Technology and changing times be damned, the government bureaucrats WILL NOT voluntarily permit any part of their empires to be trimmed, no matter how obsolete and redundant. It doesn't matter that we are all now being taxed on our phone bill to ensure that every school and library has internet service, the bureaucracy WILL NOT eliminate any positions that have been made redundant by this technology. Come on Patrick, make some good excuses for this one.

Plan offering online license-tab renewal has a bug: Politics

Thursday, February 10, 2000

By ROBERT GAVIN SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER CAPITOL CORRESPONDENT

OLYMPIA -- Now that renewing your license tabs is a little less painful, thanks to Initiative 695, imagine it getting even easier.

You sit down at your home computer, connect by the Internet to the Department of Licensing, and with a credit card and a mouse click, your new tabs are on their way.

But don't fire up your modem yet. There still seems a sure-fire way to slow down the rapid development of e-commerce: just add politics.

A proposal to develop an e-commerce system for license-tab renewals has become embroiled in fight over turf and money between the Licensing department, county governments and private sub-agents who handle tab renewals under contract with counties.

Visit our links page for more info on the 2000 Legislature. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At stake is millions of dollars in processing fees the counties and sub-agents collect each year. Counties and sub-agents say they favor giving people an Internet option, but they want a system that would continue to send them the $3-per-renewal fee they now get.

The Department of Licensing says it would like to oblige, but it needs the fee to cover the costs of running the system, including paying the transaction fees charged by credit card companies.

The Legislature will decide the issue when it considers the budget. The Department of Licensing has requested $2 million to build the system, which could be up and running within a year after approval.

But the Senate's chief budget writer, Sen. Valoria Loveland, D-Pasco, said yesterday she's reluctant to let counties lose more money on top of the money already lost under I-695.

She's also concerned Internet transactions will suck away fees from sub-agents and force many to close. People without computers or Internet access would have fewer places to renew their tabs.

"Not everyone is going to have e-commerce," she said. "We should look at this carefully before jumping on the bandwagon."

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), February 10, 2000

Answers

Well, first off you are just SLIGHTLY over exagerating when you claim that "the bureaucracy WILL NOT eliminate any positions that have been made redundant by this technology." The article itself says that DOL (the bureaucracy) is the one making the request to allow for Internet transactions, and that the legislature is only being cautious about implementing it. Gee, I'm going to have to side with the people advocating the "let's look at the possible consequences before we authorize this thing" over your apparent "let's jump over the ledge and THEN look down to see how deep it is" philosophy.

Personally, I did read the article this morning, and don't agree with the idea of blocking online registration in the name of keeping the transaction fees for local agencies. BUT, there is a VERY good point that the article points out in that the introduction of this service could very well drive the local physical locations out of business. That's all fine and dandy for those of us with Internet access, but what about those who don't and rely on those local agencies? Where would they go to renew their tabs? Should we just say "screw em" in the name of progress?

You know, I don't deny that there isn't waste or differences between the government and private enterprise, but again Craig, you seem to be highlighting something that doesn't actually highlight those differences. A GOOD private company would think twice about doing something that has the potential to cut off a significant portion of their customer base, just like the government is doing now. Of course the difference between a company and the government is that the company can just say "sorry, but you'll just have to stop using our service," but the government can't exactly say "sorry we took away your ability to pay your tabs, I guess you'll just have to stop driving. But hey! If the government really does want to force people out of their cars, this plan certainly sounds like it would do it!

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), February 10, 2000.

Patrick,

I challenged you to come up with GOOD excuses, not just repeat the flawed excuses that I posted.

-- (craigcar@crosswinds.net), February 10, 2000.

Well perhaps if you'd care to explain WHY the "excuses" are flawed instead of just posting it, it might carry a little more weight.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), February 10, 2000.

For the people without Internet access, they can send their renewal in by mail. I question the large amount budgeted to place the system online.

-- Doug (dgoar14@hotmail.com), February 10, 2000.

"Well perhaps if you'd care to explain WHY the "excuses" are flawed instead of just posting it, it might carry a little more weight. "

Come on Patrick. Read BEFORE you criticize. "It doesn't matter that we are all now being taxed on our phone bill to ensure that every school and library has internet service." And as Doug points out above, mailing renewals in is also an option.

How easy does it have to be before it's easy enough for you? What lengths is it necessary to go to before we've gone far enough?

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), February 10, 2000.

"What lengths is it necessary to go to before we've gone far enough?"

You are asking PATRICK this, Craig???

Heck, he'd defend the bureaucracy if they put out driver's license applications in Braille, for Gawd's sake.

He's the quintessential apologist for the nanny state.

zowie

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), February 10, 2000.

"That's all fine and dandy for those of us with Internet access, but what about those who don't and rely on those local agencies? Where would they go to renew their tabs?"

Given that most people have credit cards and access to a telephone, a voice response system could deal with most of the remaining people. People without credit cards might be a little screwed tho'.

