind of pre-employment testing overall - that's done with a lot of lower wage jobs, certainly not so much predominant and higher wage jobs. But it does, there has been a tension for quite some time in going - Okay, well, if it's legal, then why are you testing for it? And so this seems to bring things more in line. Do you think that makes sense? [00:07:21] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, and I hope the message of a law like this is it's not worth it because you could be breaking the law and you can get sued. Like it's a liability for you now to try to judge people this way - If you haven't like sped up with the times here and realize that it's generally not that big of a deal to use cannabis. [00:07:46] Crystal Fincher: Another law that took place is a - that is taking effect - is a 10-day gun waiting period. So as of now, those wishing to buy a firearm in Washington need to complete a background check and then wait 10 business days before they can complete that purchase. We've seen this referred to as kind of a cooling off period before wanting to purchase a gun and actually owning one. We have certainly seen a number of examples from mass shootings to domestic violence situations where people use guns to murder people immediately after purchasing them. And so while no gun reform is going to solve everything - usually no anything solves anything for everything - and it really is gonna take a patchwork of policies and laws to move forward. And this seems like a positive one to me that has some evidence behind it. [00:08:39] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, honestly, this is like, I think the most positive new law of this next year that I'm really looking forward to seeing put in place and I hope becomes more commonplace because like you said - yeah, there's a lot of reform that needs to happen to make this country safer from gun violence. But this cooling off period is a major one. When I was a reporter at The Seattle Times, I definitely covered some very tragic situations where it was very clear that a young man or something was distraught over somebody breaking up with them and made a horrible decision really quickly. And it's like in a lot of these cases, it's - what could have happened if this person had just been held to a few more days of thought before pulling that off. [00:09:31] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Another law taking effect impacts hospital staffing. Hospitals in Washington need to establish staffing committees made up of nursing staff and administrators. This is in response to years of advocacy really by healthcare workers saying that - Hey, these staffing ratios have gotten way out of whack. We're not able to provide adequate care to patients, patient care quality is suffering and we need to get back to staffing ratios - happening during a time where we're losing healthcare workers. There's been a lot of attrition. The pandemic only has made that worse. And so this is trying to still allow hospitals to have their say, but to do it with the input of nurses and hospital staff to say - Let's put patient safety first. Let's really work on these ratios and make sure that we're moving in the right direction and really putting patients at the center of this year. And I think this is a step forward in this direction that will bring a little bit more transparency and accountability to the process. [00:10:43] Lex Vaughn: And it's awesome that hospital staff is getting this extra leverage to make that happen. Because I mean, obviously they've been pressing for stuff like that as unions and all. But it's crazy the way they have to fight to give us quality care. Increasingly, unfortunately, in our health systems here in the US, it's like a lot of hospital administrators are more focused on turning hospitals into these profit machines without as much thought about what's happening to staff and their patients. And those staff - those are the ones rooting for us and protecting quality of care. [00:11:30] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. So there's a new voting rights law. It's intended to address situations where there are signs of polarized voting among different groups in a community, and where there are risks to some groups having their votes diluted so they don't have a fair opportunity to elect candidates of their choice. It makes it easier to try and address this with a couple different mechanisms - it allows organizations to sue on behalf of their members, it allows local governments to voluntarily reform their election systems to be more representative of their populations, and for lawsuits to be filed if the locality refused to take such steps. So it hopefully can bring the cost down. I mean, sometimes there are clear violations, but it has been very costly - prohibitively costly - for someone to pursue it if they feel they have been wrong and want to bring that in court. So this seeks to try and address that and provide a pathway for people to be able to sue without that cost prohibitive element involved and to recover costs they incur when researching those possible legal challenges. What are your thoughts on this one? [00:12:42] Lex Vaughn: I have to admit, I was like, when I, you know, just kind of heard about this one and got a general sense of it, I was like - wait, what? This sounds a little bit confusing to me. The motivation of it is just that like, if someone is feeling outnumbered in a community, that they have strength and power to - I have to admit like this one, I didn't totally get, 'cause I don't know if I've seen a law like that before. [00:13:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it is in line with previous voting rights act laws. And we have passed legislation in the same vein - I think five years ago, we passed a voting rights act in the same vein. But it's really an issue of like - we see a challenge when it comes to districting that's happening right now in Yakima, or issues where it looks like - Okay, a community's overwhelmingly voting in the same way if you look at it geographically, but things are sliced up and that's not turning out the way it is in government. I mean, there's a case to be made in a city I'm pretty familiar with - the city of Kent, the largest city in the state that doesn't have any council districts, no form of districted government, which makes the government certainly less representative than it is in other areas. But to try and bring a case or bring a suit and rectify this has been prohibitively expensive. You can see something being wrong, but whether you can pursue any remedy or whether there's any recourse is a whole different subject. And so it's like - okay, we see that there are problems happening, but we don't have the tools and power to make it realistic to expect something to be done about it. And if someone doesn't expect something to be done about a violation, if they see that there's no consequence for bad actions, it makes it more likely that that's going to happen. So this makes it more likely that - hey, if you are violating the law, if there are violations happening here, you can expect more of a consequence for that than you did before. So hopefully one that prevents further violations from happening, but for those that currently are, it makes them easier to remedy and rectify. So I think that's a positive step. Will it solve anything? Will it immediately change anything? I don't think this is like an immediately transformative piece of policy - we're going to see something that flips from night to day in this. But I do think that it's part of, again, patchwork of legislation like most things that makes it easier to hold people and entities that are violating voting rights laws accountable and to give people more tools to fix it. [00:15:25] Lex Vaughn: And maybe like slow the role of people who were planning on exploiting people in new ways or something like that. [00:15:31] Crystal Fincher: Yes. Because there's a lot of that happening right now. Okay. Absolutely. Another law that a lot of cities have been dealing with is one that addresses street racing. So this law imposes tougher penalties for street racing. If you're caught, you can have your car impounded for three days on the first offense and forfeited on the second one. It also increases penalties for those who are found to be aiding and abetting street racers. I don't know if this is going to get there. I mean, that seems like a really tough penalty. I am not personally familiar with how these laws have resulted in any changes, or whether they've resulted in any changes. But it seems like they're trying to do more. That people are seeing that this is a problem - and it is a problem - it's a problem for a variety of reasons. And they're trying to do something to address it - and hopefully it does help. We will see. [00:16:28] Lex Vaughn: Honestly, I think it's - of course this is dangerous. I mean, whenever I hear something like this happened - I can't believe sometimes I hear this happened in Seattle sometimes. I'm like - What street are you on? Oh my God. This is horrible. This is not the place. But I think the thing is - there is a culture for this that will always be there. And no matter what law you put in place, I mean, you're just going to make it sexier. So, I mean, honestly, I wish that there was some way to - I don't know - give people a space to do this more safely or something. That's the real solution, 'cause it is going to keep happening. [00:17:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think you're onto something there. I mean, clearly you're right - there's a culture around that - and I mean, it's so interesting. And it's kind of an offshoot of car culture. There are car enthusiasts and this is a subset of that. And it's kind of tangential, but we, as a community, as a society have been reducing the number of just alternative, recreational opportunities in spaces, particularly for younger people. And then criminalizing a lot of activity there. Some of that, you know, may be warranted. Not all activity is positive. Like we said, there's a lot of danger associated with street racing, but what are we doing to give people options to do safer activities? Whether it's racing activities or others, if we aren't providing positive, affirmative options, particularly for younger people - places for people to congregate and share that don't require an entry fee, that don't require purchase necessarily, that are places where people can congregate and recreate and do things that are meaningful to them together - that we're moving in the wrong direction overall. I think that's a valid concern and one we need to do better with as a community and society. [00:18:28] Lex Vaughn: But it's not going away. So it's - we just need a more proactive approach. [00:18:35] Crystal Fincher: Yep, and so we will keep our eye on how these laws pan out, on new laws as they pass. We have a new legislative session starting on Monday, and we'll be following along with what happens there. But we're seeing these results now and we'll keep paying attention. Also wanna talk this week about a new Crosscut poll that was just released - part of the poll at least. And the headline of this poll is - Washington voters want to spend more - while cutting taxes. Also another headline saying that 57% of people are in favor of repealing the state's new capital gains tax. Now this is interesting. We've talked about this before in the podcast, but polls are very interesting things. And it's very important to pay attention to the questions asked, who they're being asked of, and what the particulars are in this. And this one - I think there are some interesting findings in this poll, I think that you have to dig a lot deeper than these headlines. And I think that this doesn't actually tell us much about what voters' likelihood of voting for or against some of these questions asked in here. And one of the reasons why this is being asked is because there is likely to be an initiative, a statewide initiative, to repeal this tax. But it's very important to actually read the poll, to go beyond the synopsis in the article and to take a look at the actual poll. And when we do that, we see that these questions were asked in a way that they aren't asked when people are invested in, where like people working, right - if you're actually working on this thing, you would not trust this. You're not asking questions in this way. Usually when you're trying to figure out what happens - one, kind of the most important thing, you wanna ask the question in the same way that it's gonna be asked to voters on their ballot. Now we're kind of before that point, right? So a lot of times you'll hear - Well, is it the ballot title? Is it the ballot language? We don't have that yet, but you wanna get close to that. You wanna describe it in a way that you feel that they're gonna encounter it in the real world with voters. You also with this, it's very important understanding, particularly with something like this - there's gonna be a lot of money, there's gonna be a lot of communication in these campaigns. So people are gonna hear messages in favor of it. People are gonna hear messages opposed to it. They're gonna be getting mail in their mailboxes, they're gonna see digital ads, they're gonna be seeing political commercials about this - and they're gonna be getting a lot of messages. You want to expose the people you're asking those questions of of likely messages that they're gonna hear so that - okay, afterwards, is it more likely or less likely that they're going to support it? - or that you're coming closer to the conditions under which they're gonna make their decision. That's really informative and really predictive and a pretty accurate way of figuring out where support really lies. And really in those things, when you have a poll, you're asking those questions - there's a lot learned by asking the initial question before they hear any pro and con arguments. And then asking that final question - the question again - having heard all that, are you still in favor of, more likely to support, less likely to support this initiative or this law? And seeing who that moves and who different arguments influence is all part of how people put together these campaigns. None of that was in here. This was asked in kind of a kludgy way, actually, kind of a muddled way in how they did this. They kind of asked - Hey, they're expected to have a surplus from a capital gains tax and a carbon pricing trade system. What should we do with this money? And so it's just - Okay, we should put it into schools. And actually the majority of people did not say they want to keep spending at the current level or reduce taxes somehow. They were saying - majority 55% said put more money into schools, reducing homelessness, mental health programs, and combating effects of climate change. Then they asked - Okay, the following are some proposals that the legislature is expected to discuss in the coming weeks. As I read each of these, please indicate whether you favor, strongly favor, oppose, or strongly oppose each one. And so all it says is - Repeal the state's new capital gains tax. And that's it. And the other ones are - Eliminate some restrictions on when police can pursue criminal suspects in cars. Put more money into mental - like they're just asking the sentence. Now, if there's one thing, especially people involved in politics, involved in reporting know - it's that people do not have the context for this at all when you just ask that. [00:23:23] Lex Vaughn: In just a general sense, the average person is like - less taxes. Like no context, like what is it? [00:23:32] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, sure, it's a tax - repeal it. What is that? [00:23:32] Lex Vaughn: Are you taking more money from me? And