Q: What do John McCain and Mike McGavick have in common? I mean aside from last names that start with “Mc”.

A: They’ll both be appearing at an event in Seattle tonight. Furthermore, if like me you can’t make it, their speeches will be webcast.

Here’s the press release:

WEBCAST ADVISORY

U.S. Senator McCain & U.S. Senate candidate Mike McGavick to webcast speeches tonight
webcasts will begin at 7:15PM PST

WHAT: Tonight in Seattle, U.S. Senator John McCain will appear at a McGavick for Senate Campaign Event. Continuing the McGavick Campaign’s use of technology in an effort to reach as many Washingtonians as possible, both Mike and Senator McCain’s speeches will be webcast live through www.mikemcgavick.com beginning at 7:15 PT. For those who can’t join the event live, Mike’s speech will also be archived at www.mikemcgavick.com

WHEN: Tuesday, March 21st, 2006. 7:15PM PST

WHERE: www.webcasting.com/mcgavick or go to www.mikemcgavick.com

WHO: U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ), Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, Mike McGavick.

OVer at Pajama Jihad I’ve talked briefly before about Initiative 936, and the effort to pass “Jessica’s Law Plus” here in Washington. Today I’m posting an interview with Jim Hines of Preserve Childhood Innocence who is spearheading that drive. Here’s what Jim had to say:

1. Let’s begin with some background. Who are you, and what made you decide to fight for “Jessica’s Law Plus” here in Washington?

I am Jim Hines, Gig Harbor resident, father of two special-needs children.

My involvement began in November, 2003, when I learned that my neighbor’s then 12-year-old daughter was raped and molested by the mom’s fiance. I was outraged when I learned that the perpetrator received a 6-month county jail sentence, followed by three years of community-based treatment under our Special Sex Offender Sentencing Alternative (SSOSA).

I wrote a letter to the editor of our local newspaper, The Peninsula Gateway. The editor recommended that I take my ideas to our local legislators. I did just that and we drafted HB 2400 in the 2004 legislative session, which called for mandatory minimum sentences for all sex crimes against children. A weakened version passed that session and my lobbying has not stopped since!

2. What concerns would a “Jessica’s Law Plus” initiative like I-936 address that current law does not?

The largest gap that the Legislature left, with their main sex offender Bill (HB3277), is that there is no provision for the new 25-year minimum sentence to be applied in any case where a child is raped or molested by a family member.

Further, in cases involving folks in “supervisory” positions (coaches, teachers, clergy, et…), prosecutors must prove that the relationship was established for the purpose of sex (grooming). This is loose legal language that will lead to more plea bargains, lenient sentences, and in practical application, very few 25-year mandatory sentences. Also, HB 3277 does not address SSOSA eligibility, except that anyone sentenced to the new 25-year sentence obviously cannot receive a SSOSA.

Our initiative dramatically scales back the use of SSOSA by adding more eligibility requirements, all of which must be met, in addition to the current requirements.

2b. According to my reading of I-936, SSOSA would only apply if the offender was a family member, the victim’s testimony was necessary to the case and the victim was unwilling to testify otherwise. What about situations where all of these applied except the first?

We have been informed by prosecutors and legislative leaders that the dynamic that creates the toughest situations are the cases that involve family. Though many child sex abuse cases are challenging, we have not experienced nearly the same levels of concern regarding non-family cases.

Further, SSOSA has been used far too often in cases involving perpetrators who abuse positions of trust and authority, i.e. teachers, coaches, youth pastors, counselors. We strongly believe that these supervisory people deserve long prison sentences and should be excluded from SSOSA possibility. If prosecutors run into cases, outside of family, where there is no testimony and/or physical evidence, SSOSA cannot be used, but other plea bargain options do exist.

3. I-936 makes repeated reference to the “standard sentencing range” for certain offenses. What is the “standard sentencing range” and how will it effect the sentencing of sex offenders should I-936 pass?

The current standard sentence ranges vary quite a bit, depending upon the specific crime, i.e. the current standard sentence for child rape 1 is about 8 - 12 years. However, it is also a “Two-Strikes” offense, which means it is part of Determinate Plus Sentence. A bit confusing, I know!