-- Brad (knotwell@my-deja.com), February 10, 2000.

That's right, there is the mail. Yet the license agencies STILL EXIST. So if everyone could just use the mail instead of the walk in locations, those places would have gone out of business a long time ago. Mailing in a check and getting your tabs back in the mail certainly is a lot more convienient and saves the $3 fee. But for whatever reasons, there are people who need the sub-agents.

And before everyone gets all huffy again and we get another witless comment from Zowie, I am NOT saying that this WOULD happen, I'm saying that since this COULD very well happen, the state does have a duty to look into what impacts it would have on people. I know there's a lot of people on this board who hold fast to the philosophy that they need to have what they want IMMEDIATELY, and if what they get isn't what they wanted because they rushed into it, it must be someone else's fault, but silly me, I like to actually think about the consequences before I do something.

So what's the worst that could happen if the state waits and studies the possible negative impacts of installing an on-line registration? Well, you'll have to go throught the agony of writing a check and putting it in the mail (how will you survive?!?). What happens if the state just installs the registration without studying it? Well it could be a great addition to the most wired state government in the country, or there could be any number of unforseen (which would have been seen if researched) problems, and the state would have blown $2 million dollars on a system that does more harm than good.

Geesh you guys are hilarious. You whine when the government blows taxpayer money on a poorly thought out program/project, and then you whine when the government takes the time to think about a program/ project before it commits taxpayer money. I guess you all like making up things to get angry about. Glad it's not my blood pressure.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), February 11, 2000.

Patrick.......the government doesn't HAVE ANY CUSTOMERS!!!!!!!!!! It has slaves....or large bags of blood...(the taxpayers) and it has dependants.....welfare, bus riders, ferry riders to name a paltry few.

They won't lose ANYTHING except an excuse to draw a few more gallons of blood form us.

-- maddjak (maddjak@hotmail.com), February 11, 2000.

"And before everyone gets all huffy again and we get another witless comment from Zowie, I am NOT saying that this WOULD happen, I'm saying that since this COULD very well happen" Yeah, and the sun could go nova this afternoon, too. The essence of the nanny state is that it falls all over itself to build larger and larger bureaucracies to address increasingly marginal needs. Hell Patrick, even old Bolsheviks know that! Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river. Nikita Khrushchev

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), February 11, 2000.

Anyone remember Calavo? He disappeared after someone asked him about sweetheart deals at city light. Here's THE REST OF THE STORY, which also tells a lot about the difference between how a government monopoly allows waste and out and out fraud with few if any consequences to the perpetrators. From Today's PI (http://www.seattle-pi.com/local/city11.shtml):

City Light employees fined for 'sweetheart deal'

Friday, February 11, 2000

By KERY MURAKAMI SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

Four current and former Seattle City Light employees who made about $500,000 cutting down trees for the utility have agreed to pay fines of $500 to $2,000 for violating a law that prohibits city workers from making a personal profit from their duties.

According to the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission and the state Auditor's office, the four were paid to look for trees that could fall into power lines. On three occasions, in 1996, 1997, and 1998, workers advised City Light that strips of trees in the Skagit Valley should be cut, and offered to do it themselves.

In what City Light acknowledges was a bad decision, real estate manager Stephen Hagen awarded the trees to the four employees without allowing others to bid.

City Light spokesman Bob Royer acknowledged the move led "to the perception of sweetheart deals."

The workers paid City Light a total of $12,500 for the right to cut the trees, then sold the 1.6 million board-feet of timber for $500,000.

The first contract, in 1996, was approved by Don Hundahl, City Light's Skagit Valley supervisor, and by Hagen. Hagen alone approved subsequent contracts.

Hundahl has retired and was unavailable for comment. Hagen, through Royer, said only that he followed Hundahl's recommendation. He was not disciplined by the city.

HEY GUYS! FOR $500 MILLION IN PROFITS, I'LL PAY SEVERAL $2000 FINES.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), February 11, 2000.

Mark:

Lets at least be consistent. The article said they made about $500,000. That is NOT $500 Million, and likley not all "profit". It seems this should have been a government public works project, with a competitive bid process. Since that was not done, I am quite sure this is a violation of state law, which is why the State Auditor was involved. Some level of discipline seems in order, for those employees who approved this violation of state law (in addition to the fines of those who profited).

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), February 12, 2000.

I've been wondering why setting up an e-mail system would be so expensive and I've concluded that it's because of the security problem. When I recently visited my local sub-agent, I took the mailed-to-me notice and I was still asked for photo identification. Had I elected to send the notice back with a check, I would have been identified to the DOL by that notice. But I was not adequately identified to the sub-agent by the notice, which could have been stolen from any mailbox. Seems to me the mail-in is adequately served by the notice since, if it had been stolen, the tabs would go to the stealee, not the stealor. Not so with the sub-agent.

