I do know that Rossi’s former employer, Capretto & Clark, was not exactly a shining beacon of honest real estate development. It is sort of surprising that Rossi remained so close to his boss until he decided to go into politics.

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20040929&slug=choice29m

Here’s what a July Seattle Times article has to say on that subject:

The governor’s budget office projects that by next year, state government will have added more than 6,100 employees since Gregoire was elected in 2004.

That’s an increase of nearly 6 percent. By comparison, after Gary Locke was elected governor in 1996, the state hired more than 8,400 employees during his first term β€” a 9 percent increase.

Personally I think it fits the theme of RE + fiscal responsibility. It did not seem partisan imho.

The deregulation legislation Clinton passed was all done by a GOP controlled Congress, and the regulation Bush wanted enacted could have easily been rammed down the Democrats throats by the GOP controlled Congress under 43. Congressional Democrats certainly didn’t help matters, but sticking this mess on the minority party for 12 of the last 13 years is dubious at best.

Blaming unions indicates a poor understanding of the dynamics of those industries. Boeing is doing quite well (for now) despite the “Union’s” best intentions. The auto industry buried themselves by being complicit with the UAW and giving out ludicrous lifetime benefit plans (pensions) in exchange for lower wages at the time. 4 decades of increased productivity (reduced labor needs) has created a situation where their worker:retiree ratio is so out of whack that it’s untenable. As much as I loathe UAW, it’s hard to fault them for the executive management’s complete lack of foresight.

General manufacturing has gone overseas because it’s cheaper. It’s cheaper than the cheapest non-union shop anywhere in the US. Nobody in this country can compete with somewhere that has no labor laws, no environmental or safety regulations, and nominal wages far below our minimum wage. And since Americans have shown a steadfast refusal to pay more for “made in America” companies did what needed to be done.

The world is not black and white.

She can’t blame these on Washington DC.

To get the economy heated up the Fed was encouraged to lower the interest rate charged banks as well. They did. It gave people the ability to buy cars and charge things at lower rates. And, to get lower interest rates on homes. But when that interest rate went up to “cool” the economy, so did many of the credit card rates as did mortgages based on adjustable rates or open mortgages.

While President Bush’s “goal” was that every American be able to buy a house, he did not want it done with the total disregard of good sound financial practices of lending. Congress passed laws deregulating the institutions that were supposed to make sure people could pay their loans back: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac told banks to lend the money out to anyone. When people got loans they could never pay for, they walked away from them. When they did, their neighborhoods suffered, the housing market went south, and tax revenue tanked. People moved and businesses suffered. Banks now held loans that were worthless and owed money to the Federal Government that could not be paid back. The solution? Get the Government to bail us all out. In the long run this makes the tax burden on those of us who pay taxes much worse.

What also heightened and contributed to the problems we are facing now are higher energy prices that affected everyone, including all businesses. Higher energy prices caused higher costs for everything people buy or manufacture.

The other “problem” no one wants to mention is the fact that Unions, who jumped on the surge in the economy, wanted higher wages and benefits. They went on strike thereby have killed Boeing, the auto industry, and manufacturing.

Real estate is a key in understanding all of this because when people do well, or are lead to believe they are doing or have a right to buy anything anytime, they usually go for the “security” of buying a home. In this case, it was a propped up proposition because it was all based on false mandated assumptions.

“State workers, she said, also went too long without raises and needed to catch up. Plus the state had to start putting more money into its employee pension system.

But the governor and Democratic-controlled Legislature did not stop there. They also expanded programs, started new ones and said they wanted to spend even more in the future, including paid family leave, a sales-tax credit for low-income families, and increased access to health care for children.”

Based on the article the problem is education, roads and those greedy kids and their health care…

State government is a business with a very inconsistent revenue stream. States around the country always struggle with this and 14 are currently unable to meet their existing financial obligations.

If the govt was a regular business, it would sock away cash in the good years to spend in the bad years but politics always intervene. In the bad years we cut spending and in the good years there is pressure to “give back the money to the people that earned it” as Rossi argues.

People talk about “business” but they dont want to run the state government like a business or with common sense. Instead you get what you can when you can and vote the person out when times are hard. I guess we get what we deserve.

But I am glad Gregoire has saved the seals, and not thrown the low income children out on the street like that evil Rossi wants to do.

For what it’s worth, Gregoire’s done nothing but stand up for the rights of Washington’s citizens, fight for the protection of abused children, walked the walk in supporting teachers, reducing class size, and preserving opportunities for all to get a college education. She’s also helped provide healthcare for 73,000 low income children in our state. If your going to be critical of an incumbent governor three weeks before an election, be fair and at least tell the whole story of her contributions.

