Remember ten days ago or so when Palin mocked Biden's age? This of course made us wonder how much she respected her party's nominee for president. This weekend Palin accused Obama of associating with terrorists, which I hope is such a shockingly untrue accusation that there will be serious blowback. Palin's weekend attack on Obama has two very strong negatives: It makes her ticket look cheap and spiteful; and it again opens the door to unflattering comparisons with McCain.

Palin's use of the media while complaining about it may have contributed to a growing impatience with her inability to address subjects substantively. Given the many questions about her, the recent attack strategy has Republicans wondering about the campaign's direction. Interestingly we rarely hear anything about integrity in this context. The discussion seems to be entirely focused on efficacy of what were once thought unworthy methods. Thankfully some media feel it is incumbent on them to at least check the truth of scurrilous accusations.

McCain has a long and somewhat convoluted history in the Senate. He is much more ripe for the guilt by association attack than Obama.

Look at this discussion of one of McCain's associations:

In opening the door of past associations she has exposed an area of extreme vulnerability to McCain. McCain actually was one of the Keating Five at the heart of the financial crisis of the 1980's and early 1990's.

Palin is accusing Obama of association with a terrorist by his being on the board of directors of a nonprofit, public service corporation when also sitting on the board was a university professor who had helped found the Weathermen in the 1960's. That's it. There was no further association. It's actually rather high praise for an individual if that is the closest association the person has ever had with a person who had a questionable background. Would you do better?

In contrast to Obama, McCain was in the middle of our last financial crisis, from 1988 to 1991. He was one of the Keating Five who caused havoc with the economy and McCain was never exonerated from the charges, but never criminally charged either. His role was investigated by the Senate and the F.B.I. which concluded that he had bad judgment but that there was not enough evidence of criminal activity on his part to sanction him.

This guilt by association accusation triggered a multimedia assault by the Obama campaign, featuring the video on this website. Politico has a review of the this counterattack.

As many others have pointed out Palin seems to find more to fear in Obama's sitting near this professor at the annual meeting than her husband's membership in an American government hating secessionist group.

With a month to go the two campaigns are launched on different trajectories.

Obama is calling attention to our financial crisis and the need for the financial regulation opposed by McCain over his entire career. His is also calling attention to McCain's recent erratic behavior, something that has deeply troubled conservatives lately. He is focusing on the present and on facts that we ought to be grappling with.

McCain increasingly looks like a battle weary veteran spouting obsolete policy, howling like Lear in the wind. His voting record is the story of the deregulation that brought us this financial crisis. His health care plan is widely discussed as a boon to business and a gift of deregulation to the insurance industry, leaving consumers with health issues like stockholders in the market. Despite the fundamental problems with our economy, McCain has refused to back off his commitment to dramatically increase defense spending and to wither governmental revenue by deepening tax cuts. Even before the current crisis experts were decrying this proposal as burying us further in national debt.

McCain is compelled to dissemble his voting record and obfuscate policy. Like our current president McCain will stay the course on his policies but he cannot -- without disastrous consequence -- clearly articulate those policies.

The only course left to him is the road most traveled by his predecessors. His camp must forage in the past for bromides used by Reagan to rally support and engage in the sleazy practice of demagoguery, fear and hate mongering. The self described "mavericks" have leaped into perhaps the oldest political cesspool.

Sarah Palin this weekend has been shrieking that Obama associates with terrorists and is not a real American. CNN looked into these "charges" and found them utterly without merit. It seems a bit odd to dignify such things with inquiry but I applaud CNN's acceptance of the role of responsible medium and refusal to be a propaganda organ.

I trust that, as the McCain camp embraces its end justifying the means abandonment of integrity, that other media will follow CNN's lead and not give demagoguery the appearance of legitimacy by merely reporting its as news.

I attend dance performances about as frequently as I go to roller derby. Last night I attended the Twyla Tharp performance at Pacific Northwest Ballet with some friends who truly enjoy dance and would attend dance performances as frequently as I go to Mariners games if the opportunity were here.

