Lively audience greets candidates in Edmonds Chamber forum Monday

    120
    3

    What do you get when you place nearly all of the Edmonds-area candidates for state Legislature (plus two running for U.S. Congress) in the Edmonds Council Chambers, and add a standing-room-only crowd of boisterous citizens? Answer: A lively candidates forum sponsored by the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce Monday night.

    There were a few jeers, boos and catcalls, but the crowd was mostly well-behaved. The candidate questions — drawn randomly from a stack created by the Chamber’s economic development committee — centered on business-related issues, including those specific to Edmonds. Here’s a summary of the evening, but the program was taped so you can watch it on Comcast channel 21 and Verizon channel 39 starting at 4:30 p.m. Wednesday.

    The forum was presented in three groups: Two sets of state legislative candidates followed by the District 1 U.S. Congressional race.

    Issues debated by the legislative candidates included the following:

    Initiative 1098, which would add an income tax for those earning more than $200,000 a year (filing federal taxes as individuals) or $400,000 (joint filers) – but that some fear will eventually be extended to everyone: Elizabeth Scott, Republican candidate for the 21st District Rep. Position said she opposes the initiative as it “will open the door to eventually establish a tax for all.” The incumbent, Democrat Marko Liias, said he is “dead set against a middle class income tax for voters” but is still researching the initiative and hasn’t decided whether to support it.

    Small business tax relief: Both Scott and 1st Legislative District Rep. Pos. 2 candidates Heidi Munson suggested that the state’s Business and Occupation Tax be on net, rather than gross, profit. Moscoso said it’s important “to do whatever is necessary” to ensure that small businesses succeed. He also repeated a common theme during the night – that he does not want to travel to Olympia to engage in ideological fights but to find solutions to problems.

    Edmonds Proposition 1, which would add a $40-per-vehicle licensing fee onto an existing $20-per-vehicle fee to fund city transportation projects: This question was asked of state 1st District Pos. 1 candidate Derek Stanford, who admitted that he wasn’t yet up to speed on the measure (he lives in Bothell and his district includes only one small area of Edmonds). However, he added that his approach, as someone who has a Ph.D. in statistics, is to look at the numbers to determine whether the investment of taxpayer dollars is worthwhile.

    Privatization of state liquor stores: Moscoso and incumbent State Senator Maralyn Chase, Democrat from the 32nd District, said they both opposed two initiatives going before voters in November that would eliminate state-run liquor stores — due to the $300 million loss of state revenue. “This is not a time to take us out of a business that provides revenue that is desperately needed,” Moscoso said. Munson said she supports privatizing liquor sales: “I don’t see the reason why the government is in the liquor business.”

    Engaging the state Legislature in efforts to redevelop the Edmonds waterfront: Incumbent 21st District Sen. Paull  Shin and challenger David Preston agreed this was a good idea, although Preston said he preferred that such an effort be a public/private partnership that involves local businesses, if possible.

    Streamlining the state budget: Everyone supported this concept but the debate was reduced to mostly party-line sound bites. The Republicans generally called for “doing more with less” and “living within our means,” and the Democrats generally declared that the state’s financial problems are the result of a worldwide recession and it’s time to move beyond ideological differences to solve problems.

    “I think this is an opportunity to do some streamlining of our state government,” Stanford said. “The reality is, we know that things are going to have to get smaller, because that’s where the budget is.”

    Dr. Art Coday, a Republican candidate for 32nd District Rep.  Pos. 1, said he is committed to taking the time and efforts necessary to address the state’s budget woes. “I’m not in favor of going in with machete cutting everything or raising taxes,” he said.

    Republican Gary Gagliardi, running against Democratic incumbent Ruth Kagi for 32nd District Rep. Pos. 1, said the solution is to “move dollars and control out of Olympia and into our communities.”

    David Baker,  a Republican running against Chase for 32nd District Senator, cited his experience as mayor of Kenmore, where the city is financially stable and even built a new city hall under budget.

    “My opponent represents business as usual,” added Republican Ed Borey, who is seeking the 21st District Rep. Pos. 1 seat held by Democratic incumbent Mary Helen Roberts. “Haven’t we really had enough?”

    Roberts shot back: “My votes and my actions are transparent and they reflect what voters in this district believe in.”

    Some of the most lively debate came during the Congressional questioning, with Watkins and Inslee sparring over questions ranging from how to serve constituents effectively amid partisan strife in Washingon, D.C.  — Watkins said he will “vote for people, not special interests,” while Inslee cited recent bipartisan efforts to pass prescription drug abuse reform – to next steps in the health care reform bill.

