Government waste, that's why. I live in a nice neighborhood, and this neighborhood has a "main" street winding through it. It's not an aterial, but just just a street that people must use to get to and from their cul de sacs. And, of course, even though the speed limit is 25 mph, most people drive 5, 10, 15 mph over the speed limit. So, after people complained to the government (I'm not sure, but I think King County is the controlling government for this?), the first brilliant idea to slow people down was to add "road turtles" at both sides of this road. I guess the bureaucrats thought this would slow people down, which of course it didn't! After a year or more, and more input from residents about this not working, the bureaucrats came up with another brilliant idea ... add traffic circles. Well, guess what? This has slowed very few people down. All of these circles allow drivers to simply jog to the right a little, then to the left a little, maintaining their speed as they go. These circles don't force anyone to slow down. I jog along this street 2 or 3 times a week, so I have first hand knowledge of how fast people were going, and are still now going. So ... my main point is the waste of taxpayer money on 2 separate solutions, neither of which has corrected the problem. And multiply this by hundreds or thousands of other government projects throughout the state that are just as wasteful. And the bureaucrats wonder why I-695 passed!

-- Anthony Hanson (awhanson@msn.com), December 11, 1999

Answers

Anthony, What suggestion did you make to your government? Are you in any particular city limits? I don't understand why there is confusion as to whose responsibility the road improvement is. Your local city hall should be able to answer that for you.

-- Jim Cusick (jccusick@att.net), December 11, 1999.

And the solution you propose is....

Cut government funding to the point they have no money to do ANYTHING to deal with your problem. How will that slow people down? Or are you expecting the road conditions to get so bad that they will need to slow down to get through all the potholes?

What they did to slow people down, was probably what the community asked them to do in public meetings where the choices were considered. Your taxes at work doing what your neighbors wanted done. The way to influence that, is get involved and go to the meetings; particularly when it involves your street.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), December 11, 1999.

I like that: "Go to the meetings and get involved". HaH! The reason people don't go to these meetings is that the particular cousels agenda, has already been worked out and decided behind closed doors. The public knows this and will not waste there time dealing with these little fiefdoms. I 695 and the son of 695 is the wake-up call to these politicians. Their arrogance at the majority will of the voters, on no new taxes Without a public vote,is monumental. The son of 695 will take away all their public money and force them to live within their means,like us common people. The Washington government has lost touch with the people. All they want is more money to hire more assistants to do their jobs. I am counting the days until November 2000. Finally we have something to vote for! Keep the faith...

-- Rolex Hoffmann (rolex@innw.net), December 11, 1999.

I am confused by the method chosen (local county government?) to deal with this problem. There are some effective alternatives that involve Law Enforcement. I understand, for example, that using speed moniters in conjunction with Sheriff"s Office Volunteers are used in Thurston County (I believe). Mason County is considering this as well. Also, if the traffic circles have not worked, did you notify your local Law Enforcement? By your description, it sounds as if the people in your own neighborhood are the speeders. I would have directed my energy towards catching/fining the speeders. Just a thought.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 12, 1999.

Marsha

Your right, if Anthony and his neighbors would contact the local WSP office, I know they would gladly come down and inforce the speed limit.

After constantly patroling the area for a couple of weeks, it would only take a Trooper to drop by once a week to maintain the speed limits.

Ed - never go to council for law enforcement, they don't have a clue unless it involves money (of course that means spending it).

-- Ed (ed_bridges@yahoo.com), December 12, 1999.