Should our initiative pass, sentencing for certain sex crimes will essentially turn into 25 years, because that will be the minimum. The maximum can still be life under Determinate Plus, however, in real terms, we will be creating many more 25-year sentences should prosecutors and judges appropriately apply this new law.

3b. How would you respond to the argument that a higher mandatory minimum sentence would interfere with judicial discretion in sentencing?

Yes, it is true that longer, mandatory sentences interfere with judicial discretion. That is exactly our intention! Discretion has led to the erosion of our freedoms and the recirculation of dangerous predators in our communities. Citizens all over America are fed up with lenient penalties for sex crimes against children. I could easily point to over a dozen cases in our state alone, over the past several months, where discretion has been used to the detriment of our society.

A recent Zogby Poll revealed that 80% of Americans believe in long, mandatory prison sentences for first offense of sex crimes against children. Discretion has led to the average sentence, when one factors in the use of SSOSA, being significantly below the standard sentencing ranges available.

4. Why should it matter whether or not non-relatives are sentenced under the Special Sex Offender Sentence Alternative?

Actually, many of us would like to see SSOSA go away completely. This abomination of justice has allowed over 5,000 child rapists and molesters to escape justice since this law was enacted in 1984.

Opponents of “Jessica’s Law”, and of mandatory minimum sentences in general, state that “children won’t come forward and cooperate with prosecutors” if they (child and/or family) learn that a family member will “go away a long time”. We have been told that it is needed in these difficult family cases. Well then, why are we offering it to non-family perpetrators?

We are totally opposed to its use in cases involving people who abuse children while being in positions of trust and authority. No teacher, coach, counselor, nor member of the clergy should receive a SSOSA. If SSOSA is needed in certain, rare family cases, then it should only be available in those cases. Otherwise, we see its abuses all too often.

Just recently, two Tacoma teachers, each convicted of raping 14-year-old students in their classrooms, received 3 and 6 months respectively under SSOSA. This is completely unacceptable and will not happen should our initiative become law.

4b. Wouldn’t it be preferable (and more cost effective) to rehabilitate sex offenders so that they can contribute to society rather than locking them away, especially if they were considered a low risk to reoffend?

I think we, as a society, still struggle with this entire concept of rehab of sex offenders. I absolutely agree that not every sex offender is a “predator”. However, the damage to the victims cost our society in so many ways. Children who are violated suffer in so many ways. They cost society due to drug abuse, promiscuity, suicide, depression, and other societal issues. So, the people believe that the starting point for sentencing should be a much longer prison sentence, like the 25 years we are proposing for certain crimes against our youngest and/or most vulnerable.

I am much less concerned with rehab than justice for the victims and protection for our citizens and communities. Offenders can and should seek treatment before committing crimes. It is their responsibility to keep their urges in check. I am not opposed to treatment being a component of sex offender sentencing, but it should take place in a prison setting and be in conjunction with a long sentence.

There are many people who believe treatment doesn’t work for the true pedophiles. While not all offenders are pedophiles, we have done a poor job of isolating true predators from our children. Also, plenty of offenders who are “a low risk of re offense” commit further sex crimes. This makes citizens cringe, and demand longer prison sentences.

Government’s first priority should be to protect the innocent, especially our young people. Currently, they are failing in this regard. Bold, dynamic change is needed, and I predict lower levels of these crimes 5-10 years after our initiative becomes law. It will send a loud, clear, strong message!

5. Will I-936 address concerns about keeping track of sex offenders released into the community?

I-936, in its original version, included GPS monitoring of all perps convicted under the new law. However, we decided to stick with just sentencing issues due to the “multiple subject rule” that has been used to strike down a couple of other initiatives. For now, we are dealing with the first step….dramatically toughening penalties for the worst cases of child rape and molestation, and sex abuse of our disabled, mentally impaired, and frail and/or vulnerable elders.

6. It seems that many initiatives end up being overturned in court on constitutional grounds. How susceptible is I-936 to legal challenge?

Every initiative, it seems, is at least somewhat susceptible to being overturned…..our courts have proven that predictions of “fool-proof” wording simply does not exist. While we were careful to wording I-936, it is likely it will be challenged. If it is, we will then challenge the Legislature to do what we expect the citizens of this state will do should we get this on the November ballot - pass it overwhelmingly!

