Smart PNW idea...NSR/Political

**Jumper Bones** · 02-22-2005, 03:13 PM

LINK

Forget Ben And Jennifer -- Some Want To Break Up Washington

February 21, 2005

By KOMO Staff & News Services

OLYMPIA - If Sen. Bob Morton has his way, he'll soon be a resident and lawmaker in the 51st state of the United States.

To Morton, the Cascade Mountains are more than just the dividing line between wet and dry Washington. They are the indisputable wall between political ideologies that only became more apparent during the recent contested governor's race.

The Republican from Orient is the prime sponsor on a joint memorial in the Senate that asks President Bush to create a new state east of the Cascades that would comprise 20 of the current state's 39 counties. Nine other Republican senators have signed on in support. Similar measures have been introduced in past years without success.

"It's not sour grapes," Morton said. "It's common sense. People who think alike should be united."

Morton said Eastern Washington has its own distinct culture, lifestyle and agriculture-driven economy. And he says growth development restrictions and other regulations imposed by Olympia put a stranglehold on his area.

But even if the measure passes the Senate and House and is signed by the governor, the U.S. Constitution says that Congress, not the president alone, has the power to create a new state.

Morton acknowledged the challenge of anything coming of the measure, but said "it's worth every effort."

Other Republicans also noted that because about one-third of the state's voters reside in Washington's largest, and overwhelmingly Democratic, county - King County - that their constituents' voices are overshadowed by their western neighbors.

Bitterness over the red-blue divide in the state only increased in November's governor's race. Eastern Washington overwhelmingly voted in support of Republican candidate Dino Rossi, only to see Democrat Christine Gregoire pull ahead after a third count.

"Look at the election results. We elected Rossi. King County elected Gregoire," said Sen. Bob McCaslin, R-Spokane Valley.

The measure will have a public hearing before the Government Operations and Elections Committee Tuesday morning.

Committee Chair Sen. Jim Kastama, D-Puyalllup, said he has no plans on moving the measure out of committee. He said he decided to hold a public hearing because it was "an opportunity to learn from each other."

"This is purely an opportunity for us to engage in a conversation about why they do perceive Western Washington the way they do," he said. "I hope something positive comes from this. In no way am I really serious about dividing the state of Washington."

But McCaslin said that there's no way to escape domination from the west coast without becoming a whole new state.

"I believe from my heart, mind and soul that Eastern Washington could survive beautifully without Western Washington," he said. "And I hope Western Washington feels just as I do, that we'd love to be on our own."

One Democrat from Western Washington does, and he's the lone member of his party listed as a sponsor on the measure.

Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, said he believes Western Washington would benefit from a split in the state.

"I feel east and west have common cause here," he said.

While recognizing the political divide that angers the east side, Kline said financially, Western Washington would be better off without them because he said that side of the state gets more than its share of tax revenue.

"I would like as much as possible for revenue generated in Western Washington to stay in Western Washington," he said.

But other Democrats disagree.

"I like the fact that we have the diversity of the west side and east side and the urban and rural. That makes it a stronger state," said Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane. "The ideological differences that (Morton's) talking about are present everywhere, within every county, within every neighborhood."

Brown also noted she'd lose some status. She said Morton was "trying to turn me from majority leader to minority leader."

"Because that's what I would be in the new state," she said.

Sen. Dan Swecker, a Republican from Rochester who has signed on in support even though he represents Western Washington, said the measure is "a little bit tongue-in-cheek."

"I think people need to remember that the biggest divide is not the east-west divide, it's the rural-urban divide," he said.

As proof of more anger of rural residents against urban Seattle, another bill before the Legislature would create Cascade County from all parts of King County that fall outside Seattle.

Swecker said bills like these reflect the frustration of voters who feel their voices are overshadowed by those in the big cities, regardless of whether they're east or west of the mountains.

"One size does not fit all," he said.

**Viva** · 02-22-2005, 03:18 PM

NoCal, and by this I mean extreme NoCal, has been trying to rally support for the state of Jefferson for decades. Damn loggers and cattlemen!