Two issues:

1. I think Rolex is right. Notwithstanding open public meeting laws, etc., the nature of the current political process is deal making behind the scenes by the mainplayers, you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours, with the special interest groups getting theirs and to Hell with the public interest. D's often voiced solution of, "you too can be a special interest group," is a non-starter. The average Joe (or Jill) will never have the vested interest of the mainplayers (be they government employee unions or Boeing) to devote the resources or acquire the contacts (Knowing which butt to kiss, when, and where) to get the access to be effective. Worse yet, even if they could, as they become part of the system they become part of the problem, because they MUST then do the things that stab OTHER individuals in the back to gain the leverage to pursue their interests. 2. With regard to catching/fining speeders. People need to understand that we MUST do something about restoring the unspoken social contract. People traditionally have behaved reasonably because there was a common consensus on what was a reasonable way to behave. As people deviated from that consensus, they received more and more pressure in the form of social disapproval to conform to the consensus. This took the form of people being judgemental in verbal and non-verbal ways and even discriminating (gasp) against them in social and business dealings. The law enforcement and courts getting involved was the last and most drastic step in society enforcing the mores and values of the culture. We will NEVER have the resources to have law enforcement personnel bird-dogging every average citizen 168 hours a week, nor would we desire to live in such a society. But allowing people to do increasingly anti-social things with no informal sanctions of any kind, and then expecting the courts to control them when they inevitably step over the line doesn't work either. Trying to civil engineer courtesy and common sense obviously isn't working either. We need to get back to the realization that BEING JUDGEMENTAL IS WHAT SOCIETY IS ALL ABOUT, worry less about people's "rights," and be less hesitant to call jerks jerks, publically and frequently. Cause if you wait until they are looting the buildings, you'll never have enough cops and courts to do the job. Witness the recent WTO.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), December 12, 1999.

Mark,

I feel the use of Volunteers for this task fufills many of your issues stated in #2. More communities need to take advantage of what no cost resources are available. Volunteer presence and the attention they bring could resolve much of the speeding problem, and what they can't accomplish can then be handed over to Law Enforcement. This is just one more example of society/government making things more complicated than they need be.

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 12, 1999.

Rolex and Mark:

I don't know where you live, and don't care. Where I live, it doesn't work as you describe. Public meetings and individual comments DO have an effect on the decisions of the City Council. They are our neighbors, and are in the job as a public service because we elected them to represent us. They can only do that effectively if we tell them what we want. Your dismissal of participation sounds like you are just to lazy to get involved and participate. It is easier to sit back and complain about what "they" are doing to you.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), December 12, 1999.

DB, Let me put it to you in another way that you might understand. I, and almost one million washington voters, went to our city council (washington legislators and ALL city councilmen),and told them-NO MORE TAXES WITHOUT A VOTE FROM THE PEOPLE. Did they listen to us? No. I believe they are smart enough to understand that we are fed up with taxation without representation. They sneaked in all these tax increases in before the law goes into effect.They know we do not want this. Son of 695 will tell all our state politicians, that they work for us and not the other way around. We have had enough. November 2000 is not that far off....

-- Rolex Hoffmann (rolex@innw.net), December 12, 1999.

Rolex:

And so you understand, my local elected officials were responsive to their local voters. They don't need, and I don't want, the state voters getting involved in our local politics.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), December 13, 1999.

Roland, Maybe you should move to a nicer city.

-- Jim Cusick (jccusick@att.net), December 13, 1999.

dbvz,

As Ronald Reagan used to say "There you go again". Tell me something, have you ever met a government program you didn't like?

Some people are going to speed regardless of what you do (remember, locks only keep honest people honest),therefore, you need to have severe penelties for people who because of their speeding deprive someone else of their rights.

The people in these neighborhoods could, however, handle their own traffic situations if left to do so without government interference similar to their ability to create block watches and housing associations.

Give them back some of their hard earned tax dollars and let them go at it. You might be surprised at the results.

-- Tony (eagleross@pioneernet.net), December 13, 1999.

Tony:

Usually an engineering solution (islands, circles, bumps) is cheaper and more effective in the long run than an enforcement solution (signs, police, tickets). If it looks like a race track, people drive fast.

I don't like lots of government programs. Everyone does. What I don't like and what you don't like will be different. That bad word "politics" decides what gets approved.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), December 13, 1999.

D-

Your dismissal of participation sounds like you are just to lazy to get involved and participate. It is easier to sit back and complain about what "they" are doing to you You know nothing about me or the extent to which Ive tried to participate effectively in government decisions. Calling me lazy does not change my opinion of government, it merely decreases my opinion of you. Arrogance rarely is an effective tactic in winning people to your side of the argument, it merely polarizes them further.