I was prepared to have a nice evening, but was nearly awestruck by the performance of the three Tharp pieces, two of which were world premiers and the third a familiar favorite to dance buffs. Each piece was a highly evocative fusion of elements, some of which were even discernible by me, seamlessly blended to create in me a sense of anticipation throughout the performance. Elegant balletic movement, folk dance, Chaplin-esque near slapstick, ballroom dance, gymnastic athleticism, sweeping Romantic gesture, then the abject collapse of all movement. Not only were all these dance and movement elements merged into the work but the pieces themselves seemed a blend of dance and theater, silent movies, and the images of memory and imagination.

I won't stray too far into a territory unknown to me. But great art awakens something in the viewer, an awareness of the richness and possibility of life. I had that kind of aesthetic experience last night.

Of the three pieces, I was most drawn to the second, called "Afternoon Ball." Before I get into that I should say that the first piece was performed to a Brahms quartet, Opus 111. I was struck by the synchrony between the movement and the music, each accenting and complimenting the other. It was easy to imagine the dancers as the imaginary figures you sometimes see when you close your eyes to listen to music. The dark underlayment of Brahms contributed to a sense of profundity.

The music for the second piece, the one that particularly struck me, was composed by a contemporary Russian, Vladimir Martynov, "Autumn Ball of the Elves" (1994). The first movement was the stark minimalist sound that for me might accompany work by Beckett. The music builds to attain in the later stages of the work almost an echo of the Brahms piece.

In a very interesting, but slow starting, interview by an overwhelmed reporter from the Stranger Tharp called the piece "existentialist theater . . . the end of the world." It conveys a sense of alienation and despair but at its conclusion a brief but strong sense of hope or redemption. I think this piece resonated for me because I've recently been preoccupied with King Lear, the utterly nihilistic work that according to Harold Bloom marked the beginning of western consciousness.

That Stranger interview is one in which you vividly feel the interviewer's pain and discomfort, as Tharp protects her private mental and emotional life from intrusion. The interviewer is not prepared to discuss with her her work, so is forced to ask rather broad questions and virtually begs her to jump in and participate, which she grudgingly does.

Toward the end she comments that the decline of art critics in the published media is a very good thing. She views critics, not as intermediaries promoting quality art to the population, but as obstacles between the artist and the audience.

She then starts interviewing the interviewer and asks him why he does it. He responds by saying that there is something profound in art that makes it the province of philosophers, citing Aristotle, Nietzsche and Heidegger, among others. Tharp then says that she thinks of her work as pre-Socratic. After some brief discussion back and forth she says "turn that thing off so we can have a serious talk" and the tape is instantly over.

Tharp thinking of herself as pre-Socratic fascinates me. (What I would give to have heard the ensuing talk.) She like to thin of herself as coming form a time before Plato had inflicted a sense of rigid and perfect system of ideal "thing," which morphed into the gnostic notion that the ideal, true reality, is someplace else and our lives a spent with shadows within a cave. Aristotle of course was able to lay a rigid system of taxonomy and categorization on this dim world of shadows so that everything had a place. Then he imposed a system of logic to enable us to trudge among the categories. Tharp sees herself as before all that when the world was full of mystery, explained by myth and metaphor.

If you missed the debate or would like to see it again, the New York Times has the video with transcript here.

The debate turned out to be without breathtaking gaffes, which was probably the major surprise of the event. Lacking that spectacle, it seemed like people in the audience pretty much took from the debate what they were inclined to see.

Stripping away everything else and just looking at the transcript, I believe that Biden clearly prevailed on the merits. The polls indicate that most people thought Biden did a better job.

That, however, was not what this debate was about. The overwhelming issue was whether Palin could maintain the appearance of competence. Toward the end she seemed to falter but she hung on to get through it.

My guess is that Palin shored up the eroding base but probably did not do much to sway undecided voters. We'll see. Monday the polls from today and the weekend will be out. The very early polls seem to bear that out.

In this instance though the polls are not all that reliable. The LA Times today has an interesting article on the effect or racial attitudes on voters and speculates that Obama will need a double digit lead to prevail in the election because of the Bradley Effect according to which white voters shy away from candidates of color at the moment of voting.

Here's a little video compilation of a few recent comments by Senator McCain and others at the Republican Convention. Deregulation of the financial industry is a fundamental precept of the party. Their denial is just smoke and mirrors.

When it rains it pours. I've discussed the two lawsuit filed by the Attorney General's office against the Master Builders Association of King County and Snohomish County and against the BIAW subsidiary. These suits related to allegedly illegal campaign contributions to Republican causes and recently there has been some discussion linking Dino Rossi to these events.