    In closing statements for both candidates, Watkins questioned Inslee’s focus on environmental issues and in particular his commitment to creating green jobs.

    “We need real jobs in the 1st District, not la-la-land jobs,” Watkins said.

    “I am not going to turn this seat back to someone who wants to vote with the coal and oil companies,” Inslee responded.

    3 COMMENTS

    1. I find it disgusting that the Rebublicans have forgotten the facts & blame the Democrats for the mess they themselves created.
      Remember that Bill Clinton left office with a surplus.
      8 long years of Bush and a Republican held Congress for 6 of them created the financial mess by de-regulating Wall St. & giving the Banksters free reign.
      Two wars (1 started by Bush for his own jollies) has bankrupted the USA.
      Now, they are trying to convince people that Bailout and Stimulus did not work.
      The country was a eyelash from total economic collapse( Don’t believe me? Remember thinking about taking YOUR money out of the bank that Oct.?) and those two programs just stopped the bleeding.
      What the Republicans did was set off an economic atom-bomb which the effects will be felt for a decade. Republicans, quit blaming the Democrats for your radiation, stop blocking congress just because you want to make the President look bad (not because it is best for America) and for heavens sake help the poor and middle class (whats left of it) instead of the rich that send jobs overseas for tax-breaks.

    2. @Chaz X – while I’m no apologist for the Republicans, Democrats are not blameless. Clinton pushed through the “modernization” of our financial system, including the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act that led directly to our financial collapse in 2008 to the present. Oh, and NAFTA. But yes, the Republicans didn’t help matters one whit, as they continued to increase spending, riding a bubble that was built only on the availability of credit.
      There was no increase in real prosperity during the 90s, wages for the lower 95% remained the same. The so-called prosperity of the Clinton era is an urban legend. It was the credit flow that caused the boom, and now we’re paying for it.
      Now, we can go back and assign blame all we want, or we can choose a standard under which we muster our troops for the next drive forward. I encourage us all to shift our political debate from backward looking blame-games and caricatures, to offering real solutions for the very real problems that we have to face now.

      My short list of issues:
      1. We must create and maintain living wage jobs for Americans. REAL fair trade is the only way to ensure a level playing field for our workers.
      2. We must exercise frugality and judgment in every government expenditure, as there is less to go around, and our interest payments are starting to take over the budget. I agree, the Bush tax cuts should expire – but I think they should expire for ALL, not just the rich.
      3. I almost left this off… but as is evidenced by the FIVEFOLD increase in campaign donations for this mid-term, we need some serious campaign finance reform.

    3. @ChazX – Your tired attributions to Presidents has been explained away time and time again by those who look deeper at who controls spending. It is the House of Representatives. Clinton had a majority Republican Congress for much of his term,. and it was during that time there was a surplus.

      It was Democrats who created the opportunity for the Housing bubble and its subsequent burst. Was it Clinton, or Carter who started the Community Reinvestment Act? That was the first domino set up. The second was the Democrats in Congress forcing banks to play too loose with mortgages for those who couldn’t afford them, who were lousy credit risks, and so banks did so, under penalty of being shut off from support by Fannie Mae and the Gov’t if they didn’t “play ball.” The third was the government allowing banks and Fannie to bundle loans into CMOs and SWAPS. They were traded with high leverage (and often with NO money backing them!) and even higher risk, and the house of cards was BOUND to implode. And it was almost all Democrats responsible for the underpinnings of it. The Republicans share some blame for not doing more to stop it. but that’s about all.

      Now we have a chance to churn the politicians and vote out incumbents. A couple good flushes ought to get this Progressive sewer drained. (Note, I put G.W. Bush in the Progressives gang, because he never met a spending bill he didn’t like, and was soft on the Mexican border protection and Illegal Immigration)

      @ Todd Cloutier: You do realize, don’t you, that if the Bush tax cuts go away, even partially, that it will HURT this economy? My goodness, man, we are being taxed into near-total subservience already. (And the bottom tax bracket going up as you hope would cause a 50% increase on those at that tax level. You wish them a 50% Federal tax increase?) Government has gotten FAR too comfortable spending your and my earnings. There has been fleeting to no restraint on growth and spending in Federal or State (Or County!) governments, at least that is noteworthy, in my 60 year lifetime. And it has gone on longer than that.

      We need smaller government, lower taxes, fewer entitlement programs, we need to get rid of JFK’s camel’s-nose-under-the-tent of unions in Public Service Sector jobs; we need secure borders, a Federal Government that upholds the Constitution, and we need, desperately, FAR less Socialism.

    LEAVE A REPLY