And so you understand, my local elected officials were responsive to their local voters. They don't need, and I don't want, the state voters getting involved in our local politics.  Well then I guess you should advocate changes in policies so that ALL of your local funds can be raised and kept locally, because if you are getting a DIME from me, I expect a say in how the money is being spent. We fought a war about taxation without representation once, as I recall. So if you want autonomy, back out of the state trough.

Usually an engineering solution (islands, circles, bumps) is cheaper and more effective in the long run than an enforcement solution (signs, police, tickets). If it looks like a race track, people drive fast. If you dont desire traffic throughput, thats fine. But dont create congestion and then ask me for my tax dollars to solve the congestion problem that youve just created. For that matter, dont ask me for my tax dollars to create congestion either.

I don't like lots of government programs. Everyone does. ???? Is this another Yogi Berra saying?

What I don't like and what you don't like will be different. That bad word "politics" decides what gets approved. Fine. And if that is your idea of politics, mine is to progressively starve government of tax money through son of 695, voting down referendums, and other direct voter involvement so the self anointed bureaucrats and political class will have less and less resources to do things that I dont approve of. Ill either insure for or fund myself the services my family and I require. That make you happier?

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), December 13, 1999.

Anthony,

What matters is that you "Voted For I-695 And Will Vote For Son of I- 695."

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 13, 1999.

Mark:

It is hard to believe you can get farther out into right field, but go ahead. The more "polarized" you are, the less influence your opinions will have.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), December 13, 1999.

Oh boy! I didn't mean to start such a ruckus. My main point was that this was one small example of why I think government in general wastes a lot of money, and why I-695 and "Son of..." are necessary to jolt government out of it's beauracratic ways. Thanks.

-- Anthony Hanson (awhanson@msn.com), December 13, 1999.

"It is hard to believe you can get farther out into right field, but go ahead. The more "polarized" you are, the less influence your opinions will have. "

Is this your rationale for name-calling and denying that problems exist, rather than attempting to solve the problems. So far, you and I simply disagree over the level of services that government should be providing. If you see evidence of something more in any of my postings, show me where. Can't you either debate that with me, or simply agree to disagree, rather than calling me lazy [you are just to (sic) lazy to get involved ] or a fascist [It is hard to believe you can get farther out into right field].

You have had a SOLID MAJORITY of your fellow citizens favor I-695. Are they all stupid, lazy, or proto-fascists? I was not one of a trifling people multiple standard deviations off the norm supporting this issue. I WAS IN THE MAJORITY. Don't try to write me off as some extremist wacko, you're fooling no one, except perhaps yourself.

Be real careful the day you wake up and say, "Everyone is an extremist except me". It might be time for a reality check.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), December 13, 1999.

Mr. D-

You seem to be becoming increasingly curt, arrogant, and as a result, ineffective. I agree with Mark that you are resorting to hyperbole, bombast, and name-calling. You were much more effective when you demonstrated less attitude. Examples of recent quotes:

I am feeling like this is now of little value.

And the solution you propose is.... Cut government funding to the point they have no money to do ANYTHING to deal with your problem.

I don't know where you live, and don't care.

Dealing with all the bad ideas on this site takes more time than it should away from other, more important things.

I will check in to see if more happens here regarding the Son(s?) of 695, but nothing else seems to be of much interest to me or anyone else.

you are just to lazy to get involved and participate

You think this is gonna be effective???

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), December 13, 1999.

Well put, Mark. You sound just like my boss, Dan Stilson. Are you two related?

It appears that our elected officials will do and say anything to avoid the main issue: Cut your budgets or cut personnel. Db. says counties could lose 20 to 45% of state money. I have a solution: Officials should take a 20 to 45% salary cut for the good of the people. I know it would be hard for them. It would mean they would be making ONLY twice as much as the average citizen. They could keep their jobs, but would actually have to WORK like the rest of us.I would like some opinions and feedback on this proposal. Thank You opinions about this proposal.

