Excellent reporting, Eli. This kind of reporting is why more and more people are turning to The Stranger for news. Seattle Times just has too much slant to it. (I note that several parents at my blog said they were canceling subscriptions to the Times b/c of teacher strike coverage.)

I could not be more pleased that the Gov is taking a stand to get - McCleary - done before any charter school funding. (I perceive the AG filing a reconsideration motion to the Supreme Ct to be pro forma - the Court is not going to go "whoops" and change their ruling.)

This is a real commitment to getting something done - now to figure out a better way to fund the entire state.
Thank you Eli Sanders for reminding Washingtonians that Jay Inslee, Frank Chopp and other supposedly progressive legislatures gave Boeing $8.7 billion in a New York minute while dragging their feet for YEARS on complying with repeated Washington State Supreme Court orders to adequately fund education. These people are corporate toadies, and we the people need regime change.
SLOG . . . please write an article explaining the $100,000 per day fine that the WA State Supreme Court has imposed on our State Legislature. Individuals members of the legislature are not being fined, surely--though that would surely be more just. And the only money with which the legislature could pay any fine is with the money we've given them in taxes. So are we--the Washington taxpayers--the ones actually being fined? And who will the legislature pay when they pay these fines (with our money)? They won't pay the members of the Supreme Court, surely. Will they pay the State Court System? Where will the paid fine dollars end up? Back in the State budget? It all seems quite insane.
I've been watching "Show Me A Hero" lately (about the NIMBY reaction to building housing projects in 1980s Yonkers) and I got really excited about the bit where the courts were personally fining the council members $500 a day and fining the city $100 a day, which doubles every day until the court order was fulfilled. They predicted the town would be bankrupt in three weeks.

I really, really want the courts to do this to our state legislators, with appropriate inflation.
Even the most obtuse, cross-eyed, mouth-breathing moron knows that we're living in a kleptocracy. The governor and the legislature no longer have any credibility.
Rodney Tom. Tim Sheldon.
The Boeing Special Session 'worked' (for Boeing) because everyone at the table (House, Senate, Governor) was already in agreement as to what they wanted to accomplish - hand Boeing the biggest tax break in history.

But what good would Governor Inslee do by calling an Education Special Session when the Democratic House has one solution and the Republican Senate has a different and diametrically opposed solution?

Be careful what you wish for.

A Special Session to solve the challenge of McCleary at this point is more than likely to result in legislators sitting in Olympia and doing nothing for weeks on end, eventually moving to a 'least common denominator' solution closer to what the Republicans want - slashing other state spending to fund education - rather that the pipe-dream of a progressive state income tax to generate much needed new revenue.
Of course, the legislature was in special session in May and June, and it took them that long on overtime to come up with about 1/3 billion more state revenue. So, finding the 3.5 billion more state revenue is not a simple task to agree to. Most of it will be a levy swap which is an existing tax renamed. It will take the working group several months to engineer and bargain a potential solution. The only reason to call a special session is to have everyone come in and vote once it's ready. If the legislature can't find the money by January to March, does the supreme court sequester some of the tax breaks back from Boeing and others?

The sarcasm is hilarious!

Wait. You meant that? The Stranger as a news source? The Times has a bias, but The Stranger coldly reports the facts? Really?

Well. That's an, um, interesting perspective.

I don't think anyone needs to take advice on unbiased reporting of the facts from a guy who thinks there's more evidence that gay marriage will destroy our society than that climate change is threatening the biosphere.

Oh, I see your confusion.

I don't claim to be a journalist. The hacks and propagandists at The Stranger do, and wish to make a career of it.

See the difference, boy? No? Well maybe when you grow up...
@12: All right. It's okay for you to be fact-challenged because YOU aren't a journalist.'re not a journalist, and you can't get your actual facts straight...and you think this makes you qualified to tell journalists how to get their facts straight. Seriously, dude?

It's like if I called Shea McClellin a weakling and, when people pointed out that I can only press a measly 160 pounds, claimed that it doesn't matter because I'm not a football player. Seattleblues, the fact that you make no pretensions to journalism doesn't excuse you from your inability to comply with the facts or make you an authority on journalism; in actuality, it does the opposite.

Oh. Okay.

So, not being a doctor I can' t assess whether my doctor seems competent and understanding of my health care needs. Because you say so.

Not being an attorney or accountant I can't make decisions about the people I hire to perform those services. Because the boy VL says so.

I assess from a life experience and personal needs standpoint all kinds of service providers I employ. And despite your asanine argument I don't actually need to be any one of them to do so.

You're an argumentative kid. Argument because someone is wrong makes sense. Argument as a reflex action is a boy's game. And apparently the only one you know.
@14: I'm not saying you need to be a doctor to assess whether someone is a basically competent doctor. But if you didn't know the first thing about human biology or even biology in general, you wouldn't have much standing to critique them. You are able to make conscious choices about those various service providers because, amazingly, you actually are rudimentarily informed on the nature of their work. If only such incredible basic knowledge was present in you on more topics. Like journalism. And biology. And climatology. And American civics.
I don't argue with you a lot because my first instinct is to argue. I argue with you a lot because you're so damn wrong so damn often.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.