I am a law enforcement officer in favor of I-695. The Sheriff has directly informed the department that a minimum of two jobs will be lost if this initiative passes. I feel this is a scare tactic with no truth to back up the threat. Money can be shifted from other bloated areas of the state budget to cover any lost revenues used to fund law enforcement. I would like to hear from anyone with information I would be able to use to convince others on the department to vote in favor of I-695. Most law enforcement officers I know are opposed to this initiative and any good fuel for my debates would be appreciated.

-- Mark (marks@venus.beltc.ctc.edu), October 21, 1999

Answers

If you want to trust your job to the hope that the state will shift funds to bail out local government, you can. Ask your Sheriff how much of his budget is derived from the MVET, and how much an officer costs, and do the math. 695 is about funding, and does nothing to target where the budget cuts will be made, or change any program priorities. The fact that the cuts are not targeted, means anything could happen. Inertia being what it is, in the short term the MVET funded programs are most likely to be hurt the most, but no one knows for sure. My advice is to listen to those law enforcement officers who are opposed to 695, and vote NO. Not because of the funding issue; but because it is poorly drafted, bad law, and will be in court for months to sort out what some sections mean and if some others are constitutional.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), October 21, 1999.

Mark:

During the taping in a Yakima Town Hall meeting, the city manager of Yakima indicated they would lay off 10 fire and policemen if I-695 passed. However, I pointed out to the city manager that he was quoted in the Seattle Times that very day that the city would NOT lay off any fire or policemen. He then admitted that the city had found another way and would not be laying off any police and fireman.

I also addressed 1/2 of the county commissioners in Richland. Mike Patrick (your lobbiest in Olympia) came in emphasising that 1000 police officers would lose their job if I-695 passes. I responded by reminding the commissioners that he is a paid lobbiest and that he was now lobbying for the loss of 1000 police officers. I told them that this would not happen during their watch. That the commissioners campaign message for the 2000 election would be: "Vote for me! I cut your taxes and maintained essential services. Keep me working for the taxpayer. Mr. Patrick sat sutnned in a state of shock.

My advise to the police officers is to get themselves another lobbiest that will work for them.

-- RD (Monte) Benham (rmonteb@aol.com), October 21, 1999.

I believe forcing governements to curtail or cancel bloated programs to fund priorities is part of what 695 is all about. Once it passes, it will be up to the governments to deal with what funds are left over. If they do lay off cops, there will be a firestorm of lengthy media coverage and some smart guy will start asking questions like " how come we are laying off cops but still subsidizing X..?" X may be corporate tax breaks, wasteful social programs, etc. Those layoffs will stop or more likely never start. The real opposition is three fold. Business that wants to keep the tax burden on the people rather than business, government employees that want to keep their jobs(many of whom are excess baggage), and big government liberals that see this as stopping the march towards a socialist utopia. They're all tying their complaints to losing cops and firemen because no one cares if one more buearaucrat gets the ax.

-- Bill (live_free_2000@yahoo.com), October 21, 1999.

i have to agree with Bill. Where's all the talk about how many government jobs might be lost? All those metro jobs are contracted anyway, so they aren't really "jobs". The same applies for government service. Prepare for time warp....

Back in them days when horse drawn carriages were going through town, most elected officials and workers didn't get paid. In fact, our Founding Fathers never intented public service as a "job". It was supposed to be you have a real job, do public service, then go back to your real job. Nowadays, you see people can have a political career. I've seen one lady go from local rep, to county, to city, then state. When she lost at state level what do you think she did... yep. She winned and complained and asked for a recount of the votes! She had dug herself into a political career hole that she was not qualified to do anything but that. Our reps and workers in Olympia are the same way. I'm just curious how many of them spend the day surfing the internet or playing solitarire on tax payers dime!

We now return you to normal time where our system is out of control, and I-695 is the solution. Vote Yes on I-695. Be sure to vote too. Don't just assume it will pass.

-- Sandy D (sandy_d1@yahoo.com), October 21, 1999.

Mark even if what you were told is true, I bet you know of two, or maybe even more, positions that are absolutely useless and would not effect the community if the no longer existed..right?

-- maddjak (maddjak@hotmail.com), October 21, 1999.

The state government is a large bureaucratic entity that probably has areas where the budget is bloated. But I-695 does not direct those people, who set up the bloated areas in the first place, to redirect those funds anywhere. It would be nice to think that they would, but don't expect it.

Typically, when a large bureacratic entity (government or business) has a budget cut, jobs are lost.

-- Gene (eugene.ma@boeing.com), October 21, 1999.

I agree per: "My advise to the police officers is to get themselves another lobbiest that will work for them." that cuts will not be wholly merit based, those not so politically well connected will be likely be fired first...

Probably temporary labor, but Sandy I think you are way off if you are implying that people who work as temporaries aren't somehow real: they work real jobs, often without the benefits full time employees do, and they need to pay their bills and taxes just like any full time worker.

-- Billy Morton (leftodo@deja.com), October 21, 1999.

I believe soldiers in the 'war on drugs', which is filling up our jails with non violent criminals, thereby creating many more such caretaking jobs and bloating the self perpetuating prison industrial complex.. are fine contenders for dramatic cuts.

Unfortunately I also believe they are better connected then say public caseworkers for the mentally ill.

-- Billy Morton (leftodo@deja.com), October 21, 1999.

Billy-

"I believe soldiers in the 'war on drugs', which is filling up our jails with non violent criminals, thereby creating many more such caretaking jobs and bloating the self perpetuating prison industrial complex.. are fine contenders for dramatic cuts. Unfortunately I also believe they are better connected then say public caseworkers for the mentally ill. " So answer the question inquiring minds want to know? Which of these two groups let you out.

-- zowie (zowie@hotmail.com), October 21, 1999.

PS

I respect our local police and their good work very much.

Per the 'war on drugs', the rapidly expanding prison industrial complex are the work of our political leaders, not our police. Politicians are the ones passing the criminal laws and sentencing guidelines that keep the drug war machine employing many enforcers and beaurocrats year after year.

I don't believe Washington state is the worst supporter of of the drug war by a long shot. I think it is more national folly, but with a local effect of stuffing our local prisons, taking plenty of local budget to grow and maintain. Maybe though there are a few too many police working this beat now, certainly many police efforts are aided by having good and available case workers.

-- Billy Morton (leftodo@deja.com), October 22, 1999.

Mark

Just wondering if you're one of the Massachusetts cops that is pictured in the No on I-695 flyer I got in the mail yesterday?

I was in law enforcement in the late '70s and earlier '80s. They told us then that if Hanford shut down there would be cuts in law enforcement due to it. The only cuts I saw was in the drop of bar fights we had to go to.

Ed - thinking of the good old days

-- Ed (ed_bridges@yahoo.com), October 22, 1999.