it's like, if this does end up on the ballot, you know, again, like this year, the main message that I know we've kept saying to defend that capital gains tax is - it affects such a small number of people. It's probably definitely not you. [00:23:51] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, exactly. [laughing] It is such a small percentage of people. And when people are like - Oh, okay, you're not talking about something that applies to me and I'm already struggling and trying to figure this out. [00:24:02] Lex Vaughn: Honestly, that thing needs like a rebrand or something - capital gains tax. [00:24:05] Crystal Fincher: Well, and I don't even - you know, I don't know. [00:24:08] Lex Vaughn: The 1% tax - I mean, I think it's even smaller than 1%. It's like - tippity-top. [00:24:13] Crystal Fincher: I would question whether it even needs a rebrand because the other thing about this is that we have seen a lot of high quality polling that turned out to look like it was pretty accurate when it came to this. And basically the numbers look flipped. When people actually are asked a reasonably composed question, when they - after they hear pro and con messages, they're more likely to support the capital gains tax. It has actually been a popular policy in polling that we've seen till now. And, you know, the questions were asked more comprehensively and differently than they were here. It'll be interesting to see as this continues - I mean, certainly this is going to produce a great headline, which in today's media environment is a goal for many people. Most people don't read beyond headlines. So if you can get a great headline, that is a win because then that gives people an impression of something, even though it may not be completely accurate or there's not other contexts surrounding it. But it'll be interesting to see where this comes out. I would just be leery about these results based on the way that these questions are asked, based on the fact that it does contradict other publicly available polling that we've seen. And it'll be interesting to see, but I am taking this with a grain of salt - for these results. I do think that there are - just looking, polls are always interesting things. And even if it's not the number one thing that the poll may have been designed to elicit, it'll be interesting. There's this larger discourse, kind of want to say Stancil-ized discourse - discourse about the economy, and whether people are happy, and what this means for Joe Biden, and like where people are at. And that there are a lot of economic indicators that seem positive, but people are kind of sour on the economy overall - more sour than traditional economic indicators would indicate is logical. But these questions, there's a question asked here - Hey, what's your outlook for the country? - basically - do you expect things will - in general terms, get better over the next year or get worse? Much better, somewhat better, somewhat worse, or much worse. And in these, what we saw is that people said - Okay - and it was asked four ways in four categories. Do you think this for the United States, for Washington State, in your community, and in your household? And across the board, people gave, you know, majority of people said - Hey, things are actually gonna get better for my household. Majorities across the board there. And then slightly less for their community, and then less for Washington State, and then less for the United States. So there's this difference where if you look and you ask people individually - Hey, do you think the next year for you in general terms is gonna be better or worse? Most people say better. But if you ask people - Okay, generally for the United States, do you think the next year is gonna be better or worse? Most people say worse. And the further out it gets from them, the less likely they are to think that it gets positive. There are lots of theories for why this is, there are lots of people's views - but it's an interesting dynamic that is there. And it's not a new dynamic - we've seen this before, but it certainly is more pronounced. It's very pronounced and there's a very wide gulf, wider than we've seen in quite some time. The other interesting thing about that is when you look at the crosstabs broken up there - younger people are actually more optimistic than older people, which is interesting. [00:27:52] Lex Vaughn: Now I don't trust anything in this poll. [00:27:54] Crystal Fincher: [laughs] What I don't have at my fingertips right now is enough data on this asked in different polls in a variety of different ways to immediately be suspicious and wanna look into more. Like with that question about the capital gains tax, it's just at odds with other polls that we have seen - certainly publicly available, certainly at odds with a lot of private polling. [00:28:21] Lex Vaughn: But young people being optimistic - about anything political - hmm. [00:28:24] Crystal Fincher: In some ways, right? And about like, does it, are you more optimistic about your own prospects? Like looking at the personal, 'cause the further away you get, the more politically influenced it is. But looking at the personal, it's really interesting. And I just find that very, very interesting in what that means and the difference there. And to me, when I see those things, the interest is in wanting to dive down and - okay, what explains that difference? Who is experiencing kind of in that zone between you thinking things getting better for yourself and worse overall? You know, who is in that category? Who are the people who move? What's influencing that movement is interesting to look at. So we'll link this poll. And like generally, I would just say for people, when you're consuming polls, there's usually a whole article breakdown, and then there should be in each article - there is in this article - a link to the actual poll. Always read the actual poll. Always read the questions. Because a lot of times, some of these challenges or things that seem non-standard or problematic are often visible to a layperson if they read it. Like, okay, that's a weird way to ask the question. Or, you know, if you ask me that, I might be confused. Or like, what does that even mean? So there's a lot there, but that was an interesting finding. But we're certainly hearing about this today - we're recording this on Thursday - and we'll be hearing a lot more about it. What did you think just generally about it? [00:29:53] Lex Vaughn: First of all, I have to admit - I think a lot of times I don't click on that kind of external PDF like there is here with a breakdown of who was interviewed, breakdown of landlines, cell phone, text. I'll say at least this poll does a very good breakdown of exactly who they interviewed. But in general, I don't take a lot of reporting on polls very seriously. I usually think it reveals the bias of a media organization or a polling organization. And I'm - that's informative. That's what I'm taking from this. [00:30:36] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's, you know, polling is an interesting thing. Polling is - not all polling is predictive. Not everybody is polling likely voters or trying to mimic an election result. Some polls are just trying to take the pulse of where people are at. This, you know, is asking some things that they're gonna be dealing with in the legislature. And it's not like there's gonna be an immediate vote up and down on proposed legislation, but it could indicate people's general satisfaction of the legislation or not. I think with these things, it is important to read the actual poll. I will say - just for here - it's important to read the poll 'cause I have seen more than one misleading breakdown of a poll, or things that omit some significant or even contradictory findings. And so I think it's important to look for yourself to - okay, not a synopsis, but if we're really talking about how important this is about policy or what people think, let me look at everything people ask and let me look at this whole poll and see what happens - because we can't always trust the breakdowns. But also just understanding what polls do and don't do. A poll that - things can change massively in either direction, right, between now and the election. These are a snapshot in time. Something, especially at this point in time, is not predictive. They're very early. There's usually - if you're asking about a specific candidate or policy, a lot of people who aren't familiar with it yet, or who don't have all of the context - there's still a lot of pro and con arguments and a lot of communication that's gonna happen. So they're not determinative, certainly. They're not absolutely predictive. But they can be useful information points. And usually they're most useful - not in the horse race sense - but in the who does something appeal to and why, if it's done well. And just understanding that - certainly from a campaign perspective is really important - Even if you set aside the - ultimate who's likely to vote for this or not type of questions. So just another interesting one. I'm sure we're gonna see other ones. I think this is part one of two that they've released, so we're going to see some more from this soon. And that was a Crosscut poll. Also this week, Seattle City Council - councils all across the state, really were sworn in - the new Seattle City Council was sworn in. And so we have a new council. We have committees that were assigned. We have Sara Nelson, who is now the council president. Sara Nelson, who is a moderate conservative, who is now seeming to be very aligned with the mayor and leading a council that is much more aligned with the mayor's office - that is much more moderate to conservative. And so we're going to see a new council and seemingly a new direction here in the state. We saw one of Sara Nelson's first actions as council president was to disband the Renters' Rights Committee, which former Seattle City Councilmember, Kshama Sawant, had chaired since 2019 - disbanded that committee, and which is not that surprising. More than half of the residents of Seattle are renters, so it seems like that is applicable to the majority of people - it would be useful and helpful. But Sara has indicated distrust and hostility of several of those efforts before, has hosted landlord support groups before. And so it is not surprising, even though it may be really unfortunate. [00:34:18] Lex Vaughn: Yeah. [00:34:20] Crystal Fincher: But we're gonna see. What do you think about this whole thing? [00:34:24] Lex Vaughn: It's really unfortunate that a whole slate of people was elected that are probably gonna just kinda be in lockstep with the mayor. And I see all of them as like, faux-gressive - they know how to kinda have the facade of progressive to fit into Seattle, but their policies that they're rooting for are just so obviously conservative and Republican to me. Like making your first order of business disbanding a Renters' Rights Committee. [laughs] It's like, it's just amazing. And it just kind of adds to the cognitive dissonance of the whole identity of the city - who these council people are and what they're probably gonna do legally this year, the policies they're gonna enact - just makes me laugh that anyone thinks the city is liberal. 'Cause it's - unfortunately, these people that were just elected are probably going to move forward with basically a lot of conservative policies on a local level. [00:35:33] Crystal Fincher: It's gonna be really interesting to see. And for me, there's a lot that they're going to be dealing with. And just so people know - that for committee chairs, the people who are going to decide the general direction of these areas, what kind of legislation they pursue within their committees. Rob Saka will be chairing the Transportation Committee. Tammy Morales will chair the Land Use Committee. Joy Hollingsworth will chair the Parks, Public Utilities and Technology Committee. Maritza Rivera will chair Libraries, Education and Neighborhoods. Cathy Moore will chair Housing and Human Services. Dan Strauss will chair Finance, which will handle the budget, Native Communities and Tribal Governments. Bob Kettle will chair Public Safety. And the vacant Position 8 position - the person who will be appointed to the council - will chair Sustainability, City Light, Arts and Culture. Sara Nelson will chair Governance, Accountability and Economic Development. Within those, there's a lot that's gonna happen. And I think one thing that some people discount or don't expect is just how much practically they're going to have to deal with. Now it's kind of like - Okay, strip the progressive or conservative, whatever labels. There are serious issues that people have to deal with and a range of options, like a range that could be under the progressive label, a range that could be under the moderate label, right? But they're going to have to chart - well, they don't have to - their job is to chart a path forward for lots of this. Rob Saka, Chair of Transportation, which, you know, there's certainly a lot at stake - when it comes to transportation, there's gonna be a new Move Seattle Levy. He's overseeing the $700 million annual budget. We see a lot of asks and needs from the community. He's talked about getting back to the basics and being "the pothole king." And there, and it'll just be interesting to see. There's a lot of practical daily things that have to be dealt with. How is he going to do that? What approach are they going to take to a lot of things? We've seen Bob Kettle, Chair of Public Safety, talk about a lot of law and order oriented things, building a better relationship, promoting respect. We heard Sara Nelson talk about - one of her other first acts was proposing another pay increase for SPD, which is, you know, without anything changes, would deepen the budget deficit that the city is facing, barring any new revenue on the heels of other additions to that budget and elements of pay. It'll just be really interesting to see, because these things are having practical effects. They're all going to impact the budget that they're all going to have to deal with, with a major budget deficit coming up. They were all, most of these people who are new on the council were very hesitant to discuss what their actual practical plans were for dealing with this budget deficit, most hesitant to put support behind any new taxation, progressive taxation, proposals from the work group that the mayor convened on this that came up with options. But they have talked about cutting in areas. They have talked about the need to trim overall, but were hesitant or unwilling to talk about what specifically that would be. They're going to have to get into specifics now. They're going to have to deal with the things that they were hesitant to talk about during the campaign. It's going to be really interesting to see how this, how this carries out. Also, this is a very new council overall. They're going to have to get their feet underneath them. Sara Nelson announced that they are not going to be having regular committee meetings for most of this month to allow people to get up to speed - there's a lot of that that needs to happen - and that their first council meeting of the month will be on the 23rd to appoint the new councilmember that is going to take over for Teresa Mosqueda, who is, was just elected to the county. So it's going to be really interesting and just FYI - applications for that vacancy, if anyone is interested, are being accepted until January 9th. And that is Tuesday and the appointment will take place on the 23rd. Certainly a lot of talk about who might potentially take those places. We have heard a couple names bandied about, one of them being Tanya Woo, who lost - [00:40:10] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, how about not Tanya