Washington 2019 Session Convened - Gun Control Hearings Scheduled

The 2019 Washington Legislative Session convened today, January 14^th, and anti-gun legislators have already pre-filed and scheduled hearings for bills that will infringe upon your Second Amendment rights. 

Senate Bill 5062, sponsored by Senator Patty Kuderer (D-48), and House Bill 1068, sponsored by Representative Javier Valdez (D-46), were filed at the request of Attorney General Bob Ferguson.  They would ban the possession of ammunition magazines with a capacity greater than ten, encompassing most standard capacity magazines commonly used by law-abiding citizens.

Senate Bill 5027, sponsored by Senator David Frokt (D-46), and Senate Bill 5072, sponsored Senator Steve O’Ban (R-28), would expand Washington’s existing Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPO).  These bills would affirm that the ERPO can be issued against minors while also infringing upon the self-defense rights of law-abiding parents or others in the household without due process.   SB 5027 and SB 5072 are scheduled for a public hearing in the Senate Committee on Law & Justice at 10:00AM on January 17^th.

House Bill 1010, sponsored by Representative Tana Senn (D-41), would allow the Washington State Patrol to destroy forfeited firearms rather than raise funds by selling them to licensed firearm dealers.  HB 1010 is scheduled for a public hearing in the House Committee on Civil Rights & Judiciary at 10:00AM on January 15^th, and has been scheduled for a committee vote on January 18^th.

More bills will be filed in the coming weeks.  Attorney General Ferguson and a major anti-gun group backed by out of state elites previously announced their 2019 legislative agenda, which includes banning commonly owned semi-automatic rifles and repealing RCW 9.41.290, the pre-emption statute, that prevents localities from infringing upon Second Amendment rights.

It’s imperative that Second Amendment supporters stay involved during the 2019 legislative session.  Your NRA will be at the Capitol on a daily basis throughout the session, so please stay tuned to www.nraila.org and your email inbox for further updates on these bills and other issues affecting your Second Amendment rights in Washington.

Coming Up In Your State -- One Party Rule

Since the Democratic Party has taken total control of the Washington State government, you'd think we're safe from evil.  Sorry, it just ain't so.

Inslee proposes ‘public option’ health-insurance plan for Washington

Inslee also took time out from campaigning to lay out his goals for the 2019 session, set to kick-off tomorrow.  “Gov. Inslee’s policies may be geared more towards Iowa than Washington state,” said Senator Mark Schoesler. Whether it’s pushing for socialized medicine or proposing huge tax increases on families and businesses, Inslee seems set to make the 2019 session be about him and his political future. 

If you think government run health care access is a bad idea, sign this petition: https://act.srcc.org/stop-inslees-health-care-takeover/

Gov. Inslee says he’s focused on the state as speculation swirls about presidential bid

Inslee also took time out from campaigning to lay out his goals for the 2019 session, set to kick-off tomorrow.  “Gov. Inslee’s policies may be geared more towards Iowa than Washington state,” said Senator Mark Schoesler. Whether it’s pushing for socialized medicine or proposing huge tax increases on families and businesses, Inslee seems set to make the 2019 session be about him and his political future.

Washington state Supreme Court declines to review ruling that killed Seattle’s income tax
Potentially lost in all of the pre-session news, was an important decision by the state Supreme Court. Last week, they declined to review a ruling out of a lower-court that stopped Seattle’s unconstitutional income tax in its tracks. “There’s no way they can look at this and see any silver lining,” said Jason Mercier with the Washington Policy Center. We should add that after Seattle’s failure, liberals in Olympia are trying to pass their capital gains tax off as anything other than an income tax…which it is. Just ask the IRS.
 
Why Inslee's idea of fair costs $54.4 billion
In case you missed it, Governor Inslee late last month unveiled his $54.4 billion budget, full of tax increases. He’s proposing a $3.7 billion revenue increase, including an income tax in the form of a 9% capital gains tax and a hike in business taxes. And because new taxes aren’t enough, Democrats will likely continue to block every Republican-led attempt to lower your taxes.

Plastic straw ban: Out of Seattle and on to Washington state

As Seattle goes, so goes the Democrats in Olympia. Liberal Senator Patty Kuderer wants to impose Seattle’s ban on straws with the rest of the state. And that probably won’t be the only bill in the left’s “War on Plastic” this session. It really seemed like it was time to take a look at our use of plastic in general, but plastic straws in particular,” said Sen. Kuderer.