-- Rolex Hoffmann (rolex@innw.net), December 13, 1999.

Zowie:

No. I don't expect anything on this forum to be effective at changing anything, as I have said several times. This is an exchange of opinions, and I gave mine. I am sorry if that offended anyone; but I am as entitled to my opinions as those who have accused me of being a "tax to the max" guy, and a "socialist", and "never saw a government program he didn't like". Not true from my perspective, but you are entitled to your opinion.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), December 13, 1999.

Fodder for ALL KINDS of additional discussion. From the daily journal of commerce (http://www.djc.com/news/business/11001571.html): December 13, 1999 Opinion: 25 ways to make I-695 work

By PAUL GUPPY Washington Institute Foundation

Devote tobacco-settlement to health programs. Use $323 million in tobacco-settlement funds received in 1999 to replace lost county health funds.

Tap savings from reduced welfare caseload. DSHS case loads have dropped 31 percent in three years, yet the agency employs 6 percent more people.

Suspend the 1 Percent for the Arts Program. Temporarily suspending public arts spending would free up almost $1 million. Eliminate Washington's presidential primary. We're spending $3.2 million to choose 12 Republican delegates.

End government "walking around" money. The King County Council gives $1.3 million in uncommitted tax money to its members each year.

Contract out highway maintenance. Ending the ban on contracting out would save $25 million a year in highway maintenance.

End prevailing wage in highway construction. Current law needlessly drives up government construction costs.

End prevailing wage in school construction. Prevailing wage adds 20 percent to costs. Why build only five schools for the price of six?

Open local garbage collection to competition. Opening garbage service to competition creates real choice and lower cost for homeowners.

Compete for building and ground maintenance. Private building owners save through competition, why shouldn't government?

Privatize Washington's liquor stores. The government should end its outdated, 65-year monopoly on hard- liquor sales.

Privatize passenger-ferry service. The state doesn't need to shut down passenger ferry service; the private sector can provide it.

Contract out bill collections for city utilities. Saves up to 30 percent of current costs.

Contract out for child welfare services. Contracting out could reduce by months or years the time troubled children now spend in foster care.

Contract out public health services. Contracting out saved Pierce County $4.2 million, and almost doubled the number of people served.

Contract out park operations and maintenance. Contracting out would save 20 percent.

Find other contracting out opportunities. Indianapolis, Chicago, L.A. and dozens of other cities are already benefiting from contracting out.

End free bus passes to county employees. Saves over $1.4 million.

Privatize King County's Boeing Field Would bring immediate revenues and add to the long-term tax base of the county.

Restrain the growth of government spending. State government has grown by 11 percent in the last two years, over twice the rate of inflation.

Restrain the growth of the government workforce. The state plans to add more than 5,109 new hires to its payroll over the next two years.

Restrain the growth of county and city workforces. Local governments can achieve major savings by simply restraining their own growth.

Fully implement Referendum 47 property tax limitation. Passed by voters in 1997 yet largely ignored, full implementation would restore trust in government.

Revitalize the State Productivity Board. This state board can be used to root out government waste at the deepest levels of the bureaucracy.

Create an alliance for accountability. Proposed by State Auditor Brian Sonntag, this new "Grace Commission" offers a chance to thoroughly review all public spending while restoring trust in state and local government.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 13, 1999.

From Craig's post;

Tap savings from reduced welfare caseload. DSHS case loads have dropped 31 percent in three years, yet the agency employs 6 percent more people.

From the Olympian;

State needs more welfare staff

WORKFIRST: A study finds 37 more employees would help DSHS manage its tough caseload better.

Brad Shannon, The Olympian

OLYMPIA -- A new taxpayer-paid report shows Washington's welfare bureaucracy can justify keeping its 2,500 employees, despite a 30 percent drop in welfare caseloads during the past two years.

That is because caseworkers in WorkFirst are doing more complicated work to hook up welfare recipients with jobs, child care, schooling, food stamps and a raft of other aid, the report says.