Woo? [laughing] [00:40:13] Crystal Fincher: You know, I just have a hard time - you're representing all of Seattle. It is a city that has made a strong stance and has made strong statements - fortunately - when it comes to protecting all members of the LGBTQ community, including trans people. And there's an interview with Hacks & Wonks, it's been covered elsewhere where Tanya Woo did not fully support the ability of trans people to participate in regular everyday life like everyone else, expressed reservations about trans people participating on sports teams - said if they wanted to exclude them, she would be willing to support that in a position on the city council - which just to me, there are policy differences, but then there are issues of just basic humanity and support of people and residents of the city. And that, to me, is one of those that's automatically disqualifying in my personal evaluation of that. And so it looks like that is not necessarily disqualifying for some people who might be considering this on the council, but I certainly think it should be considered with this. Now I do understand that she, I think, made an Instagram post apologizing for that and trying to clarify their position. I would just suggest that, you know, and lots of people evolve over that. So I'm not saying that that is what she thinks or believes for the rest of her life. Maybe she has changed and maybe she has learned more, and I hope that she has and that other people are on that journey. I just think that when it comes to appointing someone responsible for the city, we can appoint someone who is further along in that journey and not learning about the humanity of people at the same time that they're having to learn about all of these policies and operations that they're now having to. So it's gonna be really interesting to see. There are certainly other people who have held various elected office, school board candidates that have had exposure and that may be able to be really positive additions to the council, particularly with a number of councilmembers that have not served in elective office before - having someone who had in whatever capacity could be a very positive, helpful thing for this council. It'll be interesting to see. I think that there are - certainly there have been some names that have been talked about publicly. I think there are more names that are circulating privately. It'll be really interesting to see how this shakes out. But either way, I also don't think that's gonna tip the balance of this council. I do think that it could help with policy formation and general operational items. But I think just, you know, it's not gonna tip the balance of power of the council. [00:42:55] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, I think the direction the council is gonna go is pretty well set. [00:43:00] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. [00:43:01] Lex Vaughn: Yeah. [00:43:02] Crystal Fincher: Yep, so we will see. Also this week, news of a lawsuit against the City of Burien over their new homeless camping law that - we have heard about the saga of Burien for quite some time. There was also an independent report this week that came out really chastising the city manager for not handling some of the major issues that they're doing with due care and seriousness. But this is a lawsuit being brought on behalf of unhoused people by a regional advocacy organization suing the city, claiming that it banishes homeless people, inflicts cruel punishment, and it violates Washington's constitution. The Northwest Justice Project filed the lawsuit on Wednesday in King County Superior Court on behalf of the Seattle King County Coalition on Homelessness and three individual plaintiffs. What were your thoughts on this? [00:43:56] Lex Vaughn: I mean, it seems like this is the next step in inevitable plan to get this in the Supreme Court. I think there's probably a variety of cities, not just Burien, who have been wanting to challenge this. So this is another showdown that'll go to a higher court. But in general, I think it's just sad that it's happening because it's - we're talking about people's right to exist. It's not just a right to be homeless or something. It's a right to exist. There are people who cannot afford shelter. We as a society are not providing them enough aid in a dark period of their life. And you can't just ask people to go poof. Like, there's no magic wand that makes them just dissipate in air overnight. They have to exist somewhere. And to criminalize that is incredibly inhumane. [00:45:00] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I mean, they have nowhere to go. Homelessness is a housing problem - it's the lack of housing. There has certainly been a lot of talk and skewed coverage presenting the homeless population as basically criminals and violent drug abusers. And one - homeless people are more likely to be victimized by crime than any other group. And if we were looking at facts and data, we would start from that point - they are not more violent than the general population. [00:45:35] Lex Vaughn: A lot of people are escaping violence. I mean, especially homeless youth, you know? [00:45:41] Crystal Fincher: 100%. [00:45:42] Lex Vaughn: Yeah. [00:45:42] Crystal Fincher: But, you know, criminalizing - it doesn't help that. Sending someone to jail because they don't have shelter doesn't help them to get shelter - it moves them further away from it. It destabilizes people. And it's just incredibly expensive. [00:45:58] Lex Vaughn: Yeah. [00:45:59] Crystal Fincher: There is just- [00:46:00] Lex Vaughn: So ineffective. [00:46:01] Crystal Fincher: Yes - so really expensive and ineffective. Seems like - okay, that should be the thing not to do. But that's the thing that they are rushing to do. Interesting about this lawsuit is it doesn't cite Martin v. Boise, which is a previous 2018 decision that came out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, saying that homeless people can't be punished for sleeping outside on public property if there are no adequate alternatives to offer them. Doesn't cite that, and it is also citing that it's a violation of Washington State's Constitution. So this, you know, which to me is notable because we'll see if Martin v. Boise stands. I don't think there's absolute confidence that that's going to continue to stand, although I certainly believe it should. But this could be something else that could prevent the large-scale just criminalization of homelessness without there being any place for anyone to go. No surprise to listeners of the program - I do believe we have an obligation to provide shelter and housing for people and that we have done a poor job of that, we have not kept up with the demand. And we continue to spend tons of money on these criminalized solutions that could go so much further if we invested them in ways that have shown they're more likely to reduce homelessness. There's been lots of coverage about Housing First models, which have been under attack, and there's actually an article recently about a very coordinated, conservative attack on these models. Just anecdotally, I've seen lots of people - Housing First policies have failed - when the truth is they haven't been tried yet. We've done a lot of criminalization. We have not done that - and man, we would love to, but suggestions that they don't work and that they failed are just false and not rooted. In reality, we haven't tried them. We have tried criminalization, and that's what's gotten us here. [00:47:53] Lex Vaughn: Criminalization, another word for addiction to punishment. Doesn't matter that there's just mounds of research showing that these old techniques of criminalization don't reduce homelessness, they don't make us safer. It's just frustrating to continue to see this happen when it's like there's so much evidence and research showing that criminalization is an expensive and ineffective strategy for solving A) homelessness, and B) making us a safer community in general. [00:48:33] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. The last item on our list today is there is a new entrant into the race for attorney general - a Republican from central Washington, an attorney named Pete Serrano, is the first major Republican to toss his name into the ring for Washington Attorney General. So he joins former US attorney Nick Brown, senior King County Deputy Prosecutor and State Senator Manka Dhingra in the race - who are both Democrats. So if he was elected, he would be the first Republican to hold the office since Rob McKenna vacated the seat in 2012. He's running on pretty standard conservative policies right now, which are kind of out there. He announced his candidacy with the host of the Washington Gun Law blog, if that gives you any hint - he is not in favor of any kind of gun control or gun laws. He, I believe, fought against vaccine mandates, filed legal challenges against the state's COVID-19 emergency order, fought against gun control legislation, and wants to bring more of that to the AG's race. What do you think of this? [00:49:48] Lex Vaughn: I think it's interesting that the first person he was coming out swinging against is Bob Ferguson. And I think as he campaigns, he'll probably keep his aim there because even though Bob Ferguson isn't running for AG again, he's running for governor. I guess this guy is gonna sell himself as like the check on Bob Ferguson if he wins the governor's race. I think - hopefully this guy won't stand a chance - but he will make these campaigns a little bit more colorful. [00:50:21] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, certainly a new dimension in this race. There were - the main people in the race, two well-known Democratic candidates or fairly well-known Democratic candidates. This being the first Republican candidate is a new dimension in the race. We will continue to follow it. We're gonna have a lot of very interesting statewide races, which is not an unusual thing - except in Washington State for the past decade, basically, where we haven't had much change there. So will be interesting to follow, and we'll keep our eyes peeled on what happens there. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, January 5th, 2024. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host is Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and founder and editor of The Needling, Lex Vaughn. You can find Lex on Twitter @AlexaVaughn - you can also find her on several other platforms, as well as me. I'm everywhere @finchfrii. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

Join America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio co-hosts Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy with U.S Senator Marsha Blackburn, Member of the Finance Committee; the Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee; the Veterans Affairs Committee; and the Judiciary Committee Senator Marsha Blackburn delivered her remarks at the Solidarity with Israel event, organized by the International Leaders Summit and America's Roundtable, and co-hosted by Speaker Mike Johnson and Chairman Mike Bost on Capitol Hill on December 12, 2023. americasrt.com (https://americasrt.com/) https://ileaderssummit.org/ | https://jerusalemleaderssummit.com/ America's Roundtable on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/americas-roundtable/id1518878472 Twitter: @MarshaBlackburn @ileaderssummit @AmericasRT @NatashaSrdoc @JoelAnandUSA @supertalk America's Roundtable is co-hosted by Natasha Srdoc and Joel Anand Samy, co-founders of International Leaders Summit and the Jerusalem Leaders Summit. America's Roundtable (https://americasrt.com/) radio program - a strategic initiative of International Leaders Summit, focuses on America's economy, healthcare reform, rule of law, security and trade, and its strategic partnership with rule of law nations around the world. The radio program features high-ranking US administration officials, cabinet members, members of Congress, state government officials, distinguished diplomats, business and media leaders and influential thinkers from around the world. Tune into America's Roundtable Radio program from Washington, DC via live streaming on Saturday mornings via 65 radio stations at 7:30 A.M. (ET) on Lanser Broadcasting Corporation covering the Michigan and the Midwest market, and at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk Mississippi — SuperTalk.FM reaching listeners in every county within the State of Mississippi, and neighboring states in the South including Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Tennessee. Listen to America's Roundtable on digital platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon, Google and other key online platforms. Listen live, Saturdays at 7:30 A.M. (CT) on SuperTalk | https://www.supertalk.fm

* Judge rejects Trump bid for US House Jan. 6 committee records - Andrew Goudsward, Reuters. The judge concluded that prosecutors had already given Trump written transcripts of those interviews and that Trump's attorneys had not shown how video footage of those same conversations could be relevant to his defense. * Terry Newsome: I peacefully attended the J6 stop rally with a high school friend of mine who was a newly retired police officer.  We did not enter the Capitol; we didn t fight with police officers, nor did we destroy any property. * We attended J6 for two reasons. First to attend the rally. Secondly, to protect Trump supporters and families from being attacked, harassed, and beaten up by ANTIFA and BLM. * I obtained very interesting videos from J6.  We happened to be behind Ray Epps when they made the first breach. On the retreat from the Capitol, I have videos of Jason Chansley and ANTIFA agitating Trump supporters. * Republican friends warned me that these corrupt establishment RINOS would try to silence me. They were right!  I have a Podcast called Behind Enemy Lines which represents being a parent and Republican trying to fight for our families, children, and state in the communist state of IL!  Two weeks ago, my country Sheriff worked with his corrupt IL State Police friends to send IL State Police investigators to my home to harass me and my family. The officers said they received an  anonymous email  saying I made a threatening comment on my Podcast. This was a total lie. The police agreed and apologized. They said the  higher-ups sent us .  I have the entire conversation on my RING camera! * Here's my video at 1:31 on the West side of the Capitol, showing Jason Chansley walking past, yelling Freedom.  Then you will see either ANTIFA or a Fed agitator yelling on a bullhorn to the approaching Tumpers telling them to "take a picture and show the world"   We all know why he was saying that! * November/December 2022 a Chicago ANTIFA associate and writer for the SPLC published a bogus hit piece on me. His Chicago ANTIFA  comrades  started to attack and dox me on Twitter. They went after my job and tagged the Chicago FBI and FBI stating that I tried to  overthrow the government .  Shortly after the harassment by the SPLC and ANTIFA I was suddenly placed on a Domestic Terrorist Watchlist. Me and my family were placed on the SSSS list by the TSA where we were aggressively harassed when we flew. * Fortunately, I had tons of national media coverage that led to getting the attention of Congressmen Matt Gaetz and Troy Nehls.  Matt Gaetz contacted me in January 2023, which led to him sending a Demand Letter to Garland, Wrey, and Mayorkas. Congressman Troy Nehls contacted an Epoch Times reporter to get my information. Troy, who sits on the Transportation Committee, sent a letter to the TSA on my behalf.  These letters eventually led to me being removed from the Terrorist Watchlist. * Epoch TV, Jack Smith Demands Twitter Info on All Americans Who Interacted With Trump.