Meanwhile....

State senator proposes bill to block any downtown Seattle tolling plan

While the left takes on those evil plastic straws, the Republican caucus is working on the issues that actually matter to Washingtonians. Senator Tim Sheldon is proposing a bill that will block any city from implementing tolls without permission from the Legislature. “Do we really want a society where only the rich can afford to drive?” Sheldon said.

Inslee to impose income tax on Washingoton State

Let's accept the reality before us:  Inslee has the votes to impose an income tax -- Democrats have super-majority control of the House and Senate and they're the most socialist, liberal, progressive, kamikaze crowd of Seattle Democrazies ever in charge of Olympia.  

We're talking Kshama Sawant - Bernie Sanders type socialists running the show.  How wacko are they?  They've forced out Frank Chopp as Speaker because he was too conservative for them!  When Frank Chopp moves to the conservative side of the spectrum in the Democrat caucus, it just shows how socialist they've gone.

Inslee's Income tax?  The fat lady is singing.  Put a fork in it.  It's a done deal.  Inslee's got the legislature's votes.  

We know we can rely on the voters:  9 times they've rejected an income tax at the ballot box.  They'll do it a 10th time with the "We Don't Want An Income Tax" Initiative like this:  https://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/ballottitleletter_1503.pdf

Here's how it'll work:  we will collect the required signatures for the initiative from January through June and then voters will toss Inslee's Income Tax Scheme on November 5, 2019.  Because the initiative prohibits any kind of income tax by any government, voters will also be obliterating the Seattle City Council's income tax (which has been winding its way through the courts for years without final resolution) or any future state or local income tax.

Don't get me wrong:  I'm not saying it's gonna be easy.  Qualifying initiatives for a public vote is tough.  Look at our current $30 Tabs Initiative -- despite widespread public support, it took me and Karen selling off our family's retirement fund and loaning $500,000 to the signature drive to put us in a position to qualify it.

It won't be easy -- but it is the best way to toss Inslee's Income Tax Scheme.  And it's something we can start immediately.

So if you agree that this is the right approach, then please donate today to help toss Inslee's Income Tax Scheme:  VotersWantMoreChoices.com/Donate -- we've already filed the initiative that'll toss it.

After that, make sure to sign our online petition and help us veto Inslee's 20% salary bonus:  GiveThemNothing.com 

We need your help.  I implore you make a donation here: VotersWantMoreChoices.com/donate by PayPal, VISA, or M/C.  Or you can print this form, fill it out, and mail in your contribution. 

--- Tim Eyman

Effects of gun control

(If you voted for Initiative 1639's gun restrictions, anticipating unicorns and sugar fairies, sorry to disappoint. Your hope that background checks and categorical restrictions are magic is going to fail you.)

We have good news from a joint effort between the Violence Prevention Research Program at the UC Davis School of Medicine and the Center for Gun Policy and Research at the Johns Hopkins University.

Comprehensive background checks and prohibitions based on violent misdemeanors had no effect on homicide rates in California.

The latest study published by the highly-credentialed researchers in these well-funded programs, “California's comprehensive background check and misdemeanor violence prohibition policies and firearm mortality,” was designed to evaluate the effect of California’s 1991 comprehensive background check and prohibiting those convicted of violent misdemeanors policies on firearm homicide and suicide. The study period was 1981-2000, with secondary analysis up to 2005.

Using a synthetic control methodology, the researchers found that the comprehensive background check and violent misdemeanor prohibitions were not associated with changes in firearm suicide or homicide.

In conversational language, the two policies had no effect.

We credit the researchers for publishing these findings that run contrary to their own established opinions regarding firearms. There are, naturally, some methodological questions. For instance, the violent crime index only had a low predictive value and so was not included in the final model. The variables that did make the cut included specific age groups, race, gender, poverty level, veteran population, unemployment, alcohol consumption, and the proxy for gun ownership rates. Violent crime is often associated with homicide rates in other studies, yet was not included here.

The general design of the synthetic control model also raises questions. In this methodology, other states were combined and weighted to match California before the new policies were implemented. Eleven states were used to create this “synthetic” California but the contributions each of these states made to the synthetic California are not presented in the paper. The donor pool of states was limited to those that did not have policies similar to the comprehensive background check or prohibiting violent misdemeanor at the start of the study period and did not enact major firearm policy changes during that period, but…the differences between California and Alaska, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin are not limited to the social and demographic variables included in the model.

