News Feb 10, 2011 at 4:00 am

Washington's Republican counties depend on Western Washington's money. How can they survive the state budget cuts they demand?

Comments

102
99
good post
Hendrix's cover is great (better than original?), but Dylan is the author of “All along the Watchtower”
103
This same scenario is playing all out over the entire country. Plain and simple, it costs the country more when you live in rural areas. Those in cities are subsidizing those in rural areas. How ironic that those in rural areas dislike city folk so much and want to stop the socialism that helps them!
104
Goldy, How is it you can be so smart in your reporting about macro-economic WA school issues and so fucking stupid about the policies issues and leadership of Seattle Public Schools right in your own backyard.

Too bad you couldn't motivate yourself to do a more comprehensive reporting job in the SPS campaign. As our schools are privatized and teacher union is kicked to the curb, take a long depressing look into your lack of interest or perhaps ability to keep your own urban house in order.
105
Yes, the great population in King county pays the greatest share of taxes for the state. Eastern Wa. sells it's produce cheaply to the world. Beef, milk, wheat, corn, hopps, barley, apples, cherries, grapes, wine, lumber, electricty, calcium, gold, silver, and old rust free pickup trucks.

Enjoy, Bob T.
106
Ferry County

2000 sq. mi.
16% private land
=320 sq. mi.
1/2 is reservation
=160 sq. mi. outside reservation in county jurisdiction.

$600,000+ received and spent on GMA in last 22 yrs. and Ferry County is still out of compliance after 22 yrs.
107
This is a modern version of a very old confrontation between
industrial/computer areas and agrarian. In the late 80's Western
Washington was affluent and felt the migrant farm worker should be
Helped and offered Free Housing, Free Health Care, Free Schooling
Free Food and Free Money. The struggling poor was helped at the time yet also created a new line of people accustom to a big government handouts.
Wealthy Farmers invited and brought them here, Seattle liberals passed bills to let them stay and fed them now a once hardworking people are paid to reproduce and expect Social Handouts.
Both sides of the State are to blame for creating this problem and both need to come together to solve it.
108
Therefore, it is totally justified to eliminate infrastructure funding in rural areas, take away the one and only bus route to the one and only hospital in Gig Harbor (for example) and raise taxes on gas so that the rural poor can't even hope to make it to any kind of medical care, hmm? But I guess they deserve their misfortune--if only they would vote Democrat! That would solve their problems--after a sports stadium is funded, more bus and light rail routes created for Seattle, and so on and so on.

Ever think the increased funding for rural areas per capita is so that their infrastructure and schools can catch up with what urban areas already have?
109
Two things:

1: Red counties are not 100% red. Our low cost of living is good for people on government checks, so it would be natural to end up with a lot of welfare people to move where it's cheaper to live. Maybe without the Welfare money, they would have to go back. We would certainly be happier without them.

2: If you want to keep your money, you need to keep your regulations too. They increase our cost of operation and often are quite stupid when applied to a low population density environment.
110
The problem is not the Farmers. It is the Gov Unions. And the Governors that give them thier huge pay raises and benefits. That's where the costs are going. The more they make the more Political Donations goes to the Democrats. Especioally in the heavily populated areas where peopler live. Greg negotiated with the Gov unions just before her last campaign. Certain Union workers were making just $14,000 after they were through talking, those Gov workers were forced to join the union and then they made $40,000 per year. Greg got one heck of a donation from that union. and so did the Demcrat party. Also that map doesn't show the Population figures. So it is not accurate for the type of disscussion being held here. This is only one situation. When those roads have to be fixed the prevailing wage kicks in and has to be calculated from the nearst union which is in a larger city rather than a small stop on a highway. Talking about the Gross amount does not show the real costs. Read about it in the Seattle Times.
111
We really need updated financial figures. It's not persuasive to quote figures from 2008 in the year 2014. I recorded Dominic Holden's comments at the Transit Forum thursday... he again said the 60% figure. I can't find more recent figures since this was apparently a special report for Reuven Carlyle. http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/welfa…
112
All this whining is another reason to cut this state in half along the cascade ridge line. The eastside won't suffer.
113
Tell you what... if Eastern Washington is such a burden to Western Washington then we should split the state down the Cascade Trail.
114
Good article, too bad the discussion got mired down in insults and stupidity. Is there a good source for tax receipts and disbursements broken down by county and category? Also, and to pick just one example, how much do the rural counties of E. Washington spend on facilities used by residents of W. WA? The reverse is valid also, how much does King Co. spend on me? I admit it - I am a Ferry Co. resident - born, raised here, and back for retirement.