Now consider the e-mail version. Aint no photo ID technique. Who owns the credit card? Same person as the e-mailer? When I buy something on the net with my card, the seller really doesn't worry about the eventual recipient, so long as he gets his dough. That makes gifts possible. Are tabs different? Can I not pay for tabs for a vehicle that doesn't belong to me? Sure I can, I've done it. So how does the DOL determine that the order, the card owner, the vehicle owner, and the address to which the tabs are sent all are in sync? I don't think the DOL knows for sure, and they need lots of dough to explore the solution. It's a security problem that must be solved before tabs-by- email can work.

-- C. James (clinton_james@yahoo.com), February 12, 2000.

There are numerous ways to authenticate email transmissions. One of the most popular is that provided by "Pretty Good Privacy" which handles foolproof authentication as a matter of course. If you are interested in any of the details of this try the following link:

http://www/pgpi.com

-- Albert Fosha (AFosha@aol.com), February 13, 2000.

And it continues:

Monday, February 14, 2000, 08:15 a.m. Pacific

Locke forms team to probe state Department of Transportation

by Dionne Searcey Seattle Times Olympia bureau OLYMPIA - For more than five years, audits revealing sloppy management and misspending have dogged the mammoth-sized agency in charge of building and maintaining the state's roads.

And, a continuing criminal investigation by the state's top cops is dogging the state Department of Transportation (DOT). So many questions have been raised about the agency that the governor has appointed a team to look into it.

The audits and inquiries are fueling a political debate about how best to deal with the agency's budget crisis, sparked by Initiative 695, and raising questions about the wisdom of lawmakers itching to spend more money on transportation.

One 1997 audit outlines a criminal conviction of two agency employees who, for two years, sold road signs to scrap dealers and pocketed nearly $53,000 in proceeds. Another report says the agency knew that $750,000 worth of pipes it ordered in 1996 for new sprinkler systems on state ferries were bound to leak and corrode. Officials installed them anyway, then had to pay an additional $700,000 to replace them.

The agency also has had bugs in its ferry-fare collection system since 1986, a problem the Auditor's Office has nagged DOT about every year since.

Audits also detail unexplained cell-phone bills totaling $4,000 and employees using state vehicles and computers for personal work.

State lawmakers know about the problems. In fact, Gov. Gary Locke recently appointed a "management review team" to sort through them. Some politicians think the review will amount to nothing more than an inside job.

Still, they feel cornered by the fallout of I-695, the citizen tax revolt that took away money from an agency that deals with one of the most politically popular issues around: transportation. Nearly every legislator is poised to pour millions of dollars into DOT by the end of the legislative session next month to make up for losses from the tax-cutting initiative.

Lawmakers say they'll deal with problems at the agency at some point. For now, they'll soldier on.

"I don't know for sure that there are major problems yet," said Rep. Ruth Fisher, a Tacoma Democrat who is putting together a proposal to rescue DOT.

"It is bad timing. And it raises some questions with folks out there."

She and other lawmakers jump to the department's defense, saying an agency with almost 7,000 employees is bound to have flaws. Agency officials say they have fired bad workers and improved oversight.

But others want accountability now.

"There have been huge problems there," said House co-Speaker Clyde Ballard, R-East Wenatchee. "If they don't get some of these things sorted out soon, it's going to cause major complications. ... DOT needs to be changed from top to bottom."

http://www.seattletimes.com/news/local/html98/tran_20000214.html

-- (craigcar@crosswinds.net), February 14, 2000.

Save motorists some time? What a silly idea Wednesday, February 16, 2000 Our state's Department of Licensing has come up with a good idea to reduce the amount of time motorists spend waiting in line to renew their license tabs. The good folks at DOL want you to be able to do it using the Internet.

Not surprisingly, this sensible customer service concept has run into opposition.

County government and private contractors who now get money for handling the renewal and for making motorists stand in long lines while they process paperwork are afraid of losing that dough. Counties collect nearly $18 million a year in fees which they funnel into their budgets. The 140 sub-agencies who motorists deal with earn $8 million.

According to a recent newspaper report, the DOL's Internet proposal is unlikely to get past the Senate's chief budget writer, Sen. Valoria Loveland, a Democrat from Pasco. She expressed concern about counties losing more money than they already lost from Initiative 695's slashing of the license fees. She also was worried that on-line transactions will force many sub-agencies to close, endangering more than 400 jobs.

Once again, the concerns of bureaucrats and others in government trump those of the customers: tax-paying motorists. It's the same protect-my-turf arguments used to keep state government in the liquor business and block other privatization opportunities.

The licensing department says its Internet plan would cost only $2 million to put together and could be operational within a year of approval by the Legislature. Once up and running, motorists could renew their license tabs at any time of the day, 365 days a year, using a debit or credit card. Once the order has been processed, the DOL would mail out the tabs.

http://www.eastsidejournal.com/Opiniondocs/opinion/mrk55084.html

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), February 16, 2000.