Karen is absolutely delightful. She's a powerful leader and has mastered the art of navigating across political lines to create great policies for her districts as she represents Utah.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_Kwan_(politician) Karen Kwan (born February 12, 1964) is an American politician serving in the Utah State Senate from the 12th district. On January 16, 2023 she was selected by delegates of the Utah Democratic Party to replace resigning Senator Karen Mayne.[1] Before her appointment to the Senate she served in the Utah House of Representatives, representing the 34th district from 2017 to 2023 (and briefly the 31st). She also previously served as the House Minority Whip.[2] Education[edit] Kwan has a bachelor's degree in psychology from Pepperdine University, an Ed.D. in educational leadership/policy from the University of Utah, and a master's degree in clinical psychology from Pepperdine University.[3] Career[edit] Kwan is an associate professor of psychology at Salt Lake Community College.[3] Public service[edit] Kwan was first elected in 2016, defeating the Republican candidate.[4] During the 2018 legislative session, Kwan served on the Higher Education Appropriations Subcommittee; the Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environmental Quality Appropriations Subcommittee; the Political Subdivisions Committee, and the Transportation Committee. Kwan was reelected in November 2018 with 60.03 percent of the vote, defeating the Republican candidate.[5][6] In 2020, Kwan was reelected to her third consecutive term by defeating Republican challenger David Young 57% to 43%.[7] During the 2022 Legislative Session, Rep. Kwan served on the Executive Appropriations Committee, the Higher Education Appropriations Subcommittee, the House Education Committee, the House Transportation Committee, the Legislative Management Committee, and the Subcommittee on Oversight.[2]

The Guy Benson Show for 10/16/23 ~ Ron DeSantis, (R-FL) Governor of the Free State of Florida & Presidential Candidate @RonDeSantis   ~ Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) Blackburn serves on the following committees: Commerce, Science, & Transportation Committee, Judiciary Committee, Veterans' Affairs Committee & Armed Services Committee   ~ Bill Hemmer, co-anchor of Fox News America's Newsroom, weekdays from 9-11AM EST Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Friday, October 6th, 2023. Dropwave Do you have a podcast, or thinking about starting one? Does your church have a podcast feed for sermons? Then Dropwave.io is for you. Cancel culture is like walking on a thin glass bridge over the Grand Canyon. Every step you take could get you killed, I mean canceled. Since the beginning CrossPolitic has been working on being antifragile, so no matter what happens, our content can still be delivered to your tv and to your podcast. This past year, the Waterboy and his friend Jeremi, have been working on building a podcast hosting solution for rowdy platforms like CrossPolitic, so that you can be confident your podcast will never fall through that glass bridge. Dropwave offers seamless onboarding for shows that have been around for years to easy to use solutions for starting your own podcast. Dropwave will track all your show’s downloads by city, state, and country, and it offers network and enterprise packages for solutions like the Fight Laugh Feast Network. Free to speak, Free to podcast, free to start your journey now at www.Dropwave.io. https://www.theblaze.com/news/child-allegedly-shoots-two-teens-at-football-practice-over-bag-of-chips Child allegedly shoots two teens at football practice over 'bag of chips' An 11-year-old was arrested Monday after allegedly opening fire at a Pop Warner youth football practice in Apopka, Florida. Police say that while only one shot was fired, two kids were ultimately struck — one in the back and the other in the arm. The suspect is presently facing one count of attempted second-degree murder, though Apopka Police Chief Michael McKinley indicated prosecutors may pursue additional charges. WOFL-TV reported that the APD received a report of a shooting around 8:20 p.m. near a football field at the Northwest Recreation Center on Jason Dwelley Parkway where a kids' soccer game was also taking place. In the 911 call obtained by WESH-TV, one victim's mother can be heard saying, "My son got shot, miss! ... In his back!" The first officer arrived on the scene just four minutes later, finding one victim on the ground and another victim holding his grazed elbow. The two victims, both 13 years old, were taken to Arnold Palmer Hospital and are expected to make a full recovery. Surveillance footage shows juveniles crewing at the edge of the parking lot around 8:17 p.m., some still wearing their football jerseys. The first victim, a heavy-set male with red shorts, can be seen chasing the alleged shooter toward his mother's vehicle around 8:18 p.m. Seconds later, the suspect opens the front passenger door and reaches into the vehicle, where his mother was reportedly in the driver's seat. Inside and under the passenger seat was a purple handgun, according to the arrest report. Brandishing the weapon, the suspect appears to turn the tables and chase the heavy-set victim, ultimately firing one shot into the victim's back. The same round proceeded to graze the second victim's elbow. Following the shooting, WOFL indicated the alleged shooter was brought back to his mother's vehicle. He is now being held at a juvenile detention center. According to the arrest report, some witnesses claimed the victims had been "bullying" the alleged shooter. Others suggested the dispute was over "a bag of chips," reported the Orlando Sentinel. Apopka Police Chief Michael McKinley told reporters, "It's unbelievable that young kids out here to play football and have a good time would get into an altercation." McKinley indicated the APD would be pursuing second-degree misdemeanor charges against the mother for allegedly having her firearm in an unlocked box, reported WKMG-TV. Orange-Osceola State Attorney Andrew Bain, who took over for Monique Worrell after her suspension by Gov. Ron DeSantis, said his office will ensure there will be a reckoning. "The level of violence unacceptable right now, especially from our youth," said Bain. "We’re going to stand strong to deal with those cases and try to end or put a big slow-down to what’s going on in the streets right now." Apopka Pop Warner canceled its Wednesday practice, noting in a statement, "One of our players was involved in a shooting incident that resulted in the injury of two players. We are deeply saddened by this event and our thoughts and prayers are with the families affected." https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/10/04/uk-announced-new-zealand-style-plan-to-ban-smoking-altogether/ UK Announces New Zealand Style Plan to Ban Smoking Altogether The United Kingdom is to phase out smoking altogether, the government says, by banning young people from buying cigarettes at all with a minimum age to buy rising from 18 every year until there isn’t anyone left alive old enough to enjoy the habit. Conservative Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced his intention to steer the UK towards becoming tobacco-free by increasing the minimum age to buy products every year from here on, so the teenagers of today will never be old enough to legally take the habit up. Sunak acknowledged restricting personal freedoms was not always an easy choice for an instinctive Conservative but — underlining the way government decisions are driven by socialised healthcare — said it was important because smokers cost taxpayers through needing more hospital care. This is about “preventative care” to keep people out of hospitals, the Prime Minister said and told his governing party’s annual conference that: “I propose that in future, we raise the smoking age by one year every year. That means a 14-year-old today will never legally be sold a cigarette, and that they and their generation can grow up smoke-free”. This would work, Sunak said, because the UK’s previous experience with increasing the smoking age from 16 to 18 saw a drop in the number of people starting smoking. The Prime Minister said he would also look at cracking down on ‘vapes’, the electronic tobacco alternative. A report explaining the system as already implemented in New Zealand, which is becoming known for its draconian health interventions, stated in 2022: The law states that tobacco can’t ever be sold to anybody born on or after January 1, 2009 – and from now on, the minimum age for buying cigarettes will keep going up and up. In theory, somebody trying to buy a pack of cigarettes 50 years from now would need ID to show they were at least 63 years old. But health authorities hope smoking will fade away well before then. They have a stated goal of making New Zealand smoke-free by 2025. New Zealand also took other measures in its law shakeup, including making getting hold of cigarettes more difficult for those who could legally use them. They are no longer sold in regular stores, but can only be bought at specialist tobacconists, cutting the number of locations where smokes are sold nationwide from thousands of locations to hundreds. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-faa-nominee-promises-end-work-from-home Biden pick to lead FAA promises hard push to end work-from-home policies President Joe Biden's nominee to lead the Federal Aviation Administration would prioritize ending pandemic telework policies for federal employees and bring the out-of-date agency into the 21st century. Former FAA Deputy Administrator Michael Whitaker told Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee members during his confirmation hearing on Wednesday that, if approved, he would focus heavily on matters with agency employees. "I do believe that it's important to be in person for collaboration and working together," said Whitaker, a pilot and former aviation industry executive. "This has been a challenging issue for all organizations, private or public. And I think what needs to happen is after understanding the situation that we're in and the limitations that might be there, issuing very clear guidance, what the expectations are to get people in the office." In July, the FAA announced that employees would have to return to the office no fewer than three days per week starting on Oct. 9. The union pushed back against a 100% return to office, complicating the agency's attempt to reinstate the policy. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) egged Whitaker on over the work-from-home policies and claimed the federal government was the only employer that had not returned to pre-pandemic policies. "When I talk to businesses in the private sector, virtually all of them, employees are going back to work, and they're physically present. And yet, throughout the Biden administration, we have a pattern in just about every agency where large portions of the workforce have apparently decided going into the office is optional," Cruz said. "That seriously limits the effectiveness of an agency and particularly an agency whose mission is protecting people's lives and the airspace." When asked by Cruz if he would commit to "working diligently" to bring employees back into the office, Whitaker agreed. Whitaker was second in command at the FAA from 2012 through 2015. The agency has had a gap in leadership over the past 18 months. Returning to the FAA at this point, Whitaker said, would warrant three actions he would take in his five-year term as administrator. "First, I will work not just to maintain the safety record we have collectively achieved but build upon it. The two Boeing MAX crashes remind us that we must be ever-vigilant," Whitaker said. The agency ought to ensure gaps in the FAA certification process are closed so that undisclosed changes manufacturers make to aircraft can still be caught before being put into use. Second, the FAA should be more "agile and creative" and willing to "adapt quickly" and plan for the future rather than focus on the present. The FAA has but one academy that takes years to complete, and it can only accommodate 1,800 air traffic controllers at a time. Whitaker's final point was that the government should make the FAA a place where people interested in aviation careers, particularly air traffic controllers, want to work. He was tasked with hiring 6,000 air traffic controllers during his previous stint at the FAA but came up far short. https://dailycaller.com/2023/10/05/rnc-republican-presidential-primary-debates-donald-trump/ Even The RNC’s Own Members Are Admitting Trump-less Debates May Be A Waste Of Time Members of the Republican National Committee (RNC) are frustrated with the current direction of their GOP primary debates, admitting that without President Donald Trump the events may not be worth it, according to Politico. The frontrunner for the Republican nomination, Trump has skipped the first two presidential debates, a decision that has drawn criticism from rival candidates. After the first two debates were widely panned, some within the RNC think they need the President on the stage to make the forums worth it. “I think the only way you salvage it is if you get the frontrunner there,” Tyler Bowyer, a national committeeman from Arizona, told Politico. “Plan a debate where you get the frontrunner to agree to it.” The first GOP presidential debate, sponsored by the conservative youth organization Young America’s Foundation (YAF), was aired exclusively on Fox News, Fox Business and Rumble. The debate was moderated by Fox News’ Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The second debate was aired by the exact same networks, in addition to Spanish-language network Univision. The moderators included Univision anchor Ilia Calderón, Fox Business host Stuart Varney and Fox News host Dana Perino. That debate fell flat, with many prominent conservative media figures criticizing the moderators for asking poor questions while candidates bickered and talked over one another. The RNC previously promised in 2022 to use debates to “raise conservative media up” and incorporate other outlets, but after the first two debates, conservative media companies outside of the mainstream media told the Daily Caller that they are feeling snubbed by the committee. “You can’t put your head in the sand and pretend these debates are going to result in someone other than Donald Trump getting the nomination,” Patti Lyman, the RNC’s national committeewoman from Virginia, told Politico, adding that the debates were “embarrassing” and “reflected very poorly on our party.” Despite some members pushing for Trump to take the debate stage, top officials are reportedly not attempting to get the front runner on the debate stage, a person with knowledge of the committee’s operations told Politico. That reportedly includes RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and chairman for the RNC’s Temporary Committee on Presidential Debates David Bossie. Trump himself doesn’t think the debates should go on; the President told the Daily Caller that the RNC “has to stop the debates” because they are “bad for the Republican party.” Trump and his advisors have additionally urged the RNC to “refocus its manpower and money” on election integrity efforts rather than the debates, Politico reported.