I know - the real problem is not the exact balancing of the accounts. The important thing is that neither one of us, East side or West side, could live as well as we do without the other. The challenge is to convince the idiots among us - on all sides - that we all benefit if we try to solve our problems instead of pointing fingers.

Several years ago there was an initiative complaining about the 520 bridge. At the time I knew it was bullshit but I had no data to back it up. Then at the very end someone came out with the tax and benefit figures: for every $1.00 Ferry County sent to the state in gas taxes, we got $5.00 in road funds back. By then the opinions had hardened, at the beginning the facts could have made a difference.
115
since all of those "republican" counties produce almost all the food and raw goods used by the "democrat" counties, I'm sure all of this money spent had nothing to do with getting food to 'democrat' counties so the 'democrats' can eat too.
116
If the "Republicans" are the biggest recipients of tax money, then you would have no problem going along with the tax cuts. It seems very strange that so many westside voters would be doing us the favor, voting in all those funds and all.
117
If the "Republicans" are the biggest recipients of tax money, then you would have no problem going along with the tax cuts. It seems very strange that so many westside voters would be doing us the favor, voting in all those funds and all.
118
Where is the logic in this article?
119
I agree - this isn't new or news (in fact, I'm pretty sure The Stranger has published on this before - perhaps like 10 years ago).

Also, critically, this is the Maginot Line of political debate. The argument about "self sufficiency" is now more about myth-making than any type of reality; redistribution is a buzzword only among those nationally-recognized electives who have essentially forsaken their nominal constituents and are positioning for more national-level positions, like the presidency
120
Although you don't even link to the Seattle Times piece that apparently said "this is neither new nor news" so it's impossible to know the context, they are in fact absolutely correct about that. And I guess that is reinforced by the fact that you're using six year old data as a basis for your story.

And this over-simplification of red state/blue state voters is really pathetic. How do you know the people receiving welfare in Eastern Washington are voting Republican when in most of these counties around 40% of the population vote Democratic?

But hey, who cares about that? Let's just take this opportunity to make fun of those stupid poor rednecks who vote against their own interests, right? Poor people are so stupid!
121
This has been an 'unbalanced state' for a long time. There has been a long held mind-set in E'WA that accepts a 'scam' behavior.... especially if it scams government or the W'Wa's. R's promote it and yet don't like it when others figure it out and use their methods too. Immigrants learn from their surroundings. E'WA is a bastion of systems in which old-fashioned ideas continue to survive. They have Fox on the TV @ the local restaurants. My family from Pasco/Kennewick, and it was once a Dem county. It's not a matter of # of counties that vote D. It's that 'the people that vote' - and most of the population lives in only a few.
122
Considering that Clallam County's State legislators are all Democrats (unless one of them jumped the ship/shark with Judas Rodney), I'm having a hard time with my county being considered a 'Republican' county. Where did you get the info on that, Goldy?

Broadway Joe
123
It's an article like this that seems so authoritative, but is so misleading, that again makes me wonder why The Stranger is EVER considered some great alternative newspaper. [And I voted for Sawant so don't assume I'm conservative.] As was pointed out in the fifth comment to this article, "the analysis doesn't mean much when variable and fixed costs are lumped together."

And when comparing sparsely populated counties like Garfield or Wahkiakum or Ferry to densely populated counties along Puget Sound. Tiny rural counties always cost more because they still need a base of service whose cost is always higher per capita than a large urban county.

It's easy for The Stranger to diss the rural, conservative parts of the state, but it only shows as much or more provincialism as they can find "out there."