7. What costs could we expect the state to incur if this initiative passes?

The costs could vary, depending upon the “system” response. Prosecutors and Corrections officials will warn of massive resources being needed for longer terms of incarceration. This law should apply in a couple of hundred cases a year for a few years. This is about $5 million, except for the fact that we need more prison space. They will try and say that our law will cost “over $200 million” due to increased capital costs. Make no mistake, our belief is that costs will eventually go down, as some of the worst offenders will be put away, and a deterrent effect may/should kick in.

8. While the appeal of this initiative my be intuitive to a parent, those of us who are single may not feel the same sense of urgency. What would you say to unmarried voters to convince them that they have a stake in this as well?

I would hope that unmarried voters would also desire a society that values its most vulnerable.

Our law will also protect seniors, the disabled, and mentally impaired individuals. Sex offenders, generally, do not make wonderful neighbors. We are literally drowning our neighborhoods with dangerous predators. It stands to reason that many of these sex offenders have other life issues that could potentially make them dangerous.

We should all want a society that values its most vulnerable. Finally, and most importantly, government’s first duty is to protect its citizens. I would argue that our state continues to do a very poor job in this regard!

Cross posted at Pajama Jihad.

Republican precinct caucuses are tomorrow. The Kitsap County Republican Party has a great explanation of what the caucuses are and how you can get involved. The specifics (like the Auditor’s phone number) will be different depending on your county, but the general information is true throughout the state.

The Washington State Republican Party website has a contact information for each of the county parties as well as a link to their website if one is available.

As I’ve said elsewhere, if your county doesn’t have a helpful and informative website, don’t be afraid to contact someone with an official sounding title like, “Central Committee Chairmain.” They’re there to help you get involved.

If you don’t get involved, you’ve got no right to complain that the party isn’t listening to you; you haven’t been talking to it.

This second Operation: Red Washington podcast features Mike McGavick, the Republican candidate for Senate, who’s taking on Maria Cantwell in November. Listen now!

In the interview, Mike discusses his thoughts on how state legislative candidates can best make use of whatever coattails he posesses come November, and also argues that the state Republican party has been remiss in their attention to important issues, particularly education and the environment. He explains how he hopes to appeal to both the independent minded voters who make up the bulk of the state electorate and the conservative Republicans whose party he is in–and to do it without compromising his principles. He also gives a thumbs up to the Internet-driven Porkbusters project, and shares his less than complimentary thoughts on the current United States Senate. All that and more in episode #2 of the Operation: Red Washington Podcast.

If you’d like to subscribe to the podcast, the feed is here. But you don’t need to subscribe, or even have an mp3 player to listen to the interview–just click here and it should start playing. If you’d like to try subscribing to podcasts, I suggest this program.

The next interview will hopefully be coming much sooner than this one did, so stay tuned!

To my mind, this is the most important job of Republicans in Washington State: “Get government out of the way of job growth by removing the regulatory burden on small business.” The Commitment also aims to repeal the death tax (again) and to reform unemployment insurance, but those are just outgrowths of the main goal–to get government out of the way, letting this state reach its full potential.

I don’t think a lot of people realize what the full potential of Washington State is. Decades of Democrats in Olympia have inured us to mediocrity, when we should be far, far ahead of the rest of the nation. Just with our shipping, our tourism and our agriculture, we should at least be in the upper third of the nation economically. We’re not.When you add in the ingeneuity, know-how and Northwest good sense of the population, we should be right at the top. We’re not even close.

This is the state that produced Boeing, UPS and U-Haul, among others, and the state that drove them away. We are the home of Microsoft, Starbucks, Amazon and Weyerhaeuser. There is no good reason for our unemployment rate to be nearly two points higher than Alabama’s. Well, that’s not true. There’s a good reason, and it controls the Governor’s Mansion and both houses of the Legislature. We can–we must–do better.

So, as a broad goal, this part of the Comittment is extremely good. The majority of the bills themselves, though, suffer from a lack of boldness, perhaps an unavoidable flaw in any realistic list of legislative goals for a minority party, and one that’s present throughout most of the Comittment. Most deal with poking and prodding at the tax code here and there, which is well and good–but the most important one is HB2771, which would provide for a fairly robust avenue of legislative review for the RCW’s. It would mean that oppressive laws could be protested, forcing the legislature to examine them and, if they decide to, vote them out of existence. It’s a small thing, perhaps, but could potentially reap great dividends.