But back to the findings. You will recall, from just a few short paragraphs ago, that the notable anti-gun researchers – at least one of whom joined the anti-gun march on Washington this past March – found the comprehensive background check and prohibiting violent misdemeanor policies had no effect on firearm homicides or suicides in California.

The article about the study on the UC Davis website presents that finding with some spin: “Study does not find population-level changes in firearm homicide or suicide rates…” Maybe our understanding of the anti-gun bias driving this research colors our perception, but “does not find” and “were not associated with” seem like two sides of two different coins.

The discussion section of the study itself is dedicated to explanations for the lack of an association.  The authors suggest that the problem may have been limited records in the background check system, a lack of enforcement, or maybe that there were just too few purchase denials.

Their first explanation is not enough gun control. The authors note their findings conflict with some of their own prior research on other states. They claim the difference is that the other states’ comprehensive background check policies included a permit to purchase component. That must be the key difference, right?

Ignore the fact that all three studies to which they point were reviewed by the Rand Corporation for The Science of Gun Policy. In fact, two of these three studies were the only studies considered in the section for the effect of licensing and permitting requirements on violent crime. Rand found, based on these two studies alone, that licensing and permitting requirements have uncertain effects on total homicides and firearms homicides because the evidence is inconclusive. The third study was focused exclusively on suicide rates, and was one of two studies included in that section in the Rand review. Rand also found that licensing and permitting requirement have uncertain effects on total suicides and firearm suicides, due to inconclusive evidence.

So, yes, ignore that and let’s get back to the point the authors make about permit to purchase. They fail to consider that California enacted a permit-to-purchase system, the Basic Firearms Safety Certificate, in 1994 – right in the middle of their study’s postintervention period.

Still, we credit the researchers for sharing these results and we look forward to sharing their evidence when anti-gun organizations demand further obstacles to law-abiding gun owners.

We’d like to thank the Joyce Foundation and, perhaps unwittingly, California taxpayers for making this study possible

Sanctuary from stupid gun law I-1639

The Left has been using "sanctuary" laws to make themselves immune from national immigration statutes.   Now a Washington State community is considering declaring itself a "sanctuary" against  the gun control Initiative 1639, in order to restore the legality of the civil right of self-defense.

~~~~~~~~

"REPUBLIC, Wash. -- The town of Republic may declare itself a sanctuary city from a newly passed gun measure.

"Republic is in northeastern Washington, about two-and-a-half hours from Spokane, near the Canadian border. About 1,000 people live there.

"The mayor there is considering an ordinance, proposed by the police chief to make Republic a sanctuary city for gun rights. This is in response to voters across the state passing Initiative 1639.

"That initiative puts more restrictions on buying and storing guns. But in Ferry County, where Republic is, nearly three out of four voters opposed it. The police chief, Loren Culp in Republic has already said he would not enforce the law."

“I felt that it was such a blatant disregard for constitutional rights that I felt like I had no choice but to stand up for the people that I serve," Culp said in an interview with Fox News.

“We are a society built on the rule of law,” said Renee Hopkins, CEO of Alliance for Gun Responsibility, which led the campaign for I-1639. “If we have leaders that are responsible for ensuring the laws are enforced, picking and choosing which laws they get to enforce, we have a huge problem.”

~~~~~~~~

 The Leftists insist this is a society of law.  If only they had thought of that when they enacted their own "sanctuary" statutes to avoid enforcing laws they don't like.  (By the way, the Left's "Sanctuary laws lead to brutal violence and death).  Apparently they want only the laws they like and everybody else can be oppressed.

NRA Challenges Constitutional Violations in Initiative 1639

Ruger 10/22, regulated "Assault Weapon" under I-1639

STEN SMG gun, not regulated under I-1639

Fairfax, Va. - The National Rifle Association (NRA) and the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF)  today jointly filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington challenging the recently passed gun control measures in Washington ballot initiative I-1639.

"The NRA is committed to restoring the Second Amendment rights of every law-abiding Washingtonian," said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA¹s Institute for Legislative Action. "I-1639 violates the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens and puts people at risk. This lawsuit is the first step in the fight to ensure that Washingtonians are free to exercise their fundamental right to self-defense."