What has been true for a century is that government, especially the feds, but in time also very much the state, has transformed the entire state -- from tough scrubland to fertile fields, dense forests to massive tree farms, and quite a few wetlands to docks and piers and industrial or warehouse districts. Just drive from Moses Lake to Pasco now, and it looks more like Iowa farmland than its old sagebrush steppe with basalt outcroppings. That's mostly from water behind Grand Coulee, a socialist venture if there ever was one.
124
haha! oh man, republicans are stupid.
125
Soooo I'm guessing now is a good time to float the idea of non-citizens who receive many benefits. Me here's the chart in that? And what's the breakdown on exactly what kind of projects w what kind of returns are manages in the 'taker' counties. Someone above mentioned all these people are stupid for voting against the spending that's 'benefitting' them. In my limited and humble experience, typically, republicans vote against spending bc they see extra BS programs w little payout causing this exact kind of data. If programs are needed in King or Kittitas, and not needed in Spokane, but are required due to state law, is that the idiocy of the voters in Spokane who count for a small portion of Washington population? I'm gonna have to raise a flag. What's not mentioned in a graph is just as important as what is. -peace from Kittitas County, a giver
126
Oh, great. Another article about CUBRs. (Crazy Uncle Bob Republicans... Because isn't that who they remind you of? Crazy Uncle Bob, muttering in the corner of the room, embarrassing the family?)

Ah, well.
127
Oh, great. Another article about CUBRs. (Crazy Uncle Bob Republicans... Because isn't that who they remind you of? Crazy Uncle Bob, muttering in the corner of the room, embarrassing the family?)

Ah, well.
128
Horrible article. Shameful reporting. Not helping in any way shape or form. You should be ashamed.
129
Much of the "welfare" cited are state mandates for programs that outlying counties may oppose. Unfortunately, to reject a program is to reject the accompanying funding, and no politician wants to shortchange their constituency. The hypocrisy demonstrated by this article is that EVERYONE recognizes that the state is in difficult financial straits, but only those with the most to lose (republicans) are advocating the necessary cuts. It seems like Democrats, who contribute most of the money, should be quick to join their red-state brethren on this issue...
130
The use of the term "welfare queen" is racist. Please educate yourselves and stop using it.
131
To Goldy:

This is an important and well written article.

Consider avoiding double negatives.

Instead of: "That's not an uncommon complaint."

Use: That's a common complaint.

132
how do we know that the rupublicans living in the rural areas dont own the businesses in good business locations that happen to be in democrat territory
133
sad. As usual, the string was intelligent and thought provoking and then deteriorated into hate. We, in the Methow Valley are the single highest revenue support (taxes) for the rest of our county (Okanogan), and the majority of voters are liberal. And yet we are red in the map. The map is not a true representation. There are area's on the west side no doubt that are misrepresented as well. The broad strokes here are a bad idea, and only serve to create unnecessary feelings of discord within the population of our wonderful state.
134
I think many people in Western WA enjoy coming to Eastern WA to recreate on good roads. It is good for both sides. If Boeing or Microsoft left Puget Sound, they might be attracted to Eastern WA if it became the state of Madison. I lived in Puget Sound for 35 years and moved to Eastern WA to get away from traffic. If Western WA quit supporting Eastern WA, you would get all of the people with little income moving to Puget Sound to live on welfare and Social Security. Soon you would have all of the responsibility and more crowding of people into less housing, etc. Eastern WA would benefit because only those who could afford to live in the country would stay. This would raise the per capita income, require fewer goods and services, lower taxes, and give more room to those who stayed. So, keep your money, and pay for the great population shift and pay for those who move to Puget Sound. You get the taxes, the people, the crowds, and I get more room. I can survive with narrow roads, gravel in some areas, more coyotes, deer, rabbits, wolves, and cougars (not the kind that hunt in Bellevue). We would also have fewer regulations, environmental controls, and less government. We would charge a little more to use the forests, parks, recreation facilities, food, and other accommodations when you visit. We would home school our children, teach them independence, and reverence for nature, along with how to be good citizens. We would treat you with respect when you visit, take your money, and provide a guide back to the pavement. Thank you for coming to visit and have a nice day. :)
135
Linda Lu Cannon Seven year old data. And look closely. Just because the counties are in the red doesn't mean they receive more welfare. Check out Chelan County vs. Jefferson, Kittatas vs. Snohomish, Spokane vs. Grays Harbor, etc. The red means Republican, not specifically that they receive more welfare as many red counties receive less than blue counties. Ferry, Lincoln, Stevens, and Yakima counties are high because they contain Indian Reservations. But yes, all in all, the Eastern part of the state receives more welfare. But this map and article exaggerate. It's not that they're moochers, it's because there are NO JOBS. (oh, and for the record, I'm not a Republican. I'm a Socialist.)
136
Consider this, you pompous asses. The people "receiving" your socialism are the ones farming and feeding your asses, so, in hindsight, those programs are actually helping you! Never thought about that, did you? The numbers I want to see is how much of our tax revenue goes into projects like the boring machine stuck in the bowels of Seattle. How many billions of dollars wasted? We can't even get the North/South freeway completed, and it was started BEFORE the "big bore." Now it's on a 10-15 year plan? Whatever. You guys can say all you want.
137
This is a great analysis, but is there more recent data than 2008? That was 6-7 years ago. With the recent boom of the Seattle metro economy, I'm willing to bet that the effects shown here are even more dramatic!
138
Just maybe all you democrats over there in western Washington, might want to think about who you voted for in the last 2 elections! Our country and state has gone to hell in a hen basket because of him!
139
If everyone is so outraged by this, why do you continue to support candidates who aim to pump money into social welfare? Instead of sitting here thinking "oh, what stupid poor rural conservatives" realize that you are the part of the machine that continues to support increased spending in social welfare