Oh, and to the poster who said that this is Tim’s site and “he can do whatever he pleases…if you disagree, get your own” — all I can say is wow! I guess that dissenting opinions should just “love it or leave it.” I assure you that this unfortunate approach to pubic discourse would leave any modern website with a readership of about three people.

I’m just waiting to see an accompanying website like Yes We Can (Hold Babies), though in this case it might be more like Yes We Can (Ride Pink Ponies).

You cannot be serious?!?!?

GW and the Fed set interest rates, regulates and/or deregulates the banking industry, and sets government policies.

This might help you remember.

” The goal is, everybody who wants to own a home has got a shot at doing so. The problem is we have what we call a homeownership gap in America. Three-quarters of Anglos own their homes, and yet less than 50 percent of African Americans and Hispanics own homes. That ownership gap signals that something might be wrong in the land of plenty. And we need to do something about it.

We are here in Washington, D.C. to address problems. So I’ve set this goal for the country. We want 5.5 million more homeowners by 2010 — million more minority homeowners by 2010. (Applause.) Five-and-a-half million families by 2010 will own a home. That is our goal. It is a realistic goal. But it’s going to mean we’re going to have to work hard to achieve the goal, all of us. And by all of us, I mean not only the federal government, but the private sector, as well. ”

George W Bush June 18, 2002.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020618-1.html

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

http://img515.imageshack.us/my.php?image=thetimforprezqg3.png

Whole video is here

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2008165463_transpo08m.html

It seems like his plan, which of course takes money from education and public transit, would have devastating consequences for the budget.

As a former developer, he’s never seen a road plan he doesn’t like. Not to defend Gregoire here, but I think Rossi will be much worse for the budget. In exchange we’ll get a bunch of roads that will be just as crowded in 10 years, and no long-term solution. Anyone who’s ever been to LA knows that building more lanes won’t fix your traffic problems.

Me too. One’s a sleazebag and one’s a liar. And there’s no third party in the Guv’s race.

Can anyone name me one elected official( statewide or countywide, not citywide) of either party who has not been a cheerleader for the real estate industry?

The governor spent money? Shocking!
Is there still a deficit or a surplus?

“I’m struggling to get the message out to Washingtonians. The economy is strong. Buy your home. There is no good reason for a slowing of home purchasing in the state of Washington today.”

How much clearer can you be in expressing that you don’t care about the residents. All you care about is to be able to show a balanced budget. Shameful.

Be careful, this is new territory. You won’t like what you find and get.

Again, how is this new? Here is an example of some previous posts on Seattle Bubble (which was started in August 2005):

• September 2005: Real Estate Boom Beefs Up State Income
• November 2005: State Revenue Continues To Bubble
• June 2006: State’s Chief Economist Warns Of Slowdown
• September 2006: Housing Continues To Buoy State Budget
• October 2007: Government Revenues Sagging
• November 2007: Housing Slump Drags Down State Revenue
• January 2008: Gregoire: β€œThe economy is strong. Buy your home.”
• February 2008: Declining Real Estate Sales Hitting State Revenues

Here’s a quote from my September 2006 post on the subject:

Mr. Sohn has been has been warning for a good while now that the pleasant budget picture is unlikely to continue once the housing market in the state really slows down. One would hope that those in Olympia are listening, but personally I’m not going to hold my breath.

So would anyone care to explain how this is somehow a new and dangerous subject for Seattle Bubble?

Did you just use a newspapers endorsement piece from the opinion section to support your argument?

From 1993 to 2004 the budget increased by an average of a little over 4% per year.
From 2005 to 2008 it increased at about 7.75% per year.
From 1981 to 1992 it increased at about 9% per year.

I personally would appreciate a budget increase closer to that of inflation (ie 4%) than what we’ve seen of late.

(http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/zoom/html/2008061958.html)

When revenues began to slide, Gregoire, like any good manager, took immediate steps. She imposed a state hiring freeze, limited consulting contracts and discontinued unnecessary travel. Coupled with 1 percent across- the-board spending cuts, Gregoire says she has already taken steps to trim the projected $3.2 billion deficit by $1.5 billion. And let’s not forget Gregoire balanced a budget with a $2.2 billion deficit when she took office after beating Rossi by 133 votes in 2004. She created the rainy-day fund and has been a solid steward of state resources.

Of course the Gov has already taken care of half that projected deficit, but you don’t mention that.

Sorry for not being super-impressed that she managed to fix half of the problem she created.

Silver9 @ 33,

1) I’m not complaining about the cuts, just pointing out that they wouldn’t have been necessary if we had not grown state government so rapidly during the boom.
2) All that information is available in the Times story I linked in the post: How state spending rose $8 billion under Gregoire

Harley @ 34,

I don’t see what George Bush has to do with local real estate. As I said in comments #12 & #18 above, the state budget has always been a subject of interest on Seattle Bubble. That “can of worms” was opened in September 2005.