The $245,000 report for the Department of Social and Health Services comes at a time when some legislators are looking for ways to cut spending to make up for Initiative 695's elimination of motor vehicle excise taxes. Welfare workers have been mentioned as possible cuts because caseloads have fallen by more than 30,000 since reforms took effect in 1997.

"We're certainly not going to ask for more staff," Liz Dunbar, assistant secretary for DSHS who oversees welfare programs, said Friday. "That's just not realistic to request any additional staff."

However, the study by Olympia-based Sterling Associates Ltd. can be used to redeploy staff within the agency for greater efficiency, Dunbar said. And it could help DSHS explain to the Legislature why its staffing levels are needed.

The study found that 62,297 Temporary Assistant to Needy Families cases were 10.9 percent of total cases but took up 26.9 percent of caseworkers' time.

The DSHS work force dealing with welfare now totals 2,554 full-time staffers, including financial specialists, social workers, customer service specialists and office aides. Based on the amount of effort required to help welfare recipients, the study suggests the agency could use 404,149 staff hours or 37 more employees.

"That has the appearance and the feel of a bureaucracy trying to protect its work force," said Sen. Dan McDonald, R-Bellevue.

Steve Brink, administrator for the Thurston County welfare office based in Tumwater, defended the study.

"It's a ton more" work to provide help under the new welfare system, Brink said.

The extra work includes child care and support services that can include aid with car repairs and training at community colleges, he said.

Although his office reduced its caseloads by about a third in two years, he said, the remaining caseload is a harder-to-serve population that needs more attention. His office currently serves 1,350 adults, and 677 of them have been receiving aid for more than 30 months, he said.

"A high percentage of those who are no longer receiving cash are continuing to receive food stamps, medical and other services," Brink said. "The child care caseloads have increased dramatically in the last two years."

Gov. Gary Locke's welfare policy adviser, Ken Miller, said the study confirms what was thought all along: that welfare cases under WorkFirst are more complicated and require more staff.

"But the report does not answer the question if there are better ways of doing business that don't require so much staffing. It's a fair question" that will be addressed by the 2000 Legislature, he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This is an addiction problem. This is your taxpaying brain = ? Here is their brain on government bureaucracy = *%^$!#*&^*%!. Any questions?

-- Marsha (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), December 13, 1999.

When I went to the UW (oh so many years ago) the most common graduating student major was Engineering. Now its sociology/social work. If you look at where the money has gone in the great government experiment that started as LBJs War On Poverty you see that the only winners have been the burgeoning bureaucracies and the public employee unions that feed on them. The plight of the poor certainly has not improved as a consequence of the 2-3 Trillion spent since the 60s. And that would be bad enough if it were merely the wasted money, money that could have goon for infrastructure, new parks, or education. But these bureaucracies have become the new slaveholders. They engender dependency, so they can justify adding to their bureaucratic empires, adding in terms of money, authority, staff, and promotability in the bureaucratic pecking order. If you judge these bureaucracies not by their lofty promises and mission statements, but by their effects, these organizations and people are not the solution to the problem, too frequently they ARE the problem. Follow the money, they used to say, if you want to understand politics. Who benefits from keeping poor people poor? Not the industrialists. They can find all the cheap labor they want abroad. Theyd rather everyone here were rich consumers. The ones who benefit are the people in the cottage industry of the nanny state and the demagogues that have made a career of class warfare.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 14, 1999.

Marsha- "The study found that 62,297 Temporary Assistant to Needy Families cases were 10.9 percent of total cases but took up 26.9 percent of caseworkers' time."

Excuse me for doing long division but if 62,297 Temporary Assistance to Needy Family cases are 10.9% of the total cases, that makes the total about 62,297/.109 or 572,000. Given that the estimate for TOTAL population in the state is only about 6 million (http://www.tcfn.org/tctour/Washington/population.html) and the estimate of HOUSEHOLDS is about 2 million, do you mean to tell me that in any given year 572,000/2,000,000 or 29% of the population is needy??

Either someone has their figures very screwed up here, or we have a most peculiar definition of needy.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), December 14, 1999.

"Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, they go out and buy more tunnel." John Quinton

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), December 14, 1999.