« Puget Sound's Toxic Avenger | Main | The Plame Grand Jury Process »

October 17, 2005

More of Connelly on 912

Beloved PI columnist Joel Connelly has a nice article this morning about the importance of defeating 912 for commuters and the economic health of western Washington.  He says, “Commuters are the unheard voice in the I-912 debate: Campaign spokespeople trade sound bites. The people enduring ever-longer commutes need to do their own thinking.”

He highlights the implications of passage of 912:

In 1968 and 1970, King County voters rejected a regional light rail system: The cost, then, was about $380 million. The next vote on light rail didn't come for another 25 years. We live with decisions we make.

In the same edition of the PI, an editorial urging a “NO” vote on 912 reminds us that passing 912 would still cost us $66 million in delays to transportation projects put on hold just from having the Initiative on the ballot in the first place.  Far better to reject 912 and get back to re-building our ancient infrastructure.

Posted by Lynn Allen on October 17, 2005 at 09:09 AM in Ballot Initiatives | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/3393863

Comments

>>“Commuters are the unheard voice in the I-912 debate: Campaign spokespeople trade sound bites. The people enduring ever-longer commutes need to do their own thinking.”<<

Do their own thinking. Exactly. Like thinking that nothing requires one to live in Black Diamond and work in downtown Seattle. One (or both) can be changed. I made a conscious decision to live near my workplace, and I feel a little put upon to say that I am obligated to pay for other people's decisions to engage in long distance commuting. Furthermore, I am downright irritated that the state is talking about spending multiple billions of dollars to replace and perpetuate the worst transportation mistake in Seattle, the Alaska Way Viaduct.

I am voting for I-912 because the last thing Western Washington needs is more freeway capacity and subsidies of long-distance commuting.

Posted by: Roy Smith | Oct 17, 2005 10:59:47 AM

Roy,

Yours is the best reason I've heard about to vote for 912 but it is still not good enough. It's a classic case of the perfect as enemy to the good. Yes, in a perfect world, we would have a much more earth-friendly transportation system, much as Europe does. But we don't have that yet. And I see no reason to endanger peoples' lives and piss them off just to prove a point. We vote NO on 912, we get a lot more progressives in office, we stay involved in the politics of transportation and energy, and we get a far better transportation system. We have one of the best opportunties to do all of that right here in this state - BUT NOT IF 912 PASSES. So I say no to the 2005 version of voting for Ralph Nader.

Posted by: Lynn | Oct 21, 2005 10:26:16 AM

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More of Connelly on 912:

Post a comment