The State Republican Party (remember them, the ones who in their platform propose to disregard with the 14th amendment) has also recently suffered at the hands of the Public Disclosure Commission regarding campaign contributions. On September 25 the Commission heard a case entitle Washington State Republican Party, Case # 09-015.

The case relates to three letters sent out by the party during the primary season, scurrilously attacking Gregoire and recommending Rossi. The cost of these mass mailings was not reported by the party in the manner required by the law according to the Commission.

The Washington State Republican Party claimed that the communications were exempt, which seems like quite a stretch. The argument seems to be based on RCW 42.17.640(b) which exempts internal communications not associated with an individual candidate.

There were two big problems: it is hard to imagine how mass mailings are "internal" and the letters clearly favored Dino Rossi.

The party argued that the mailings went out to Republicans only, which is a problem since Republicans do not register here. There was difficulty arguing that the mailings were not associated with Rossi. Assuming that the party knew the law (which may be a significant assumption), my impression was that its behavior was based on not getting caught rather than having a solid legal justification for its actions.

The Commission had no problem finding that the party had violated the law, voting 4-1 to send the matter to the Attorney General to review commencing a lawsuit. The decision is reported here.

What interested me was the lone dissenting vote, cast by Jim Clements, a former Republican legislator. He said that he did not dispute the Commission's conclusion but that these things are "sometimes more political than substance," so he voted that there had been no violation of the law.

I hope there was an error in reporting because that is complete nonsense. He agrees with the majority but votes against it for purely political reasons based on speculation. His job is to enforce the law and he apparently would give a pass to illegal campaigning until after elections?

I hope that Rob McKenna recuses himself for a conflict of interest on this one. He declined to do so in the lawsuits previously mentioned. Here the conflict of interest seems so strong it could not be ignored.

United Mine Workers of America in Monogaliao County West Virginia took a day off after the mine owner, Consol, apparently authorized an NRA film crew on the mining premises to film an anti-Obama piece featuring the mine workers. The mine workers' union had endorsed Obama without involving the workplace or the owner in anyway and objected to intrusion at work by the film crew. This event is discussed in more detail here.

I think people often overlook the importance of unions in the political process, not to mention in the lives of the members.

It was just in May that the Longshoremen struck to show their opposition to the Iraq War, a courageous gesture made while most people were just muttering their objection to it.

It is not often mentioned that a part of the deregulation frenzy that has gripped the nation was the weakening of unions around the country. This is certainly a good time for their resurgence.

OK. Rather than answering questions about my previous entry. I'll give you Nick Licata's analysis of the money that could be used for a 6 block boulevard on Mercer or for other things:

RANKING THE CITY*S CAPITAL NEEDS

We are in uncertain financial times. Multiple levels of government are facing major budget cuts for next year: King County $90 million, Washington State $3.5 billion; the Federal Government has a $500 billion deficit, perhaps more if a bailout is passed. Seattle*s own capital budget is absorbing a $20 million reduction from an already reduced projection.

These shrinking budgets mean less money flowing to the city to fund our capital projects. The Mayor*s just released budget for next year cut back some major pedestrian improvement projects. The North Aurora Project was cut by 80% and the Linden Street Project by over 60%.
As the City Council evaluates his budget we must prioritize which capital projects to pursue and which to delay, alter or cease.

I propose the City move forward to fund projects that serve residents in neighborhoods throughout Seattle by altering a major controversial one, the Mercer Project, to make it more cost effective and immediately free up $43 million. Below is a summary of the proposed projects to be funded instead of the current Mercer Plan.

SIDEWALKS - $20 million

According to SDOT, there are 12,262 block equivalents in Seattle that lack sidewalks (block equivalents or *faces* equal one side of a block without sidewalks). Put another way 30% of Seattle*s blocks do not have a sidewalk on either side of the street. Not everyone wants a sidewalk but they are needed to safely walk to the nearest bus stop so one can take transit rather than drive to their destination. They are also needed to access local businesses and public services, like schools.