This is Garrison Hardie with your CrossPolitic Daily News Brief for Friday, October 6th, 2023. Dropwave Do you have a podcast, or thinking about starting one? Does your church have a podcast feed for sermons? Then Dropwave.io is for you. Cancel culture is like walking on a thin glass bridge over the Grand Canyon. Every step you take could get you killed, I mean canceled. Since the beginning CrossPolitic has been working on being antifragile, so no matter what happens, our content can still be delivered to your tv and to your podcast. This past year, the Waterboy and his friend Jeremi, have been working on building a podcast hosting solution for rowdy platforms like CrossPolitic, so that you can be confident your podcast will never fall through that glass bridge. Dropwave offers seamless onboarding for shows that have been around for years to easy to use solutions for starting your own podcast. Dropwave will track all your show’s downloads by city, state, and country, and it offers network and enterprise packages for solutions like the Fight Laugh Feast Network. Free to speak, Free to podcast, free to start your journey now at www.Dropwave.io. https://www.theblaze.com/news/child-allegedly-shoots-two-teens-at-football-practice-over-bag-of-chips Child allegedly shoots two teens at football practice over 'bag of chips' An 11-year-old was arrested Monday after allegedly opening fire at a Pop Warner youth football practice in Apopka, Florida. Police say that while only one shot was fired, two kids were ultimately struck — one in the back and the other in the arm. The suspect is presently facing one count of attempted second-degree murder, though Apopka Police Chief Michael McKinley indicated prosecutors may pursue additional charges. WOFL-TV reported that the APD received a report of a shooting around 8:20 p.m. near a football field at the Northwest Recreation Center on Jason Dwelley Parkway where a kids' soccer game was also taking place. In the 911 call obtained by WESH-TV, one victim's mother can be heard saying, "My son got shot, miss! ... In his back!" The first officer arrived on the scene just four minutes later, finding one victim on the ground and another victim holding his grazed elbow. The two victims, both 13 years old, were taken to Arnold Palmer Hospital and are expected to make a full recovery. Surveillance footage shows juveniles crewing at the edge of the parking lot around 8:17 p.m., some still wearing their football jerseys. The first victim, a heavy-set male with red shorts, can be seen chasing the alleged shooter toward his mother's vehicle around 8:18 p.m. Seconds later, the suspect opens the front passenger door and reaches into the vehicle, where his mother was reportedly in the driver's seat. Inside and under the passenger seat was a purple handgun, according to the arrest report. Brandishing the weapon, the suspect appears to turn the tables and chase the heavy-set victim, ultimately firing one shot into the victim's back. The same round proceeded to graze the second victim's elbow. Following the shooting, WOFL indicated the alleged shooter was brought back to his mother's vehicle. He is now being held at a juvenile detention center. According to the arrest report, some witnesses claimed the victims had been "bullying" the alleged shooter. Others suggested the dispute was over "a bag of chips," reported the Orlando Sentinel. Apopka Police Chief Michael McKinley told reporters, "It's unbelievable that young kids out here to play football and have a good time would get into an altercation." McKinley indicated the APD would be pursuing second-degree misdemeanor charges against the mother for allegedly having her firearm in an unlocked box, reported WKMG-TV. Orange-Osceola State Attorney Andrew Bain, who took over for Monique Worrell after her suspension by Gov. Ron DeSantis, said his office will ensure there will be a reckoning. "The level of violence unacceptable right now, especially from our youth," said Bain. "We’re going to stand strong to deal with those cases and try to end or put a big slow-down to what’s going on in the streets right now." Apopka Pop Warner canceled its Wednesday practice, noting in a statement, "One of our players was involved in a shooting incident that resulted in the injury of two players. We are deeply saddened by this event and our thoughts and prayers are with the families affected." https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/10/04/uk-announced-new-zealand-style-plan-to-ban-smoking-altogether/ UK Announces New Zealand Style Plan to Ban Smoking Altogether The United Kingdom is to phase out smoking altogether, the government says, by banning young people from buying cigarettes at all with a minimum age to buy rising from 18 every year until there isn’t anyone left alive old enough to enjoy the habit. Conservative Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced his intention to steer the UK towards becoming tobacco-free by increasing the minimum age to buy products every year from here on, so the teenagers of today will never be old enough to legally take the habit up. Sunak acknowledged restricting personal freedoms was not always an easy choice for an instinctive Conservative but — underlining the way government decisions are driven by socialised healthcare — said it was important because smokers cost taxpayers through needing more hospital care. This is about “preventative care” to keep people out of hospitals, the Prime Minister said and told his governing party’s annual conference that: “I propose that in future, we raise the smoking age by one year every year. That means a 14-year-old today will never legally be sold a cigarette, and that they and their generation can grow up smoke-free”. This would work, Sunak said, because the UK’s previous experience with increasing the smoking age from 16 to 18 saw a drop in the number of people starting smoking. The Prime Minister said he would also look at cracking down on ‘vapes’, the electronic tobacco alternative. A report explaining the system as already implemented in New Zealand, which is becoming known for its draconian health interventions, stated in 2022: The law states that tobacco can’t ever be sold to anybody born on or after January 1, 2009 – and from now on, the minimum age for buying cigarettes will keep going up and up. In theory, somebody trying to buy a pack of cigarettes 50 years from now would need ID to show they were at least 63 years old. But health authorities hope smoking will fade away well before then. They have a stated goal of making New Zealand smoke-free by 2025. New Zealand also took other measures in its law shakeup, including making getting hold of cigarettes more difficult for those who could legally use them. They are no longer sold in regular stores, but can only be bought at specialist tobacconists, cutting the number of locations where smokes are sold nationwide from thousands of locations to hundreds. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/biden-faa-nominee-promises-end-work-from-home Biden pick to lead FAA promises hard push to end work-from-home policies President Joe Biden's nominee to lead the Federal Aviation Administration would prioritize ending pandemic telework policies for federal employees and bring the out-of-date agency into the 21st century. Former FAA Deputy Administrator Michael Whitaker told Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee members during his confirmation hearing on Wednesday that, if approved, he would focus heavily on matters with agency employees. "I do believe that it's important to be in person for collaboration and working together," said Whitaker, a pilot and former aviation industry executive. "This has been a challenging issue for all organizations, private or public. And I think what needs to happen is after understanding the situation that we're in and the limitations that might be there, issuing very clear guidance, what the expectations are to get people in the office." In July, the FAA announced that employees would have to return to the office no fewer than three days per week starting on Oct. 9. The union pushed back against a 100% return to office, complicating the agency's attempt to reinstate the policy. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) egged Whitaker on over the work-from-home policies and claimed the federal government was the only employer that had not returned to pre-pandemic policies. "When I talk to businesses in the private sector, virtually all of them, employees are going back to work, and they're physically present. And yet, throughout the Biden administration, we have a pattern in just about every agency where large portions of the workforce have apparently decided going into the office is optional," Cruz said. "That seriously limits the effectiveness of an agency and particularly an agency whose mission is protecting people's lives and the airspace." When asked by Cruz if he would commit to "working diligently" to bring employees back into the office, Whitaker agreed. Whitaker was second in command at the FAA from 2012 through 2015. The agency has had a gap in leadership over the past 18 months. Returning to the FAA at this point, Whitaker said, would warrant three actions he would take in his five-year term as administrator. "First, I will work not just to maintain the safety record we have collectively achieved but build upon it. The two Boeing MAX crashes remind us that we must be ever-vigilant," Whitaker said. The agency ought to ensure gaps in the FAA certification process are closed so that undisclosed changes manufacturers make to aircraft can still be caught before being put into use. Second, the FAA should be more "agile and creative" and willing to "adapt quickly" and plan for the future rather than focus on the present. The FAA has but one academy that takes years to complete, and it can only accommodate 1,800 air traffic controllers at a time. Whitaker's final point was that the government should make the FAA a place where people interested in aviation careers, particularly air traffic controllers, want to work. He was tasked with hiring 6,000 air traffic controllers during his previous stint at the FAA but came up far short. https://dailycaller.com/2023/10/05/rnc-republican-presidential-primary-debates-donald-trump/ Even The RNC’s Own Members Are Admitting Trump-less Debates May Be A Waste Of Time Members of the Republican National Committee (RNC) are frustrated with the current direction of their GOP primary debates, admitting that without President Donald Trump the events may not be worth it, according to Politico. The frontrunner for the Republican nomination, Trump has skipped the first two presidential debates, a decision that has drawn criticism from rival candidates. After the first two debates were widely panned, some within the RNC think they need the President on the stage to make the forums worth it. “I think the only way you salvage it is if you get the frontrunner there,” Tyler Bowyer, a national committeeman from Arizona, told Politico. “Plan a debate where you get the frontrunner to agree to it.” The first GOP presidential debate, sponsored by the conservative youth organization Young America’s Foundation (YAF), was aired exclusively on Fox News, Fox Business and Rumble. The debate was moderated by Fox News’ Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The second debate was aired by the exact same networks, in addition to Spanish-language network Univision. The moderators included Univision anchor Ilia Calderón, Fox Business host Stuart Varney and Fox News host Dana Perino. That debate fell flat, with many prominent conservative media figures criticizing the moderators for asking poor questions while candidates bickered and talked over one another. The RNC previously promised in 2022 to use debates to “raise conservative media up” and incorporate other outlets, but after the first two debates, conservative media companies outside of the mainstream media told the Daily Caller that they are feeling snubbed by the committee. “You can’t put your head in the sand and pretend these debates are going to result in someone other than Donald Trump getting the nomination,” Patti Lyman, the RNC’s national committeewoman from Virginia, told Politico, adding that the debates were “embarrassing” and “reflected very poorly on our party.” Despite some members pushing for Trump to take the debate stage, top officials are reportedly not attempting to get the front runner on the debate stage, a person with knowledge of the committee’s operations told Politico. That reportedly includes RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel and chairman for the RNC’s Temporary Committee on Presidential Debates David Bossie. Trump himself doesn’t think the debates should go on; the President told the Daily Caller that the RNC “has to stop the debates” because they are “bad for the Republican party.” Trump and his advisors have additionally urged the RNC to “refocus its manpower and money” on election integrity efforts rather than the debates, Politico reported.

The Maryland Department of Transportation released its capital budget plan with key projects missing and explicitly stating that the document reflects the priorities of the previous governor. Sunil Dasgupta talks with Marc Korman, Chair of the House of Delegates Environment and Transportation Committee, to find out what's going on. Local news re why MoCo Councilmember Gabe Albornoz opposed the new ban on gas-powered leaf blowers, preliminary analysis of local sporting event fights, MoCo allows tunnel type greenhouses in all backyards. Music from folk singer-songwriter Steven Gellman's new album, All You Need: hiddenpoet.com; Gas leaf blower ban: https://t.ly/Y9sXO; MoCo tunnel greenhouse: https://t.ly/bsGCB; MD transportation plan: https://t.ly/bL3Uk.