The issue of overregulation, unfortunately, isn’t particularly sexy, and isn’t one that, at first blush, is likely to jazz up independent voters. If presented, though, with clarity and creativity, I think it actually can. Independent-minded Northwesterners don’t like anyone meddling in their business, and unlike most Democrats, they understand how brambles–like regulations–will choke off all growth if not constantly hacked back. While I have a hard time imagining that it will pass this session, HB2771 would be a great machete to start that hacking, and I hope the GOP can convince the voters to let them wield it come November.

Win or lose win by a whole lot, the Seahawks trip to the Superbowl provides the state GOP with a unique opportunity. As I noted over at my own blog just before the Hawks battered the purportedly “Red State” Panthers about the face & neck, the Seattle pro football team is chock full of fine Republicans. Hopefully, once the Lombardi Trophy is carefully stowed at the top of the Space Needle or wherever, the McGavick campaign and/or the WSRP can enlist a few of these gentlemen in the mission of electing Republicans. The easiest task to set them at would be fundraising–because who doesn’t want to shell out a chunk of change to the Republicans to hang with the World Champions? (They’ve certainly done it before.) And if they can serve as a friendly public face of the Party, that would certainly help too.

Eventually, of course, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to encourage one or more of them to pull a Swann Largent.

For the moment, though, all I want them to do is thump the Steelers good and hard. Go Hawks!

Next up on the Personality Project is Dennis Schroader. Dennis is running for the state House of Representatives in the 27th district, a traditional Democrat stronghold. He’s a homegrown businessman and sometime blogger who served in the USAF before returning home to Tacoma.

Here is how he answered the questions:

1. To begin with, tell me a little about yourself. Who is Dennis Schroader?

The simplest way to put it is that I’m just a normal guy who wants to serve his community. I’m a father of two great kids (Emily is 6, and Dennis III is 4), a lifelong resident of Tacoma, except for a few years when I went away to college and enlisted in the Air Force, and a small businessman.

Like everyone else I’ve had my successes and my failures and I try to learn whatever I can from both. Most importantly, I’d say, is the fact that I’m just the guy next door. I’ve never had grandiose ambitions of becoming President or Governor or anything like that. I don’t think that being in politics elevates a person above their neighbors; in fact I believe quite the opposite.

When one is elected to office, one becomes a servant of the public, not their master. I am a firm believer in the Constitution and in rule by the people. I take on the task of unseating my opponent with the utmost humility and a servant’s heart. It is time the people of Tacoma were represented by someone who is one of their own. That’s me.

2. How would you describe your political philosophy?

I call myself a Tacoma Conservative, meaning that I believe in strong fiscal responsibility and a moderate social policy.

2b. What do you mean by “moderate social policy”?

I am not concerned with what people do in their private lives so long as they’re not breaking any laws and I support reviewing old law to ensure that it is written to be inclusive and enfranchising rather than the opposite.

For better or worse, this is a “progressive” state. The “better” part of that fact is that we as a whole enjoy the same freedoms and liberties as each of our neighbors. The “worse” part is that our society tends to over think and rationalizes things that should not be rationalized nor attempted to be explained away.

For instance, I take no pleasure in seeing the mentally ill locked away in prison and we do have a pretty good system for treating those cases (although more can and should be done), but where we go too far is in attempting to handle child molesters with the same kit-gloves.

I think I can state without fear of contradiction that the majority of people support clear, definite, and serious consequences for violent criminals. A “moderate social policy” seeks to find balance between compassion and the strict application of the law; I like to call this balance “common sense”.

3. What do you believe the priorities of government ought to be? Why?

The first and foremost priority of government needs to be ensuring equal protection under the law and then making certain that laws are written so as not to be exclusive by nature.

The reasons for this should be self-evident: we cannot expect our citizenry as a whole to enjoy the freedoms and opportunity that this country offers unless we ensure that everybody is playing the same game by the same rules. I should clarify that this is not a call for affirmative action; quite the opposite. Everyone needs to have the same rights, freedoms, restrictions, opportunities and responsibilities regardless of race, gender, disability, or religion. The state should not be in the business of granting special preference to anyone.