Before 2007, the City had taken only halting minimal steps to build new sidewalks. However, due to passage of the Bridging the Gap Levy in that year 15 new block faces were built and up to 18 more are planned for 2008. While these efforts are welcome, they amount to $2.8 million per year for the next two years; sustaining that level beyond
2015 depends on the public voting to renew the Bridging the Gap Levy.

A $20 million infusion will address the need for new sidewalks that otherwise would not be addressed for another decade or more. Our residents should not have to see their children walk in the streets like those in the Othello and Broadview neighborhoods. We can address their safety needs-now.

PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS - $10 million

The City created a Pedestrian Master Plan Advisory Group (PMPAG) to help create a long range plan to implement comprehensive pedestrian improvements to encourage people to walk, safely, in their community.
Over 400 pedestrians are hit by vehicles a year; we should not tolerate that rate. New signals, crosswalks and crossing flags can significantly lower that rate. The PMPAG will be making their recommendations for such improvements by the end of 2009.

A $10 million allocation to implement those PMPAG recommendations validates their work to make Seattle a safer city for those depending on our bus and transit system, of which walking is critical to their use.

BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS - $10 million

The Council adopted Seattle*s Bicycle Master Plan at the beginning of 2008 to guide us in achieving their $176 million program for improving bicycle use and safety in the city.

The Mayor proposes spending about $4 million annually for the next two years to implement the Bicycle Master Plan. At this rate it will take many years to implement it.

A $10 million allocation to implement the Bicycle Master Plan can dramatically move Seattle toward becoming a city that encourages families, young children and elderly alike, to enjoy bike riding and to make bike commuting a practical and safe experience.

FREIGHT MOBILITY - $3 million

In 2002 the City released a Freight Mobility Strategic Action Plan that set up general goals for helping our industries move goods in and out of the city in an efficient manner. According to the report this sector of the economy, primarily located in the Duwamish and Ballard/Interbay/Northend areas, is expected to provide at least 10% of Seattle*s new employment, nearly 15,000 jobs over 20 years.

The 2005 Freight Mobility Plan listed the Lander South Grade Separation Project as one of four high priority projects for City funding; the Mercer Project was not listed. In 2008 the City dropped the Lander project in favor of funding the Mercer Project.

A $3 million allocation could fund an update to this strategic plan and actually lay out a capital investment program similar to what has been done for pedestrians and bicyclists.

----- UNDERSTANDING THE MERCER CORRIDOR PROJECT ------

BRIDGING THE GAP

The public voted in favor of a nine-year property tax levy in
2006 as part of the Bridging The Gap transportation plan to repair our roads and bridges, improve traffic flow through arterial improvements and make capital investments that benefits pedestrians and bicyclists. A few of the arterial improvements were mega-projects, such as the Spokane Street Viaduct interchange, the Lander Street Overpass and the Mercer Corridor Project. These three projects were not included in the property tax levy and thus were never directly voted on by the public. Instead the City Council directed two new taxes, the commercial parking tax and the employee tax, to fund them. These taxes remain in force until the Council removes them, unlike the property levy which ends in 2015.

The new commercial parking tax and employee tax fund items included in the property levy plus these mega projects. The city included significant funds to build these big projects in the 2006 Regional Transportation District ballot measure. When this measure failed the City did not have enough funds to go forward with all of them. SDOT recommended dropping the Lander Street Overpass, although it was an important project to better facilitate Metro*s buses and freight mobility, and continue with just the Mercer and the Spokane Projects.

Consequently funding for the Mercer Project includes a revenue stream that is not at risk of a public vote, unlike the bulk of the improvements funded by a property levy that must be renewed to complete all the Bridging the Gap plan. Since less than 15% of the Mercer Project is funded at this time, once construction begins on it, scheduled for the second quarter of next year (2009), this one project will begin to consume more and more Bridging the Gap funds, impacting the City*s ability to provide adequate long-term funding for street, pedestrian and bicyclist improvements throughout Seattle.

COSTS HAVE SOARED

Cost estimates of the two-way Mercer Project have increased in the last year, from $119 million in mid-2007 to $200 million now, and construction has not even started, although the Mayor is planning to begin construction in the second quarter of next year. Nevertheless revenue for over 80% of the project has not been secured. This strategy violates the City Auditor*s recommendation to identify secured funding sources before the City begins a project.