P.S. this article doesn't even account for lower population densities in rural areas, or the fact that many of these counties have close republican/democrat divides.

Make sure to take articles, especially from the Stranger, with a grain of salt :)
140
I am wondering why they are using data from 2008? We live in a computer age where more current and relevant data should be available. Or, does old data best support his agenda?
141
I went to Job Corps up in Ferry Co.

I received free trade schooling, free room and board, and we all received a stipend each week.

Job Corps also helped kids get their HS diplomas and GED's as well for free.

Every weekend we did fun trips away from campus to go snowboarding, mountain biking, mineral collecting, or just playing music in one of the fully furnished jam rooms.

They also paid for your travel to arrive and go home on the holidays.

There's only 4 Job Corps Campuses in WA and 3/4 are in the very red counties. The other one is in Skagit Co.

Thank you taxpayers for my awesome time!!!!
142
Regarding all those "rural crack babies" in the mostly agricultural, timber and government jobs: Until the Coasties began shipping out their addicts to the NE corner of the state, there were virtually no addicts or welfare in this rural area.

King County and the lovely city of Seattle tried to ban chewing gum. The residents bemoaned the failure of such an environmentally friendly law which was designed to make their sidewalks cleaner and environment less stressed by the unclean who visit their perfect exclusive city and county. However, there is always "other ways" to remove the unwanted, particlarly the homeless and addicted. And, that was an unwritten policy in the social and law enforcement services that created a human tsunami of unwanted humanity from urban to rural communities. It's called "passing the trash."

When a drug addict reached the unacceptable chronic offender status and Washington state legislators, dominated by the large population of the liberal West Coast votes the state laws in the RCW mandated "counseling" has not improved the lifestyle of the offender what else can a wealthy snobby population do with these people? SHIP THEM OUT! GET RID OF THEM THEY'RE POLLUTING THE AREA! "The humane thing would best be to remove them from their current coast habitat and transfer them to a healthier and more isolated region like the northeastern counties where they can get high and no one with mind."

And, thus these once low crime and independent hard working rural families were human bombed by the mass migration from wealthy coastal cities and suburbia to the land of farms, ranches and timber where addicts can grow, cook and create any recipe they choose and spread it among the youth of the area AND NOT POLLUTE THE CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE LIBERAL AND WEALTHY SEA-TACKYITES. "The fair thing to do, of course is to pay for their welfare while living there. At least they won't be polluting our cultire." The Tri-County corner of this state has become a human toxic dump site and this article fails to address the influx of THE SEA-TAC's own inhumane and unfairly transfer their human problems who pollute their sidewalks just like cast away chewing gum.

We despise the fact that the residents and taxpayers of these counties have been burden by both the new costs of law enforcement related to drug crime, environmental damage and cultural burdens if Sea-Tac's unwanted. Perhaps we should just do a fair trade. You take your welfare payments back to state government along with all the druggies you sent our way!!!!!!!!

    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
    Preview

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