4. Who are your greatest influences and what have you learned from them?

In my personal life, my greatest influences have been my parents, grandparents and my children. From my parents I learned the value of hard work for its own sake. While I am not claiming that either is perfect, they have done their best to set not only high standards and expectations, but also good examples for me and siblings.

From my grandparents I’ve learned the meaning of commitment. They recently celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary. They’ve taught me by deed, if not as many words, that
difficulty is no reason to quit.

From my children I have learned patience and humility. Any parent will know what I’m talking about here. I have learned that I’m not nearly as smart or prepared as I once thought, nor do I have half the answers I once thought I did. I thank God for all of these people and the lessons they all continue to teach me.

Politically, I was first influenced by President Ronald Reagan. His vision of America as a “shining city on a hill” inspired me as a young boy and still does today. More recently I find myself looking to the examples set by our rightly elected Governor Dino Rossi, State Attorney General Rob McKenna, and Senator Bill Frist. The first two have shown that politics is not always about blustering rhetoric, fiery speeches, and attacking the opposition. The latter has shown me that it is often times necessary to stick to your guns and rally the troops when the cause is just. Fine statesmen all.

5. What challenges do you think Washington will face in the coming years? How do you think they ought to be handled?

Washington needs to seriously address the issues of public safety, education, and state infrastructure, all of which directly affect economic growth.

With regard to public safety matters, I think I need to address the particulars for my district, the 27th. Washington as a state has used the 27th District as a dumping ground for released or paroled felons, thus increasing the crime rate. Pierce County has a felon population 100% higher per capita than any other county in Washington.

This has resulted in an unbalanced and unfair burden on Tacoma and Pierce County. I would suggest that the state release its prisoners to the county in which they were
convicted rather than grouping a criminal element in a relatively small geography.

It is also vital that we pass Jessica’s Law Plus, which greatly strengthens penalties for predatory sex offenders against children. We need to send a clear message to those who would prey upon our children that we do not tolerate that behavior in the least.

Once our kids are safe to walk the streets to school again, things there will get better, but more attention is needed. I am calling for Washington to follow the example set by Arizona and mandate that 65% of all state funding for education be handed to local control. The state government has shown its ineptitude at micromanaging education and must resume its rightful role of oversight.

We must continue to set high standards and high expectations of our children AND do what must be done to ensure that our kids are able to meet them. This is best handled by local school boards in conjunction with principals and teachers; our educational “boots on the ground” if you will.

Washington will continue to face a crisis of infrastructure unless the legislature gets serious about addressing the root of the problem. According to the Homeland Security Coordinator for the Western Regional Medical Command, Washington’s transportation system is not adequate in the event of the most likely disasters we might face; lahars from Mt. Rainier and/or a major earthquake in Seattle. Even with 3-5 days advance warning, we could neither evacuate our cities nor get much needed relief workers and supplies to the affected areas via ground transportation.

This of course is saying nothing about our ridiculously long commutes. The first step is fully funding a performance audit (as described and passed in I-900 in 2005) of the Department of Transportation. We need to know not only that the money is being spent legally, but efficiently.

Another infrastructure issue is energy production and distribution. We need new and innovative methods to produce the energy we need in an environmentally sane manner. For this I would prescribe research grants to our Universities, where some of the best and brightest in America attend.

Finally, all of these issues will contribute positively to Washington’s economic development. When the streets are safe, our kids are well educated and a diploma means something, and when we are better able to get around to service our communities, the stage will be set for economic prosperity for all.

We must also remove some of the roadblocks the state has put in the way of small business (which, by the way, employs over 55% of Washington’s work force). We need to make Health Saving Accounts work better for small business while allowing health insurance providers to offer low cost medical coverage so that our small and medium size companies can afford to offer health benefits, thus attracting and retaining high quality employees.

When evaluating taxation, we need to ask how new tax laws will effect our small businesses and is the benefit greater than the cost in jobs, unemployment insurance claims, reduced consumer spending and a slew of other results that, if left unchecked, would result in economic decline.