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, long time communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank! They discuss a poll showing that Seattle voters want a more progressive City Council, the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction overseeing more and more school districts in budget crisis, gubernatorial candidate Mark Mullet getting financially backed by charter school advocates, and Bruce Harrell's ethnic media roundtable not going very well. The conversation continues with the possibility of a $19 minimum wage for unincorporated King County, internal drama within top brass of the Seattle Police Department, and reflection on a consent decree ruling that ends most federal oversight of SPD. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Robert Cruickshank, at @cruickshank.   Resources “Ending Youth Incarceration with Dr. Ben Danielson of AHSHAY Center” from Hacks & Wonks   “Poll: Seattle voters want new direction on City Council” by Josh Cohen from Crosscut   “State will keep fiscal tabs on three cash-starved Washington school districts” by Jerry Cornfield from Washington State Standard   “WA Supreme Court sides with state in suit over school building costs” by Dahlia Bazzaz from The Seattle Times   “Big checks for a pro-Mullet PAC” by Paul Queary from The Washington Observer    “Harrell asks for better relations with ethnic media” by Mahlon Meyer from Northwest Asian Weekly   “King County looks at $19 minimum wage in unincorporated areas” by David Gutman from The Seattle Times   “King County Councilmembers propose $19 minimum wage for Skyway and White Center” by Guy Oron from Real Change   “Seattle police chief's alleged relationship with employee prompts inquiries, roils department” by Ashley Hiruko & Isolde Raftery from KUOW   “Judge ends most federal oversight of SPD, after 11 years and 3 chiefs” by Mike Carter from The Seattle Times    Find stories that Crystal is reading here   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and our Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed our Tuesday topical show, I welcomed Dr. Ben Danielson, director of AHSHAY (Allies and Healthier Systems for Health and Abundance in Youth) Center for an important conversation about ending youth incarceration. Today, we're continuing our Friday week-in-review show where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, long-time communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank. [00:01:19] Robert Cruickshank: Thank you for having me back again, Crystal. It's always a pleasure to be here reviewing the week with you. [00:01:23] Crystal Fincher: Always a pleasure and I wanna start out talking about a poll that came out this week, sponsored by Crosscut - an Elway Poll - showing that voters seem to want a more progressive City Council. What did this poll reveal? [00:01:38] Robert Cruickshank: It's a really interesting poll. Crosscut's headline says - Seattle voters want a new direction on the City Council - but if you dig down with the poll itself, it's clear that there's strong support for a more progressive direction. One of the questions they ask is - Who are you more likely to vote for? A progressive candidate, a centrist candidate, or no opinion. The progressive candidate, 49%. Centrist candidate, 37%. And no opinion, 14%. That actually matches pretty closely some of the results we saw in key City Council primary elections last month. In District 1, for example, District 4, District 6 - you saw pretty similar numbers with a progressive candidate getting close to or around 50% and a more centrist candidate getting somewhere between the upper 30s and low 40s. We have a poll, we have the actual election results from the primary - now that doesn't guarantee anything for the general election. But evidence is starting to pile up that - yes, Seattle voters do want a new direction and it's very likely they want to be a more progressive direction. We've lived for the last three years - certain media pundits and media outlets, like KOMO or The Seattle Times, pushing really hard this narrative that Seattle wants a right-wing turn, Seattle's fed up with a progressive City Council, we're fed up with homelessness, we're fed up with crime - we want to turn to the right, darn it. The poll results and the election results last month just don't support that argument at all. Yes, voters are unhappy and voters are looking at what the progressive candidates are saying and thinking - Yeah, that's how we want to solve this. Yes, we want to solve homelessness by getting people into housing. Yes, we want to solve crime by having all sorts of solutions - including alternatives to policing, alternatives to armed response - to help address this problem. And I think that some of the media outlets and Chamber of Commerce and others, who keep pushing this Seattle-wants-to-turn-right narrative, are just trying to will a story into existence, try to will that reality into existence - but voters are making it clear they're not going along with that. [00:03:28] Crystal Fincher: It really does make some of the rhetoric that we hear over and over again sound like astroturfing, sound like a marketing project - because like you said, over and over again, these election results and these polls just repeatedly tell a different story. For example, we've talked on this show before about stopping with just - Hey, are you happy with the way things are going or are you dissatisfied? And if people say they're dissatisfied, there's been this assumption - that means that they want to get rid of progressive councilmembers and progressive policy. And that has never borne out in the data. One of the questions - On the issue of homelessness, if you had to choose, what approach should have the higher priority for city government resources? One option is: Moving the tents out of parks and public areas and moving their occupants into temporary shelters - which is a nice way to say sweeps - 41%. The other option: Developing permanent housing and mental health services for people experiencing homelessness - 55%. This is not controversial - we've been talking about this on this show for quite some time, lots of people have - these are serious policies backed by evidence and it just makes sense, right? And it makes you question how deeply invested are people in the narrative that Seattle is fed up and they want a really punitive law and order, harsh lock-'em-up approach to things - that just doesn't play out. What we're gonna see in this general election, as we've seen before - it looks like we're anticipating some of the same type of communication, same type of commercial, same type of mailers trying to use those same tired depictions of homelessness as if the people who are homeless are the problem and not the fact that they don't have homes to live in. And Seattle sees that. They see that over and over again. And what we see is there is this attempt, especially around public safety rhetoric, to make it just very flat. Either you want more cops and you support cops and Blue Lives Matter and all of that, or you hate safety and you love crime and you don't want anything. And just making it either you're defund or this Antifa radical, or you're wanting more law and order on the streets. It just doesn't turn out that way. People want serious solutions. We've been doing the same things over and over again. And the public is begging these people to keep listening, but it just doesn't work. Like you said, a plurality here prefer a progressive candidate - 12 points higher than a more moderate candidate, as they put it - conservative wasn't a choice in here. Centrist and progressive - as is the way in Seattle - the way things are usually discussed. Also, when they asked about priorities - How are they evaluating candidates for City Council? It's really interesting. The top answers were: Do they support creating a new department for non-police emergency response, Do they support city funding of substance abuse treatment for people in public housing - both of those at 72%. If you're in the 60s, that's automatic win territory. 72%, it's - how wild is it that this is not on the top of everybody's agenda? Then we move down to - looking at the lower end - the lowest, actually, was: Supporting a three-year moratorium on the Jumpstart tax - that actually made people more likely to vote against someone for voting against a moratorium on that tax, which we've seen the Chamber float and other allied business interests trying to siphon some of that money or reduce the tax that they're paying. And voters are clearly saying no. And people who advocate for that are going to be hurt by taking that position in this general election. So this is just really interesting. One of these questions: Support for Bruce Harrell's agenda. One, I want someone to define what that agenda is - great to ask that in a vague way - what does that mean? And I would love for people to talk - when they talk about the mayor's agenda, Bruce Harrell's agenda - define what that is. I think that's a tougher task than many people might assume at first glance. What else did you see here? [00:07:38] Robert Cruickshank: There are a couple of things that stood out. You talked about taxes. They asked - How should Seattle cover a budget shortfall? 63% want a new business tax, 60% are willing to tax themselves - this just bolsters the point you just made that, contrary to what the Chamber wants, there's no support out there for slashing business taxes. We want to tax the rich more. And so that's another reason why progressive candidates are going to do well. Something you said resonated about the astroturfing. And you see these efforts to try to create outrage about different public safety issues. We saw some of that this week, where Sara Nelson had a stunt press conference in Little Saigon - which is facing issues, and the community of Little Saigon deserves to be heard and deserves to have their needs addressed. That's not what Sara Nelson was there to do. She was there to have a press conference stunt where she could stand there with Tanya Woo and say - Where's Tammy Morales? Why isn't Tammy Morales here? The answer is, as Tammy Morales explained, Tammy wasn't invited because Tammy was also at the Transportation Committee hearing in City Hall doing her job and asked where's Sara Nelson? The answer is Sara Nelson's out grandstanding. She's also the same person who's floating things like moratorium on the JumpStart Tax, floating things like sweeps and crackdowns on visible drug use. Sara Nelson somehow snuck into office in 2021 and thinks somehow that the City is supporting her agenda - whatever that might be, whatever right-wing cause she has at the moment - that's not where the electorate is right now. And I think that's all they have - are stunts - because their actual agenda is unpopular. And I think you're going to start seeing - as a campaign heads into the heat of the general election, the same playbook we've often seen from more centrist candidates. And Jenny Durkan was an expert at this - of just bear-hugging progressive positions, making themselves sound more progressive than they truly are - to try to get elected because they know that's what the electorate in Seattle wants. And then once in office, the mask comes off and they turned out to be the Chamber candidate that they always were. So that's something that the actual progressive candidates are gonna have to watch out for. And voters are going to need to be very careful in discerning between these candidates. Who's just mouthing the rhetoric that they think is going to get them elected? And who's a genuine and proven commitment to these ideals? - Who's really fought hard for taxing the rich? Who's fought hard for affordable housing? Who's fought hard to get services and shelter to people who are unhoused? - rather than people who are just maybe grandstanding on it because they think that's how they're gonna win. [00:10:00] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and I think you bring up a really important point. It is that discernment. Some of the justification I've heard for people who are very invested in the "Seattle has taken a right turn" try and retcon the justification - well, voters wanted a conservative business owner and they really want that perspective on the Council. They want someone who's gonna knock heads and get tough. But people so easily forget - that's not at all how Sara Nelson ran. Sara Nelson ran as an environmentalist, as someone who wanted to reform the police department - those were her top-line messages in her communications. She wasn't talking about being a business owner, she was not talking about being tough on crime - she initially started that in the very beginning in the primary and that fell flat. And so they switched up real quick and all of the communication looked like it was coming from a progressive. They used the word "progressive" 72,000 times - Oh no, we're the real progressives here. And it didn't turn out that way. And as you said, once she was elected, the mask came off and we continue to see this over and over again. The moderate playbook, the conservative playbook is to mimic progressive. It's to use that same language. It's to talk about issues in a similar way. Leave yourself a little wiggle room to not commit, to not give a hard and fast answer to something so that when you are elected, you can say - Well, I didn't exactly say that - or - I didn't take a position on this. And we see this over and over again. I hope it doesn't happen again this time, but there's going to be a lot of money spent to try and do this again. And at some point we just have to say - We've seen this before and we've had enough, and we want people who are seriously engaging in how to solve the biggest problems that we face. Because Seattle voters are really frustrated - they are fed up, but fed up with not being listened to. I do congratulate this poll for going beyond just the - Are you happy and unhappy? - and asking the why - What direction do you want to go into? What policy solution do you prefer? And as I suspected, the answers are very enlightening and give you an eye into what voters are really thinking and considering. And I hope all of the candidates - and the electeds who aren't even on the ballot - take heed. I also want to talk about school districts - right now, just as school is starting over again - facing budget crises and just a world of hurt. What's happening here? [00:12:28] Robert Cruickshank: As schools are starting across Washington state this year, there are some schools where teachers have gone out on strike, mostly in Southwest Washington - places like Evergreen Schools in Vancouver, Camas in Clark County - and that's worth watching and we're supporting teachers. In addition, we're starting to see an even more ominous trend of districts needing the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, OSPI, to actually oversee their budgets. They need OSPI monitoring because they're in such deep financial straits, primarily because this Legislature continues to underfund our schools. The Legislature doesn't give schools enough money to cover their basic operations, especially in an era of inflation. And so you have at least three school districts that we know of so far, Marysville, La Conner, Mount Baker - these are all in Northwest Washington - are under OSPI oversight for budgets. It's the most, at any one time, in several years - since at least a great recession. OSPI is quoted as saying this is unprecedented. And they don't think it's gonna stop there. It's just the tip of the iceberg - as more and more districts face problems, as federal stimulus money goes away, as levy equalization dollars start to drop, as regionalization money - which is designed to help districts afford to pay teachers what it actually costs to live in their community - that starts to go away from the state. The state continues to underfund special education. And just this morning before we went on air, we saw the State Supreme Court ruled against the Wahkiakum School District in Southwest Washington, their case where they were trying to get the state to be held responsible for the cost of school construction. The Supreme Court said - No, the state and local governments, local districts are gonna have to share that - even though it takes 60% of voters to approve a school bond for construction, those often fail. And small communities like Wahkiakum, small