This $200 million project has never had a public hearing before the City Council. Instead the Council had a five minute hearing in November of 2004 advertised as a $2 million proposed Environmental Impact Statement of the project. In the meantime, SDOT has held dozens of open houses and other *soft* design oriented public discussions on the positive attributes of a two-way Mercer, and how to implement it.

The current funding proposal assumes levels of federal and state financial grants that are unrealistic given the budget constraints that both the federal and state governments are facing.

Furthermore, the proposal depends on taking most if not all of the extra $40 million generated from the parking tax beyond the original estimates through 2023. These funds that could go for sidewalks, bike trails, bridge repairs, and neighborhood traffic projects are proposed to be diverted to just one 6 block project.

Citizens still have an opportunity to alter the project and free up millions of dollars for other neighborhood projects. I will be proposing to use $43 million of these local funds that have been earmarked for the Two-Way Mercer Project and direct them instead for sidewalks, crosswalks, bike paths, and street improvements, that serve residents around the city.

IT IS NOT A TRANSPORTATION PROJECT

The Mercer Corridor Project spends $200 million in South Lake Union with no reduction in congestion or improvement in overall traffic times over the current configuration. According to SDOT it will take 7 minutes to get from 4th and Mercer to I-5 during evening rush hour in 2010 as is. With a two-way Mercer SDOT*s figures show that it would take 18 minutes in 2010.

This month SDOT released a 2008 Mercer Project update which I suspect was brought out due to the issues that I have publicly raised since SDOT addresses them for the first time in a public document. Some of their statements are flat out wrong. For example, when comparing the two-way Mercer project to retaining Mercer as a one-way street it says: *The Mercer Corridor Project improves travel times for most directions with the exception of slightly poorer eastbound times.*

This statement is not true according to SDOT*s Environmental Assessment Transportation Report analyzing 2010 travel times. With the exception of a few minor improvements, overall travel times are slower for the 6-lane project SDOT plans to build. The specific time measurements show that the average westbound trip will indeed be 3 minutes shorter in the a.m. peak, but will take the same amount of time in p.m. peak period. And the average eastbound trip in the peak periods is longer both in the morning and in the afternoon: taking 1 minute longer in the a.m. and 8 minutes longer p.m. North and south travel times are about the same.

That same report concluded that the South Lake Union Mercer Project area will see increased idling of traffic at more intersections than the current configuration, resulting in higher percentages of auto polluting emissions than what we experience now. And it also concluded that the total traffic volume through South Lake Union will only increase by 2% by the year 2030, not the 25% that is claimed by our Transportation Department.

The Mayor has argued that a two-way Mercer is needed as a way to mitigate traffic congestion once construction begins on the Alaskan Way Viaduct. City Council*s Central Staff reviewed data from the Transportation Department and concluded that a two-way Mercer provided no discernable mitigation. All eight Viaduct options list a two-way Mercer because it is in SDOT*s plans, not because it is a required element of replacing the current viaduct.

The two-way Mercer Plan is also described as just phase one of a multi-phase project. SDOT staff says that they are currently studying an extension of a two-way Mercer all the way to Elliot Avenue. The City Council has not seen studies, reports, cost figures or transit times for this second phase.

As these findings have become recently public, since SDOT had not released them for over a year and half, the project*s urban renewal contributions to South Lake Union have taken on paramount importance.

THERE IS TRANSPORTATION SOLUTION

A previous 1999 Mercer Plan, now referred by SDOT as the *Alternative Plan*, was adopted by then Mayor Paul Schell, the Neighborhood Council, and by the City Council. Its cost estimates varied but the last one issued in 2001 was still only 20% of the current Mercer Corridor proposal. This earlier plan was rejected by Greg Nickels after he was elected Mayor and was not included in the Environmental Assessment of the Mercer Project by SDOT.

SDOT*s 2008 project update directly addresses this alternative and says it was *eliminated * because it failed to create a more direct connection from I-5 into and through South Lake Union, and did not improve local access and circulation. Moreover, it left roadway safety issues unresolved, failed to accommodate neighborhood growth and livability, and made no improvements for pedestrians or bicyclists over current conditions.*

This statement is misleading since it does not cover certain facts. SDOT*s decision to eliminate the Alternative Plan did not take into account travel times or cost. They have also not provided any quantitative evidence that the Alternative Plan provided any less safety improvements than a two-way Mercer.