"We are disappointed that too many voters were fooled into supporting this 30-page gun control scheme, despite overwhelming law enforcement opposition," said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "This initiative is an affront to the constitutional rights enshrined in the Second Amendment and the Washington state constitution. This measure will have a chilling effect on the exercise of the constitutional rights of honest citizens while having no impact on criminals, and we will not let it go unchallenged."

Initiative 1639 classifies ordinary, recreational firearms in common use as “assault” weapons, denies young adults the right to self-protection, and bans the sale of firearms to out-of-state residents.

"The NRA will fight to overturn this unconstitutional initiative. We will not sit idly by while elitist anti-gun activists attempt to deny everyday Americans their fundamental right to self-defense," concluded Cox.

School districts promise more in salary than the state provides

So you thought your local school levies were only gong to be used for local improvements in the future?  You thought the school teachers were going to be paid by the state?  Ha.

The Washington Education Association used hard bargaining that ignored the laws prohibiting levy money from being used for wage enhancements. The union instigated multiple strikes, and elected school boards gave in to extraordinary wage demands including raises as high as 34 percent.

These increases in school districts’ payroll obligations massively exceeded the salary funds provided by the state, and now districts are going to cannibalize school services to fund the union’s wage increase demands.

Read more to learn how far into the red your local district budget will be in four years.

Dr Kim Schrier's smear campaign against Dino Rossi

Dr Kim Schrier's campaign has run several ads alleging that Dino Rossi's campaign is sold out to dark and mysterious forces.  Schrier's ads have been called  a lowlife smear.

You would expect the alleged financial oddities to show up in the campaign statements.

Since Rossi and Schrier are running for the Washington 8th district US Congressional seat recently held by Dave Reichert, federal election campaign laws prevail.  We can check how much impact mysterious forces are having by using the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) website data.  Here is a summary comparing the two 8th district candidates in the upcoming general election:

Rossi (R) FEC link	$4,098,669.12
Total receipts	$4,073,609.43
Total individual contributions	$3,651,459.43
Party committee contributions	$5,000.00
Other committee contributions	$416,850.00
Candidate contributions	$300.00
Transfers from other authorized committees	$5,000.00
--------	--------
Schrier (D) FEC link
Total receipts	$5,343,212.64
Total contributions     $4,920,643.48	$4,920,643.48
Total individual contributions	$4,650,628.61
Party committee contributions	$0.00
Other committee contributions	$264,614.87
Candidate contributions	$5,400.00
Transfers from other authorized committees	$421,603.22

Its pretty clear from the data that the two campaigns are about equal in financial resources, with Schrier somewhat ahead in the overall.  The question for Dr Schrier is, What mysterious forces operate in the Rossi campaign that do not also operate in the Schrier campaign?  Where are those dark forces the Schrier's campaign is smearing Rossi for?

~~~~~~~~

You can compare all the Washington State 8th district Congressional candidates at https://www.fec.gov/data/elections/house/WA/08/2018/

Impolite Voters' Guide

Initiative 1631 (also in Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese) -  Addresses global warming by taxing energy use.  The advertised purpose is to tax fossil fuel and electricity use.   Section 8, subsection 1 states "[a] pollution fee is imposed on ... electricity generated within or imported for consumption in the state"; and Subsection 5 adds that electricity from an unknown generation source may be taxed at an unspecified rate.  This includes hydropower.

Despite being vague, the basic tax rate starts at `14¢ per gallon of gasoline, approximately 4%.  Overall, energy consumption will be the about 4%, in the first year.  By the fifth year, the energy tax will be double that.  Everything's cost will be affected, from gasoline to food to keeping warm this winter.

Although the advertising for 1631 claims there will be 40,000 environmental jobs added to the state's economy, the initiative doesn't provide for any hiring.  The jobs claim comes from thin air.

Impolite recommends a NO vote.  I-1631 is a bad initiative.

~~~~~~~~

Initiative 1634 (also in Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese) - Addresses local authorities (mainly Seattle) imposing additional taxes and fees  on the sales of food and food related products by banning additional taxes and fees.  Taxes and fees in place already will not be affected.

Impolite believes strongly in the People's right to eat whatever they want to with being taxed, saddled with a fee, or assessed anything other than the cost of the substance.  The government's right to tax ends at the human mouth.