The work of government is a delicate balancing act. One thing invariably influences another. The stop-gap measures that have been the norm in Olympia for decades have proven ineffective. It is time for forward thinking vs. regressive politics as usual. It is time we demanded positive results vs. the status quo.

6. What do you think are the most important characteristics for a legislator to possess? Why?

Legislators must first and foremost have a servant’s heart; meaning that they accept the mantle of their office with humility and the best interests of their constituents in mind. If they have any agenda other than building a better government for the people, they are in the wrong line of work and should take up lobbying.

Legislators must also possess the ability to listen more than they speak. Herein can you find the difference between a politician and a statesman.

7. Describe one specific piece of legislation you would like to see passed.

The single most important piece of legislation facing us right now is Jessica’s Law Plus, as I described before. The next most important is the 2006 Congestion Relief Bill, sponsored by Rep. Doug Erickson.

8. If you were faced with a situation where something that was good for the State as a whole was bad for the district, how would you deal with it?

That’s a tough question and one I think I’d have to answer on a case by case basis. Obviously, we all must make sacrifices for the greater good from time to time, but it would depend on the good and the level of sacrifice.

8b. Lets try a few combinations. i) A situation where something that is morally good for the State as a whole is economically bad for the district (perhaps a piece of environmental legislation). ii) A situation where something that is economically good for the State is morally bad for the district (perhaps constructing an important piece of infrastructure where a park or historic building now stands). iii) A
situation in which something that is economically good for the State is economically bad for the district.

I’ll answer these in order:

i) I would vote my constituency here. We already have enough economic woes in the 27th district with double digit unemployment. While I am strongly in favor of the responsible co-existence with our environment and I enjoy the outdoors in my free time, I will choose the good of the people over trees every day.

ii) History is vital to an area’s sense of self. Demolishing landmarks cannot be an undertaking taken lightly. If the landmark could be moved, I would support it. In the case of a park, I would want another one built to replace it. I guess the point is that it is foolish to stand in the way of progress; it is much wiser to guide its path.

iii) I have a hard time conceiving of such a situation. When something is economically good for the State, it is usually good for everyone involved. But in the hypothetical, I would attempt to change the bill in order to benefit (or at least not harm) my district.

9. What steps do you plan on taking to get your message out to the people of the 27th district?

My main focus is through word of mouth, a ton of doorbelling, and journalists like you. I know that I cannot win a media war, so I am relying on supporters to help me build a massive ground force with 5-10 people in every precinct to help identify other potential supporters, plan and organize neighborhood events (such as a coffee hour in someone’s home to speak to them and their neighbors and - most importantly - listen to their concerns), and help with the get-out-the-vote drive in October and November.

9b. How do you intend to distinguish yourself from the “generic GOP” stereotype?

For one thing, I’m young. Republicans have the image of being old men. I bring new blood and new ideas to the table. I’m not suggesting a coup of the old guard; more of an augmentation. Republicans also have the reputation of being dour and angry, opposed to change. I am very much NOT that. I have a pretty positive attitude and I am running a campaign centered on positive change and real progress for the people of Washington.

10. How will you make sure that you know what the people of the 27th district want and need?

Both while I’m running and after I am elected, I pledge to hold public town hall meetings every month where the main focus will be listening and responding to the thoughts and concerns of the voters. I am of the people and will not attempt to elevate myself above them. If the people send me to Olympia, they can rest assured that they are sending one of their neighbors; someone who can truly represent them because I am one of them.

To find out more about Dennis, check out his website at www.voters4schroader.com.

Cross-posted at Pajama Jihad.

For the people of Washington, education has always been a priority. Parents care because they want their kids to succeed, business leaders care because they need well-educated employees and the rest of us care because we recognize the future of the state and the nation rests on these kids.

That being said, there is a widespread concern that the current educational system is not adequately preparing our kids for college or the real world, a perception that is bolstered by the fact that in 2004 about half of all High School sophmores failed at least one section of the 10th grade WASL on their first try.
Starting this year, students must pass that test in order to graduate from High School, and lawmakers are scrambling to make sure that they do.

The Governor has proposed a plan that would give school districts approximately $1,000 per student that failed at least one section of the WASL in order to better prepare those students to take the test again.

I am somewhat dubious of this plan, since it almost seems to give schools an incentive to fail. For too long the answer to education has been throwing money at a broken system and expecting it to perform better.