**Jumper Bones** · 02-22-2005, 03:25 PM

I think I have to agree with the idea. How what counties voted (in the governor's race) aside, I'm sure Spokane residents are sick of seeing a whole lot of public works project monies going to King County, while Seattle residents feel that the money belongs here because this is where the majority of the issues are.

at the very least, King county does need to be broken up - the Cascade county idea is a good one. One county should not decide all the fates of the rest of the state, considering they really are entirely different worlds.

**joshbu** · 02-22-2005, 03:47 PM

This is a bullshit Republican gerrymandering powerplay.

It puts 2 more senators in the Senate representing very, very few people.

Both houses of congress should be fused, and districts should be formed based on population only.

**Jumper Bones** · 02-22-2005, 03:55 PM

Originally Posted by joshbu

This is a bullshit Republican gerrymandering powerplay.

It puts 2 more senators in the Senate representing very, very few people.

how do you think everyone who lives north, south, or east of Seattle feels about how elections or votes go here? Who goes to represent them in Olympia, or who goes to represent them in DC?

and while you are right that that would result in two more (likely) GOP senators for very few people, does that mean Rhode Island or Connecticut don't deserve the senatorial representation they have?

**freshies** · 02-22-2005, 04:03 PM

this is a bad idea, because, really, where do you draw the line (no pun intended)? i don't like the fact that my vote is essentially made worthless by some red-necks in AL/MS/LA/ etc that helped Bush get elected, that my tax dollars in CA fund the majority of these hicks public works projects, that my $ goes to support a war I don't agree with, that my $ also helps fund the raping of the enviornment in my back-yard (Republican influnced NFS/BLM now opening public lands in CA/Sierra to corporate interests for logging and mining)......

if every person/party/special interest group whose policies/politics are in the minority, and thus aren't represented by their state/federal representitives, were to break-off into their own states, it would be crazy....

**Jumper Bones** · 02-22-2005, 04:14 PM

ok freshies I see where you're coming from, but also realize that there are a lot of people here in thise state whose votes were made worthless as well, by ONE COUNTY.

Maybe splitting the state itself isn't the solution, but splitting King County up a couple of times...

**1080Rider** · 02-22-2005, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by Jumper Bones

Maybe splitting the state itself isn't the solution, but splitting King County up a couple of times...

We're just hoping that there'll be an earthquake and it'll fall off into the sound, kinda like they say about California...

**joshbu** · 02-22-2005, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Jumper Bones

how do you think everyone who lives north, south, or east of Seattle feels about how elections or votes go here? Who goes to represent them in Olympia, or who goes to represent them in DC?

and while you are right that that would result in two more (likely) GOP senators for very few people, does that mean Rhode Island or Connecticut don't deserve the senatorial representation they have?

Rhode Island's population in 1999 was 990,819. Which is more than several western states. Connecticut 3,282,031.

States are pretty antique. They're a direct barrier to furthering the cause of true democracy in this country. IMHO.

**Spats** · 02-22-2005, 04:36 PM

California:

35.5 million people. 2 senators.

Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, Idaho, Nebraska, West Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Kansas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Kentucky, South Carolina:

34 million people. 32 senators.

Thanks for playing!

**lemon boy** · 02-22-2005, 04:43 PM

Washington I ain't worried about, you want something that'll keep you awake at night:

Shit (tex@$$) is already empowered to divide itself into as many as FIVE states should they so choose. Chew on that one for a while, 8 count em 8 add'l Republican Senators. Only time I'm thankful that those shit eaters are so damned proud of their state.

**Jumper Bones** · 02-22-2005, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Spats

California:

35.5 million people. 2 senators.

Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, Idaho, Nebraska, West Virginia, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Kansas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Kentucky, South Carolina:

34 million people. 32 senators.

Thanks for playing!

yes, but how many Representatives? And how many Electoral Votes? To California's 85 Kajillion of each.

**optics** · 02-22-2005, 04:50 PM

Does this mean all the Bushies driving Hummers down 1st Ave would have to move away?

If so, I'm all for it.