Perhaps your next post should talk about what W. has said and the true realities. Your finger tips would bleed and you would be left with stumps trying to capture all of his blatant lies.

One good lesson might be never believe what any politician tells you. THEY ALL TALK OUT OF BOTH SIDES OF THEIR MOUTH.

Unfortunately this can of worms is now open, good luck eating it.

2)
What was the spending increases spent on? Can you provide some graphs on what increased and where the money went? This is the kind of issue where the details really matter.

The top-two applies to everything but the presidential candidates. On the presidential ballot in Washington state, you’ll get to pick between the following:

• Barack Obama / Joe Biden
  Democratic Party
• John McCain / Sarah Palin
  Republican Party
• Ralph Nader / Matt Gonzalez
  Independent
• Gloria La Riva / Eugene Puryear
  Socialism & Liberation Party
• James E. Harris / Alyson Kennedy
  Socialist Workers Party
• Bob Barr / Wayne A. Root
  Libertarian Party
• Chuck Baldwin / Darrell L. Castle
  Constitution Party
• Cynthia McKinney / Rosa Clemente
  Green Party

I saw ChangMook Sohn giving a presentation on government access TV several years ago. I learned tons and now view him as a role model for all public servants. Sadly, his speaking style has a very limited appeal (probably just weirdos like me) and there is little chance for him to have a political career without an image makeover.

But now you’re all worried about the 2009-2011 budget. Do you really believe the economy won’t recover by 2010? Of course the Gov has already taken care of half that projected deficit, but you don’t mention that. You also don’t mention that spending has increased within historical norms.

From the Seattle Times:

As for that deficit: When lawmakers left Olympia in 2003, the immediate budget was balanced. Rossi left the Legislature to run for governor.

In January 2004, officials predicted the next two-year budget – the one Gregoire ended up writing – would start off with a shortfall of about $1.06 billion.

Deficit projections went up and down before Gregoire proposed her 2005 budget. At one point, the deficit was pegged at about $2.2 billion. But after that, the state got a surge of tax money. State documents say the Legislature dealt with a deficit of about $1.8 billion.

If so many in this state weren’t always intent on cutting taxes, it would be easier to keep rainy day funds; or use the good years to fund infrastructure improvements. Ain’t no such thing as a free lunch, folks.

That said, Gregoire has been pretty indifferent to said university and has never been willing to carry the water for it at the legislative level.

And while I agree with what The Tim is saying in terms of her being blind to the economic realities of the bubble, I also think she did a pretty good job reining in the legislative Democrats when it came to spending, repeatedly turning back their demands to spend, spend, spend. Had she let them go we would be in a deficit right now rather than next biennium.

One other thing, too, that worries me about Rossi is his deep connections to the BIAW, an organization that used its political clout to build build build throughout this boom, and now that some of these houses they threw up are being shown as shoddy they’re using that clout to shield themselves from liability.

Gregoire has been mediocre, but right now I’m more inclined to four more years of meh than four years of damaging our economic engine in the name of adhering to some conservative talking points.

I want to know what I got for my money. Traffic still sucks, DSHS is still being sued for millions and screwing up every chance it gets, my taxes are higher, more companies have moved out of state, the voting system is still corrupt without state standards, unemployment is up, blah, blah, blah…. Unbelievable. And all the opposition wants to talk about is how Rossi is “a lap dog for the contracting industry.

Seattle/KC/ much of WA is as dysfunctional as it gets. Collapse is on the way.

Also, just to invite a lynching here;

If the economy is doing poorly, doesn’t it make sense to increase spending rather than cut the budget? Seems to me that in a poor economy the needs are greater, so maybe the politicians shouldn’t be so willing to throw out money when times are good, and more willing to spend money when times are bad.

I’m not sure what the “other side” would be here. Rossi hasn’t been the one running the state budget for the last four years, so how would I compare him in that respect? As I said, I’m not trying to tell people how to vote, I’m just detailing what I know from following this since 2005, which is ChangMook Sohn’s warnings and the state budget.

…but I really wish I was voting for ChangMook Sohn.

The really sad thing is that ChangMook Sohn resigned from his 24-year post as the chief economist to run for State Treasurer, and then came in a distant 3rd place in the August top-two primary.

Personally, I’m voting for every socialist I can, knowing that eventually such a system will collapse under it’s own weight, and then we can start over again. Might as well hasten the process.

And besides, last ad I heard said the budget was still balanced, because Christine (now Chris) has created a rainy-day fund. So there!