Earlier this year Representative Doug Ericksen suggested that “perhaps we can find a way to empower parents with some scholarships for the WASL that they can use for private tutors, sylvan learning centers, or if teachers want to form private tutoring groups to go out and help these students, to give parents a different option and not just say, ‘go to summer school and sit there in the classroom.’”

The idea was to give parents more options and more control over how their children are prepared for their second shot at the WASL.

It was an excellent idea, but unfortunately it does not appear to have translated into any legislation. According to the House Republican Caucus, the only bills they have submitted to address the issue of education are HB 2902, which allows PSAT, SAT or ACT math scores to be accepted in lieu of the math section of the WASL and HB 2903, a more comprehensive education package that, among other things, allows the development of local assessment tests and lays out a plan for turning around failing schools.

Both bills are worthwhile, but they lack the boldness and vision of Ericksen’s plan.

When all is said and done, however, we need to be candid about the fact that anything we do to address the immediate problem posed by the WASL is only a band-aid. Real, substantive reform is what is needed to solve the root cause of the problem.

Ericksen’s plan, which allows parents more choice in deciding how their children are prepared for the WASL, provides a framework for doing that. I’d like to see Republicans pursue it with more vigor.

Odd as it may seem, the one piece of the Comittment to Washington that has raised the most conservative eyebrows–mine included–is this one, the comittment to eliminate the $5 fee for use of state parks. While not a big fan of taxes & fees in general, Republicans tend to be okay with use fees, particularly for things used sporadically like state parks, because they ensure that the public in general isn’t paying for something used by a small minority of the populace.

So, what’s with eliminating the use fee? Well, first off, it’s good politics, and second, it’s good patriotism.

It’s good politics because paying $5 just to go for a walk or have a short picnic in a park is really, really annoying. I speak from experience here. Use fees are one thing, but that’s a bit ridiculous.

Equally important, though, is the fact that this is Washington State. We have the greatest state parks in the country, and they are a part of our state character like they are few other places. We should be willing to put forth some extra effort to keep these parks open to everyone, including people for whom $5 is a hardship.

Add to that the fact that it’s hardly a minority of Washingtonians who use state parks–as of 2000, the state parks saw 58 million attendees a year, making the $5 fee practically a general tax. And we Republicans hate those.

Next up is Wally Nash. Wally is running for the State House of Representatives in the 25th district, position 2, which is currently held by Dawn Morrell. He’s run for the seat once before and lost in the primary to Michelle Smith. This time he hopes to do better. Here is how he answered the questions:

1. To begin with, tell me a little about yourself. Who is Wally Nash?

I was born, many, many years ago in a small coal Mining village in North East England. I suppose we would be considered poor by today’s standards but we didn’t know it. These were the days of outside toilets, no electricity, water heated by a coal boiler and rainwater collected in big barrels. I won a scholarship to a Grammar School and left school at 17 graduating in English Language, English Literature, Chemistry, Geography and Art. I enlisted in the Royal Air Force at 17 and a half and trained as an Air Wireless Mechanic. Strangely enough, my first posting was at RAF Habbaniya, an airbase 60 miles from Baghdad in Iraq. I was then posted to Cyprus where I was on Active Service for three years fighting terrorism on that island. Yes, Nathan, we were fighting terrorism as long ago as 1956.

After leaving the RAF in 1960, I worked on the fringe of the music and night club industry. I helped employ the Rolling Stones for the equivalent of $60.00, for two appearances and I helped Eric Burdon and the Animals in their early days. After that, I wandered around the world for a little traveling through, all of Europe, Bulgaria, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.

I eventually became a “Product Demonstrator” and first came to the USA in 1974 and after a while I fell in love with the country and it’s peoples. I became a Green Card Holder in 1982 and a US Citizen in 1993. My wife and I operate a successful business based in Puyallup, we manufacture niche household products. We like to sell enough product to make a good living without attracting the attention of major manufacturers who might gobble us up.

I am an active member of the Puyallup Rotary Club and the East Pierce County Chamber of Commerce. I am First Vice President of the 25th District Republican Club and was the Chairman of the 25th District I-912 Steering Committee. I am also a member of the Pierce County Developmentally Disabled Advisory Board.