logging community on the Columbia River, don't have the property tax base to keep their schools in good repair. So what we're seeing is the Legislature, and now the Supreme Court, continue to hand blow after blow to local school districts. And this is alarming, not just because it leads to cuts and even school closures - something they're considering in school districts like Seattle - that's bad enough. But when you start to see state oversight in management of districts, that's when I think red flags should really go up. There's things like appointing emergency fiscal managers - in the state of Michigan and other states where Republicans took over - that led to huge cuts to schools, where these emergency fiscal managers would come in and turn schools over to charter school operators, they tear up union contracts, they would make all sorts of cuts to libraries and music and other important services. Now, we're not seeing that in Washington state yet, but that architecture is now in place. And if the wrong person gets elected governor or the wrong party takes over the Legislature, all of a sudden these school districts could be losing local control over their basic dollars and spending to the state. So this is a unfolding crisis that the State Legislature and the Democratic majority there continue to ignore, continue to not take seriously - even though it remains in the Constitution, literally their paramount duty, to provide ample provision for funding, not just enough. The open dictionary says more than enough. No one can look at a public school district anywhere in Washington state and say schools are getting ample funding. They're just not. And this crisis is only going to grow worse. We're only going to see further cuts to schools, further closures, larger class sizes, teachers leaving - unless the State Legislature steps in. [00:16:00] Crystal Fincher: We do have to contend with the fact that this is happening with the Democratic majority, right? Even more frustrating where - this is another issue voters support in such huge numbers - adequately, amply funding education and raising the revenue because revenue is needed to amply fund education. It's really frustrating. And so I guess my question for you, because you do pay such close attention - I do recommend people follow Robert for a variety of things, but his insight on education policy is really valuable - how do we fix this? Is it all on the Legislature? Where is the fix here? [00:16:39] Robert Cruickshank: The fix is at the Legislature. Local school districts can only do so much. A 60% threshold has not been changed by the Legislature - they have the ability to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot to change that, that never happens. But even more, the Legislature has also capped a local operating levy. Seattle, which has a very pro-tax population, would happily tax ourselves a lot of money to have amazing public schools. We can't do that because we're prevented by the State Legislature. And the obvious reason, of course, is Seattle has such valuable property because we have Amazon, Vulcan, other large corporate property owners here who will ensure that the Legislature doesn't do that. So we have a State Legislature and a Democratic majority that is just unwilling to take on the big corporations and the wealthy to fund our public schools. They point to the capital gains tax. And yes, that was an important victory in 2021. And it's raising almost double what was expected. But of course, there's a caveat there. They cap the amount of money that goes to the Education Legacy Trust Fund - anything above that is supposed to go to school construction, which is great - we just talked about the Supreme Court decision and how local governments and local districts in rural Washington definitely need help funding schools. That's great. But what happens when you don't have the ability to pay the teachers to go into those buildings? When you don't have the ability to provide the books, materials, the music classes, the arts classes, the small class sizes that we voted for in 2014? The Legislature proposed a wealth tax last year - 20 out of 29 Senate Democrats, 43 out of 58 House Democrats supported it as co-sponsors. Surely there were many more who weren't sponsors who were on board. The bill never even made it out of committee in either chamber. At some point, we have to look at the State Legislature and the Democrats, even the progressives - even the Democrats we like and support strongly - haven't stuck their necks out for education, haven't stepped up to say we're gonna fix this. They aren't recognizing the crisis that's there and that's what we have to do. We have to point the finger at the Legislature and go to them at their town halls, to their offices, committee meetings in Olympia, testify virtually if that's possible again in January and make it crystal clear - this is a crisis, it is dire, and you have to fix it. And the only possible source of the fix is the Legislature. [00:19:02] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Thank you for your insight on that, and we do have to get involved. We have to make sure they hear our voices, demanding that this happens. And while they're at it - to provide free school lunches for all school kids. Also several other states - I think we're at 11 so far - are doing the same, putting us to shame. All states should have this and so we have a lot of work to do. Also wanna talk about a candidate for governor - Mark Mullet, current sitting senator out of the 5th legislative district, being backed by charter school money. What's happening here? [00:19:42] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, Mark Mullet, a very right-wing Democrat - he probably would have been a Republican if he didn't realize that being a Democrat would get him elected more easily out there in Issaquah. He's been hostile to teachers' unions for a long time, notoriously hostile to other unions - very nearly lost his reelection in 2020 to Ingrid Anderson, a progressive nurse. Mullet only prevailed by 58 votes, but continues to act as a very right-wing Democrat. And he's always been in love with charter schools - he's been a major obstacle to getting the Legislature to fully fund our public schools. He sits on the Senate Ways and Means Committee. He works with centrist Democrats, corporate Democrats, and Republicans to try to block bills that would fund our schools. And in return, he's now gotten at least $25,000 from a charter school PAC to help fund a super PAC in support of Mark Mullet's run for governor. Polls continue to show so far that Mullet is trailing pretty badly here in the governor's race - Ferguson still has the lead, but it's early. We're well over a year away from the general election for governor. But Mullet clearly is staking his claim as the right-wing Democratic candidate, and the candidate of now folks who wanna privatize our public schools and spread charters everywhere. And as we've seen in other states, charter schools are really problematic. They don't really meet student needs on the whole. Their outcomes aren't better for students. And they're often fly-by-night operations - they'll close in the middle of a school year and then leave students just high and dry. But it's really revealing that Mullet is taking, or at least getting supported by, so much money - that's not a direct donation to his campaign, but it's clear that they are running a super PAC explicitly in support of Mark Mullet. It's a real sign - that's where his bread is buttered - by big corporations and school privatizer money. So something that I think voters are gonna wanna pay pretty close attention to as the campaign for governor starts to heat up next year. [00:21:33] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and I do have to tell you, it is very concerning how unstable charter schools seem to be. How many - we see openings and then we see closings. And that just hardly ever happens with public schools. When it does, it's under financial duress and usually over the objections of all of the parents. But this has been something that we've seen with frequency with charter schools here in Washington. But yeah, definitely worth paying attention to that - and what that agenda is by the folks who have that super PAC and what other interests they're in-line with are really troubling. So we'll continue to pay attention to that. I also wanna talk about a story that came out - I actually think it was late last week, this is a short holiday week and so kind of trickled out - but it was a story about Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell's roundtable with some of our local ethnic media outlets. We have wonderful, rich ethnic media outlets here in Washington State - all throughout the state, definitely here in King County. And the mayor's office seemed troubled by the lack of positive stories coming out, and so invited a number of these journalists to - it looks like City Hall - to have a little roundtable conversation. How did that turn out? [00:22:56] Robert Cruickshank: Well, it's interesting. Many mayors have met with our local ethnic media - it's a good thing for them to do in and of itself - Mike McGinn did a great tour of them back when I worked with him in 2011. So it makes sense for Harrell to try to reach out, but it doesn't seem to have gone very well. And according to at least one of the reports that was there, the mayor wasn't happy about the meeting being recorded - said he could speak less freely. But I think when you're dealing with journalists, any public official should know that's how journalists like to operate - they wanna record everything. And it just seemed like the mayor wanted to make it very personal and wanted to get good coverage out of these outlets. And that's just not how you actually should be approaching these media outlets to begin with. These folks want respect, they wanna be treated as serious journalists - which they are. And I think that for a mayor to come in the way it appears Mayor Harrell did, I don't think it's gonna serve his needs and certainly not the needs of those ethnic media outlets. [00:23:49] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, this was covered in Northwest Asian Weekly and it was really a jaw-dropping read because it does seem to start off - Bruce Harrell is a charismatic guy and there's nothing wrong with that, there's nothing wrong with wanting to open lines of communication, to air out any challenges - I think that's a positive thing. Where I think this took a bad turn was this assumption that they should put aside their professionalism, put aside the obligation they have to report - and to seek information and accountability - and just play along, go along with what he says. And the one thing that caught my eye, which maybe it didn't - well, a few things caught my eye - but one thing that I found troubling in here, which may not be an overt red flag and who knows what he actually meant by that, but there was an allusion to - Hey, there's Comcast money - anyone who works in the City of Seattle is aware of how much Comcast money there actually is in the City. But he said - Hey, the city might be able to facilitate ethnic media getting involved in Comcast channel 21, while also him saying that they were dying - which those ethnic media outlets directly challenged and he seemed to not accept or be willing to do. But dangling - Hey, there's more access, there's more information here for you if you play along. And that's the unspoken part of this. And even if that wasn't intended - I don't know what he intended - but as a public official, you have to be aware of when you're holding that much power, when you have that much control of resources and influence over people who are wielding those resources, and you have access to a bigger platform, and you're saying - Hey, I can help you out with this - there's the implication, if you aren't explicit and careful, saying - If you scratch my back too, if you ease up on the criticism, if you stop asking troubling questions. It seems like they heard that in this meeting and seemed to react - one, just mischaracterizing where they're at and they're not sitting here asking for handouts, they're not asking for anything unearned - they are professionals who put out great products, who many of us consume regularly and they're a part of our media ecosystem that too many people just leave out. And they're saying - No, we're not dying, we're here and we're thriving and we just want answers to our questions. We just want invitations to invites that other reporters are getting invites to. And there seem to be questions with that, as well as some offense taken to them asking just regular general questions. One reporter, a Black reporter from a Black media outlet, brought up - Hey, we're having a really hard time getting straight answers from your police department. Bruce Harrell is literally the executive to talk to for that - they answer to Bruce Harrell, he is in charge of the police department. And his response - You're the only one who's had that problem. I think everyone listening knows that they're not the only ones who have that problem. We've seen that across the ecosystem in various places, particularly to people who don't cover City Hall sympathetically, and that's just really troubling. You're there and you're not listening to the reporters who are reflecting their communities and trying to get information that is really important to the communities they serve. And the dismissiveness was just really troubling. [00:27:27] Robert Cruickshank: It really is. And I think it goes to the concerns that those media outlets have had for a long time. They wanna be taken seriously and deserve to be because they're serious journalists - doing serious journalism that is read and respected, not just in those communities they serve, but around the City. And yet they struggle to get invites to press conferences, they struggle to get responses from City departments, they struggle to get included in stories, they struggle to get their basic inquiries addressed. And they understand that a lot of the City's media relations folks, whether it's the mayor's office or City departments, don't always take them seriously. So to have the opportunity to sit down directly with the mayor is hugely important for these outlets - not only to show that they matter, but to get answers and to get things fixed that need to be fixed in the way the City is interacting with those media outlets. And yet for it to go this way, it just, in their minds, likely justifies a lot of concerns they had all along. It's not going to assuage them at all. And from the perspective of supporting local media outlets, it seems like this should have been handled better. Even from Bruce Harrell's own perspective, it could have been handled better. 