The position that the two-way Mercer plan improves local access and circulation is based on reconnecting up to five streets across Aurora Avenue to lower Queen Anne. SDOT*s Environmental Assessment of this improvement assumes that Aurora Avenue will eventually be lowered, but this feature was dropped this summer since its estimated cost was $200 million and the State made it known that it would not be included as part of the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement plan. The assumption now is that the streets will be reconnecting at the surface level with signals installed on Aurora Avenue.

These reconnections are not dependent on a two-way Mercer configuration and can be accomplished under the Alternative Plan.
Ironically *re-connecting the grid* with an increased congested corridor will inevitably lead to a dramatic increase in cut-through traffic through the middle of SLU, a condition that will likely result in more pedestrian-vehicle collisions than if the Mercer corridor were not turned into a traffic bottle neck.

SDOT*s statement that the alternative plan *made no improvements for pedestrians or bicyclists over current conditions* should say *not as many improvements* as their proposal. The alternative plan did provide better connections across both Mercer and Valley, and it did provide for a bike trail next to the park. It did not provide for a bike path on Valley, although the proposed half mile lane could easily be added.

One of the major attractions of the two-way Mercer Plan is narrowing Valley Street to two lanes, one in each direction. This is a reversal of the *99 plan which was to widen Valley Street. A narrowed Valley Street would certainly provide a calmer boundary to the Lake Union Park. But the alternative plan provided for improved pedestrian crossings and the number of lanes in the wider Valley Street could be reduced. Even the two-way Mercer Plan provides only for 8 foot wide side walks next to the park, while the alternative plan provided for 10 feet plus a landscaped street edge with another 5 feet. The South Lake Union trolley currently serves as a buffer to the Lake Union Park from Valley and it would serve that function as well with the Alternative Plan.

More importantly, the two-way Mercer Plan significantly widens Mercer while narrowing Valley. Consequently South Lake Union residents, all of whom live south of Mercer, would have to cross a greater distance in street right of way than they would have to in the current configuration of roads to reach Lake Union Park.

IN SUMMARY

It appears that the most critical advantage of the two-way Mercer Plan over the Alternative, as expressed by SDOT, the Mayor and many on the City Council, is that the former plan promotes neighborhood growth and livability, while the Alternative does not.
The question as I see it is how much public resources should the City devote to this one neighborhood in comparison to the needs of other neighborhoods around the city that are also in need of accommodating growth and livability?

City Council designated South Lake Union as an Urban Center, which means we expect it to grow substantially in providing jobs and residences. There has been a significant influx of commercial and residential growth in the last three years. If it continues at this pace, the hope that this neighborhood will eventually be home to 20,000 employees and 10,000 residents may become a reality. This growth is good for the city. It expands our tax base and hopefully it will allow more people to live in the city and not have to commute to work, although it is unlikely that much of the new housing will be affordable to the average downtown worker.

Development in South Lake Union is good, but does its urban renewal necessitate a $200 million investment that results in greater traffic congestion? Since the Alternative Plan provides similar urban design benefits and results in better traffic flow than what we have now and can be implemented at a fraction of the two-way Mercer Plan*s cost, why not pursue it?

Why not give people transportation choices by making it easier to take transit or ride their bike from neighborhoods across the city to reach downtown rather than investing our scarce transportation dollars in one 6 block extra wide boulevard?

You decide.

There will be a public meeting on whether to spend $43 million on the Mercer Corridore. Here's the notice:

PUBLIC FORUM - MONDAY - OCTOBER 6TH -

SHOULD THE CITY SPEND $43 MILLION ON CITYWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVMENTS or ON A TWO-WAY MERCER BOULEVARD?

This UP announces an October 6 forum on the Mercer Project, and my proposal to redirect $43 million.

Time: 6:00-8:30
Doors open at 6pm with refreshments, presentation begins at 6:30pm
Location: Bertha Knight Landes Room, City Hall, 4th Ave and James
Date: Monday, October 6

Just to give you something to think about, Nick Licata is championing the use of the money for other transportation purposes: funding the recommendations of the Bicycle Master Plan, Pedestrian Master Plan, and providing a long-term capital program for meeting our freight mobility needs.

The big issue here is whether to fund enhanced automobile transportation or alternative transportation needs.