I was a Pierce County delegate during the 2000 Bush campaign and I unsuccessfully ran for the 25th District House seat, Position 2 in 2004. I have learned a lot since then.

2. How would you describe your political philosophy?

I am a Reagan / Thatcher Conservative. I believe in small government, low taxation, reduced regulation, more personal responsibility and a school system that actually teaches children to read, write and count.

3. What do you believe the priorities of government ought to be? Why?

I assume that we are talking about “State” Government but the first priority applies to both State and Federal Governments and that is Firstly and Foremostly Government must remember from whence comes it’s power. The Power of Government comes from the Governed. As legislators we represent the people and should never forget that. I do not mean that we should continuously govern by referendum because we also have to lead but we must never, ever allow government to be divorced from the people we serve.

4. Who are your greatest influences and what have you learned from them?

This is not an easy question to answer. Do we do what the winners at the Oscars do and thank everybody we ever met? I think not. Looking back, my greatest influences came from my Grandparents who brought me up. I had a strong family and a strong support system. I was influenced by serving in the RAF and learning discipline and responsibility. I was influenced by my early bosses who taught me my trade and how to be a businessman. Politically, my first and important influence was Maggie Thatcher. From her I learned about Free enterprise. I learned about having true beliefs and never straying far from those beliefs. Like Reagan she brought pride back to a nation that had lost it’s pride. From Thatcher I learned in retrospect about Winston Churchill and the strengths he brought to a nation at war and when I came to the USA I learned about Reagan and what it meant to be a Conservative. I think it was The Gipper who said that what made America great was ordinary people doing extra ordinary things. Remember that in the USA we wear our hearts on our sleeve for all to see. We are brash about our beliefs and so we should. We are the most generous and most maligned people on this earth yet we do not hide from the world. We are indeed the city shining on the hill.

5. What challenges do you think Washington will face in the coming years? How do you think they ought to be handled?

Whatever ails Washington will not be fixed overnight. We have endured 23 years of Democratic mismanagement and there is so much to correct. Our transportation policy is a mess and common sense needs to be brought to that problem. Our education system is failing it’s charges, our children. Our state is not business friendly so we must work to make it so We must get Washington moving again. Businesses provide jobs. People in jobs pay taxes, tax money can be spent wisely to solve transportation difficulties and make our neighborhoods safer.

6. What do you think are the most important characteristics for a
legislator to possess? Why?

As mentioned before, we must never forget who put us in the House or Senate Seat. We must not make promises we do not intend to keep. We must never forget that we are taking hard earned money from people and in essence giving that money to somebody or something else. It is an awesome responsibility. Government has no money of it’s own. It is the people’s money. We must always have the good of the State in the forefront

7. Describe one specific piece of legislation you would like to see passed

I would like to see English made the official language of this State.

8. If you were faced with a situation where something that was good for the State as a whole was bad for the district, how would you deal with it?

Nathan, you are bad, bad, bad! What sort of question is this for a Politician? There are so many variables and there will be different actions required depending on the situation. Congressman Reichart has faced similar difficulties Sometimes you have to vote for your district otherwise the electorate will not vote for you again and if you do not have a seat you can accomplish nothing. I can only say that I hope the situation never occurs but if it did I would have to really, really, really study the situation and do what I think is the right thing to do.

9. What steps do you plan on taking to get your message out to the people of your district?

First of all by the old stand by of door belling. Speaking face to face is the true, tried and tested method but we must not for get the media. Being Republicans, we obviously face an uphill battle using the old media because they are rarely helpful in getting our true message out. We must use paid advertisements and for that we have to raise funds. We have to use the “New Media” as much as possible, sympathetic Blogs and Republican radio. We have to learn to make a noise in as many areas as possible.

10. How will you make sure that you know what the people of your district want and need?

When I ran 2004, I found the best way at that time was meeting the electorate face to face on their doorsteps and face to face at County fairs and Meeker Days and little Town Hall Meetings. Nowadays we must use every avenue available to us. I have my own website, www.electwallynash.com and we have email facilities also. We must make ourselves continuously available and accessible to the electorate. I am sure that Blogs like yours will also assist in making sure that we know what the people feel is required.