Democrat Commissioner and PCO candidate Marc Boldt, (Who, in the interests of full disclosure, is my brother-in-law and my former boss in the Washington State House) voted for this massive rip off, along with every other democrat involved in the scam which was implemented after yet another horrific CTran defeat back in 2005.
The result?
A gerrymandered district that would have put Boss Hogg to shame... a district where every possible precinct that voted "no" was eliminated from the vote while every possible location that collects sales tax was included... disenfranchising most of rural Clark County, enabling the few in Vancouver proper to slam the residents of the rest of the county with a tax increase we were not allowed to vote on.
So, when you hear from Jaime Herrera, or any candidate like Liz Pike, that they want a "district-wide vote" that phrase, in effect, means they "want to silences 100,000+ voters from being allowed to participate in the vote... they don't want us to have any say.you've got to wonder: why do they support disenfranchising tens of thousands of voters from having a say... but not from paying the tax?
This is currently displayed on her campaign web site:
By "supporting a district wide vote," instead of a COUNTY WIDE VOTE, Pike is emulating Leavitt, Stuart, Boldt, Miller and many other supporters who are not interested in the will of the people.
Settling for a pre-ordained faux vote of the variety those supporting this gerrymandering advocate provides, essentially, a pre-ordained outcome.
Courage requires something much more.
It requires standing up for those of us denied a voice by those who view us as an unfortunate impediment to their agenda.
Pike is, apparently, one of those.
Where's a Republican when you need one?
2 comments:
C'mon Kelly
The choice available to the Ctran Board is either a district wide vote or a sub-district vote.
Are you advocating that the CTran district should be County wide? if so I view that as a separate issue.
I really doubt that Liz is opposed to a County wide vote, but the choice on the table is District or sub district. She has chosen the larger vote area.
Nope, sorry.
What I'm advocating... and what I demand from my representatives... is a requirement to do one of two things:
Provide an exemption from paying the tax if we were not allowed to vote on it, (You know, like I was living in Oregon?) or;
Do whatever it takes so that we CAN vote on it.
I don't care how it's done. The Gerrymandered tax district can be UN-gerrymandered just as easily as it was cut.
THAT is what I want... and that's the advocacy I want.
I'll leave the easily done details to those at the table.
But I want HER (and every other elected official) to accept the singular position that EVERYONE in Clark County generally and her (my) district specifically should have the RIGHT to vote on this...
...since we have to bear the cost of it.
Choosing "the larger vote area" which STILL doesn't even include the majority of voters who are going to have to pay for this is not unlike choosing the manner of your execution.
The outcome is the same. The only thing different is the journey.
Post a Comment