'Cause now he's got a story that makes him look bad and raises questions about the way his office is responding to some of the most important media outlets in the City. I think it's - to insinuate that they might be dying goes right to the heart of the problem. These media outlets have been thriving for decades. And it's not easy for any media outlet to survive these days, large or small, no matter what community they serve. And the last thing they want is to be dismissed again - in this case, dismissed as potentially just on the brink of death. I mean, who knows how many of the TV stations are on the brink of death, right? Seattle Times - who knows how long the Blethen family is going to want to keep running it until the family decides to sell it out to Alden Global Capital, which will just gut everything for parts. It's important to treat these media outlets and their reporters with respect, no matter who it is in elected office or whatever City department you're in. And so I hope that the mayor's office puts that right. [00:29:29] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely agree. Also want to talk this week about a potential $19 minimum wage coming to unincorporated King County. What's being proposed? [00:29:42] Robert Cruickshank: King County Councilmember Girmay Zahilay is proposing a $19 an hour minimum wage for unincorporated King County - so that's outside of a incorporated city. So cities like Seattle, SeaTac have obviously raised minimum wage. Tukwila has raised it, Renton - which is on the ballot this year - likely to pass. But there are about a quarter million people in King County who are not in a city. They live in a community, sometimes, or maybe they don't live in a formal community, maybe they're out in more rural parts of the county - but they're part of King County. And what Girmay is recognizing is there's an opportunity to help them. So what he wants to do is raise the minimum wage for those parts of King County, for those 250,000 people - which is a substantial number of people - to make sure that they can also benefit from a higher minimum wage and raise it to $19. We all know how inflation is hitting people, especially the rise in cost of housing - and Girmay's done a great job trying to address housing as well in his role on the King County Council. But this is a great step forward for the King County Council to not just sit by and say the minimum wage is a city issue or it's a state issue. No, they have a quarter million people they can help right now. And to step forward and propose this, I think, is the right thing to do. I hope that all candidates for King County Council embrace it. I hope that the current councilmembers embrace it and pass it as quickly as they can, because I think this is an important step for folks living in those communities. [00:30:58] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And they shouldn't be left out of the progress that many of the people who've been able to live in cities have been benefiting from. And sometimes we think unincorporated King County and people just think - Oh, it's just a few people living out in the boonies. You talked about how many people there are, and these are places like Vashon Island, Skyway, White Center - where there are a lot of people - these are our neighbors. They just happen to be in an area that wasn't formally incorporated. And so I see this as definite progress. We have a ways to go to get wages to a place where they're really funding people's lives today. Rents are so high. The cost of living has increased so much. Rents, childcare, these massive costs that are so huge and that are preventing people from being able to fully participate in society, to be upwardly mobile, to live the life that they choose. We know we can do better. We know we owe this to the residents. And I think this starts for businesses that employ more than 500 people. This is [not] burdening small businesses. It just seems like this is really the logical thing to do. Medium-sized businesses with 16 to 499 employees would be given a four-year transition period, but it's really important to get this on the way. This is a very popular policy also, fortunately. And so I am optimistic that this will pass and hope it has the unanimous support of the council. [00:32:25] Robert Cruickshank: I hope so too. It should be unanimous. I'd like to see Dow Constantine come in strongly for it as well and help use his power and influence to get it done. It should be an issue in the council races - between Teresa Mosqueda and Sofia Aragon, for example. I think it's a really important contrast that can be drawn. [00:32:40] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. I wanna close out talking about a couple of stories revolving around the Seattle Police Department. The first is a story that broke - I think it was KUOW reported on it - but there have been rumors dogging Seattle Police Chief Diaz about an alleged affair or rumored affair. However, lots of people are really wondering whether to question this because it also may be rumors intended - falsely made up - intended to de-credit the chief and speed his way out. And people are trying to weigh which one of these this is. What happened here and what do you see going on? [00:33:26] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, this is a sadly typical situation that we've seen in SPD over the years - where different elements of the command staff start sniping at each other and trying to take each other down, rather than focus on their jobs. It's unclear and we don't know - and I don't really care - what Chief Diaz is doing his personal time. Obviously, if it's an employee, then you gotta make sure all rules and ethics are respected - but if people are also throwing around insinuations, that hurts the woman in question. You don't wanna make a woman who's working in SPD subject to these rumors - not just that makes Chief Diaz look bad, the department look bad - you're sullying someone's reputation here. It shouldn't be sullied. But the bigger question here is - what does it say about SPD and what does it say about how it's being run? We're in the middle of a wave of burglaries that people are complaining about, and complaining about slow SPD response time, people complaining about safety on our roads. And I will say just yesterday near my home in Northgate, I saw a driver go right through a red arrow, turning into an intersection - it wasn't like it turned red right as they were entering, it had been red for some time when they entered - in front of a police car. And the officer did nothing - just let it happen and no enforcement at all. People complain about the number of homicides that are happening. It's a real crisis out there, and concerns about is SPD really doing all it can do to investigate these? Is it doing all it can do to close burglary cases? And yet what do we see SPD doing? Their command staff are sniping at each other and spreading gossip and rumor, whether there's any truth to it or not. And I think it's just a sign of how dysfunctional SPD has become. I think it's also a sign that we need strong leadership to reform this department. We'll talk about, I know, about the consent decree in a moment, but it's clear that there are ongoing management problems. And it raises the question - do we need a external chief to come in, who isn't part of all these rivalries and gossip and jealousies, to come in and put a stop to a lot of this? But it's just a sign - that these rumors are reaching the media - that SPD's commanders are not focused on the job they say they're focused on. They're happy to blame the City Council, which has no operational control over SPD, which hasn't said a word about defunding the police since they - for a hot minute in the summer of 2020, very gingerly cut a piece of SPD's budget, ever since then they've been showering as much money as they can on the police department - trying to ply them with recruitment bonuses and making it very clear - Oh no, we're not gonna defund you anymore. Sorry, forget about that. The City Council is not the problem here. There's a real problem with how SPD is managed. There's a problem with the command staff. And Council doesn't run that department - as you said earlier, the mayor does. And so we need to see how Bruce Harrell's going to respond to this too, because it's becoming increasingly clear that SPD isn't getting its job done. [00:36:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and it's not getting its job done in any way - people are suffering - and the most cynical thing is there've, no surprise, been SPOG communications in various places literally touting - Detectives haven't been able to respond to this commercial burglary for two weeks and it's 'cause we were defunded. As you said, defunding did not happen. In fact, their funding has increased. They keep giving money to these people despite staffing shortages in other departments too. If that would help, that would be one thing. But even police officers are on record saying - Yeah, these hiring bonuses are not gonna get more people in the door, keep people. Retention bonuses aren't gonna keep people. That's actually not the problem. The problem is not financial anymore. But it's really troubling just that everyone's eye seems to be off of the ball. And everyone's eye seems to be in a different place than where Seattle residents can see they need to be. As we talked about earlier with those poll results, Seattle residents want a more comprehensive response. They want responsiveness from the police department and they want to shift out responsibilities, assets to manage things in a way that does ensure they can get the service level they expect from the police department - and get other community violence interventions, diversion programs, other community safety initiatives up and running. And they just seem to be focused on literally everything but that. And at a time where everyone is facing this challenge of trying to manage, whether it's crime or behavioral health crises or everything that we're dealing with, they need to do better. We need Bruce Harrell to get this under control - what dysfunction and what disarray - he needs to get a hold of this. [00:38:01] Robert Cruickshank: He really does. Again, the mayor runs the police department. The mayor has operational control. It's not the City Council. And I think we need to see that leadership from the top to really fix what's gone wrong at SPD. [00:38:12] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Now I wanna talk about big news that broke last night - that a judge just ended federal oversight of SPD after 11 years. Now you were in the administration that saw the consent decree established. What is the legacy of this consent decree, and where do we go now that federal oversight is largely ending? [00:38:34] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, the consent decree has its pros and cons. The upside is, and always was - and this is why many in the community demanded it and went to the DOJ in the first place in 2010 and 2011 - they felt they needed a federal judge, a federal monitor and the US Department of Justice to come in and force SPD to improve its use of force policies, to address concerns about biased policing, and ultimately also added in were - later in the process - concerns about how it manages demonstrations. So it's a pro - is that you get an outside body that is widely trusted, certainly when Obama ran the DOJ and now that Biden does, to come in and force the changes that SPD wasn't willing to make and the City wasn't able to make. The downside though is it's a federal legal process that is fairly limited in what it can cover. You're at the mercy of the federal judge, the federal monitor - who wound up stepping in the summer of 2020 to undermine some of the efforts that were taken to reform the department, including cutting SPD's funding. So its coming to an end doesn't mean that SPD has been fixed. What it means is that in the eyes of this judge, the specific conditions laid out in the 2013 consent decree, in his mind, have been achieved. And what does that mean for people here in Seattle? It doesn't necessarily mean that SPD is a clean bill of health and is now operating in a much better place than it had been before. And in fact, the federal judge did retain jurisdiction over use of force and of how discipline is managed. He cares a lot about the contract - having raised significant concerns about the previous SPOG contract that was done in 2018. But it goes back to something that I remember Mike McGinn saying a lot in 2012, 2013 during this whole negotiation process around the consent decree - pointing out correctly that lasting reform isn't gonna come from the federal government, it's gonna come from the community, and it's going to depend on the ability of City Hall to make change in SPD and make it stick. And he took a lot of heat for saying that. People thought he was trying to keep the DOJ out - he wasn't. He welcomed the DOJ, he was always honest about that, direct about that. But I think he was right. He was right then and right now that with the federal government largely stepping back - not completely, but largely stepping back - bringing an end to much of the consent decree, it's now up to us. It's up to us as a city, as a community, and especially our elected officials in City Hall to actually make sure that what we want done at SPD, what we want done with public safety more broadly happens. As we talked earlier in this podcast, there's a lot of support out there in the public for non-armed response to crime. People want it, it polls off the charts. We still haven't seen it. The mayor's office keeps promising and promising, keeps getting delayed and delayed. This mayor has been in office a year and a half now, and it's time to see it come to fruition - that's going to be another important piece of how we handle policing and public safety in the City - is to have armed officers doing less of it or focusing on the things they need to focus on and not the things where they don't need to be focused on. But we'll see what happens there because as we've seen all along, this is really up to the community to make these reforms stick. The DOJ had its role and we can ask how effective was it really - again, the ending of the consent decree doesn't mean SPD's fixed, it just means certain boxes got checked. But I think we have to see what happens out of City Council elections this year and what the mayor's going to do to address ongoing problems with the police. [00:41:59] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. All with the backdrop of negotiations happening now for the Seattle Police Officers Guild contract - and that will set the tone for so much moving forward. It's going to be interesting to see how this proceeds. [00:42:16] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, it really will. And I think that SPOG contract is going to be crucial - and who gets elected to the City Council this fall will play a really big role in how that negotiation winds up. [00:42:26] Crystal Fincher: It absolutely will. And with that, we'll conclude this week-in-review. Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, September 8th, 2023. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful cohost today was Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, long-time communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank. You can find Robert on Twitter - and multiple platforms, I think - @cruickshank. We're all around. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter. You can find me on most platforms as @finchfrii. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

This week on Cowboy State Politics, shocking audio from the Transportation Committee--their tax increase isn't a tax increase!  On Saturday, my interview with BlazeTV Host Chad Prather.  When he's around, it's the world according to Chad!

A bipartisan bill “would give parents that toolbox that they need to help monitor what their children are seeing in the virtual space,” Sen. Marsha Blackburn says.“Kids are being exposed to things in the virtual space that we would never expose them to in the physical space, so it's important for parents to have that toolbox, and it's important to put the responsibility on these social mediaplatforms,” says Blackburn, R-Tenn., who on May 2 reintroduced the Kids Online Safety Act with Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. “That is what this legislation does,” Blackburn says. “It requires these platforms to open up those algorithms and make them available not only to parents, but also to researchers, so that there can be a monitoring of the harms that children are exposed to.”The legislation was initially introduced in February 2022 and unanimously passed the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee in July, according to the Tennessee senator's office. However, “the clock ran out before we got it off the floor,” Blackburn says.Blackburn joins today's episode of “The Daily Signal Podcast” to discuss the legislation and how its requirements would be implemented. She also discusses the end of the public health measure known as Title 42, and how that will affect illegal immigration. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A looming railroad strike could have disastrous consequences for American energy, agriculture, and countless other industries. One of the House's foremost experts on railroads, Congressman Rick Crawford, joins us to break down the negotiations between the railroads and their unions, why the Biden Administration is at fault, and what Republicans need to do moving forward to prevent this from ever happening again. Rick Crawford is the U.S. Representative for Arkansas' First District. He serves on the Transportation Committee and is Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials. He also serves on the Agriculture Committee and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Follow him on Twitter and Instagram at @RepRickCrawford.