Impolite recommends a YES vote on I-1634

~~~~~~~~

Initiative 1639 (also in Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese) - Restricts firearms storage, acquisition, fuzzily describes assault firearms and poorly describes the new crime of "unauthorized" use.  Apparently a firearm owner will be charged with a crime if someone steals his firearm.  See this Impolite post for a more.

The initiative seems to require firearms not be accessible for use in an  emergency  (The US Supreme Court already struck down this requirement in the Heller (also see Cornell) decision.)  The apparent purpose of the initiative is to make everyone who uses a firearm a criminal.

Impolite is vehemently in favor of the right of the People to keep and bear arms in defense of self and the free state.  I-1639 is a very bad idea.

Impolite strongly recommends a NO vote on I-1639.

~~~~~~~~

Initiative 940 (also in Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese) - Part 1, Section 2 states the requirement for law enforcement to get and maintain proficiency in "violence de-escalation and mental health training" in order to make Washington communities safer.

Its Impolite's guess that if the police find themselves in a shooting situation, lives are on the line.  The act is skewed toward encounter type training, which may be practical for some aspects of police work.

Part 6, Section 7,  immunizes law enforcement from civil prosecution if they act "in good faith."

Part 5 requires law enforcement to get and maintain certification in first aid.  Application of first aid becomes the first duty of the police in a crime situation.  This idea is stupid if a shooting situation is occurring.  Part 5 (2)(c) requires the cop drop everything and render first aid even while the bullets fly. 

I 940 is not well thought out, but some basic ideas have merit.  A rework should be done and the initiative should then be re-submitted to the People.

But as it is now, I-940 is half-baked.  Impolite recommends a NO vote on I-940.

~~~~~~~~

Advisory Vote No. 19 - Repeal or maintain the taxes and fees on oil transportation in Washington State.  This is a $13 million tax.  Impolite cannot find any record of an oil transportation spill (see other kinds of spills here)  in Washington State in the last 10 years, so it seems the previous tax and fee structure is working properly.  Raising the tax is stupid, except to a greedy legislature.  Advisory Vote No. 19 should be repealed.

~~~~~~~~

Senator candidate review

Maria Cantwell is the three-term incumbent, Democrat, Senator from Washington State.  She was originally elected in 2000 in a largely self-financed campaign.  She borrowed her campaign funds in part from Washington Mutual (WaMu).  She secured the loan with stock in the RealNetworks company.  

Later, when RealNetworks stock price collapsed, she calmly defaulted on her loan payments, in part preciopitating the collapse of WaMu.  Thousands of WaMu depositors were not so lucky.  Cantwell does not answer Impolite's emails about this subject.

Cantwell was "the other woman" (or perhaps "creditor") in a lobbyist's divorce in 2006.  

According to Ballotpedia, Cantwell is worth$3,771,505.50, which is lower than the average net worth of Democratic Senate members in 2012 of $13,566,333.90.
Cantwell can't say anything good about how her 18 years in The Swamp have actually helped Washington families.

Impolite suggests its time for Cantwell to make way for a fresh face.
 

********

Susan Hutchison is a former television news journalist, running as a Republican, for Senator against Maria Cantwell.  Hutchison ran the Charles & Lisa Simonyi Fund for Arts & Sciences philanthropy organization since its inception.  She has real experience doing what is good while minding the resources she has to do the job.

Wikipedia gives Hutchinson's background:

"Hutchison serves as an officer of the following boards: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (Washington, DC), Finance Chair (present) of Young Life International, Vice Chair (present) All-Star Orchestra, Vice President (present) and Chair (2006-2009) Seattle Symphony, and on the following boards: Smithsonian Institution National Air and Space Museum, Seattle Art Museum, Seattle Children's Hospital Foundation, Discovery Institute, and Salvation Army.

"She also has been a spokesperson for the American Leprosy Mission, Northwest Medical Teams, Job Corps, and March of Dimes, and has emceed charitable auctions, fundraising events and dinners.

"Her civic involvement includes the Governor’s A+ Commission on Education, National Collegiate Athletic Association Committee on Compliance, the King County Independent Task Force on Elections, and the Chancellor’s Advisory Council for Seattle Community Colleges."

Ballotpedia has additional information here.

Impolite plans to vote for Susan Hutchison for a change.

Too easy to vote? -- again and again?

Go ahead, register to vote.  Several times.  No hurry.  You have until the day before the election, in case  polling shows things aren't going the "correct" way.

See how easy it is to register? See this scan of the new offer to register the state of Washington is sending out.

Click on the image to see a larger image.

In the words of the post card, "Register online.  Its quick and easy."

Washington State is going to have a bumper crop of voter fraud this time around.