**slim** · 02-22-2005, 04:56 PM

I get the feeling Eastern Washington would end up missing Western Washington's tax dollar contribution alot more than Western Washington would miss Eastern's. It sounds pretty short sighted and petty by Eastern Washington's right wing wonks. Turning your back on a huge sum of state tax dollars simply to further your polictical agenda... yeah that's what's best for your constituency. Live poor... vote rich. Genius!

**1080Rider** · 02-22-2005, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by slim

I get the feeling Eastern Washington would end up missing Western Washington's tax dollar contribution alot more than Western Washington would miss Eastern's. It sounds pretty short sighted and petty by Eastern Washington's right wing wonks. Turning your back on a huge sum of state tax dollars simply to further your polictical agenda... yeah that's what's best for your constituency. Live poor... vote rich. Genius!

I think that's the point. Its beleived that we don't get our share of the tax $$$. I don't know whether we do or not but I'll tell you that we don't get new stadiums, freeways, ferry's, etc... It appears that the lions share of tax $$$ in this state is spent in Western WA. Like I said, I don't have the #'s, but that's the perception. I think the idea behind it is that if we're going to pay taxes we'd like it to stay in our backyard not go to the west side.

I'm for it in theory but the numbers would have to back it up to make it worth while. I wonder whether we have enough industry here to create enough tax revenue to run a state. But, I gotta say, King county and the continual bullshit that is pulled there pisses me off. It has to be one of the more corrupt counties in the entire US.

**optics** · 02-22-2005, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by 1080Rider

we don't get new stadiums, [b]freeways]/b], ferry's, etc...

Luckily, Seattle is full of shiny new freeways. That's why we have no traffic (that and our superb mass transit).

**joshbu** · 02-22-2005, 07:04 PM

Originally Posted by Jumper Bones

yes, but how many Representatives? And how many Electoral Votes? To California's 85 Kajillion of each.

It doesn't make up for the inequity because the house is limited to 435 members, and each state must have one.

So:

CA: 53
Others: 49

So while the house is nearly equal representation of an equal population, the senate is way off, depending on state lines.

This is a 200+ year old legacy from when states where more like little countries. We've moved way past that. There should be equal representation for equal population in all cases.

**Stu Gotz** · 02-22-2005, 07:06 PM

Originally Posted by slim

I get the feeling Eastern Washington would end up missing Western Washington's tax dollar contribution alot more than Western Washington would miss Eastern's. It sounds pretty short sighted and petty by Eastern Washington's right wing wonks. Turning your back on a huge sum of state tax dollars simply to further your polictical agenda... yeah that's what's best for your constituency. Live poor... vote rich. Genius!

Tax dollahs don't mean nothing if all ya need are dirt roads and home skoolin.

**Shin-to-Win** · 02-22-2005, 07:10 PM

Public spending per capita is generally higher in rural areas than urban. The cost of roads and infrastructure to support a relatively small population is a major factor. Washington generates most of it's revenue from Business tax (2% on revenue), property tax, and sales tax. Where does the revenue come from? Eastern washington . . . where big business is MIA, property values are super low, and the spending power of the population is significantly lower than the West side? I don't think so. West Side rules. Without the west side, E Washington would become more like Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. Not exactly the models of wealth and prosperity or rich public funding.

**char** · 02-22-2005, 07:30 PM

Ok, thats fine. But we get to keep WSU and all of our tax dollars.

It's not like SEA generates any money for Eastern WA, none at all.

This is just ideological bullshit, as usual.

**pollard** · 02-22-2005, 09:01 PM

I live in eastern washington and if you gave these dumb red necks there own state it would be fucked up in no time. Yeah there are definetly benefits. But there needs to be a balance. there isnt one now and something needs to be done but no this.

What makes a government stable is it being balanced and therefore ineffiecent. Think about it if it were easy for one side to pass all their laws everything would get fucked up.

**1080Rider** · 02-23-2005, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by optics

Luckily, Seattle is full of shiny new freeways. That's why we have no traffic (that and our superb mass transit).

Yeah, but think about us, we just get your used freeways after you're done w/ them. They're really bumpy then.

**lameduck** · 02-23-2005, 11:05 AM

isnt the idea of representation based not purely on population designed to give a voice to minority groups? its what will keep our country from becoming one big homogenized pseudo culture of bullshit.