Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

ELECTION: Keep Larry Seaquist in the Legislature

Letter by Gerald Erwin Baldwin, Gig Harbor on Oct. 14, 2010 at 12:23 pm with 3 Comments »
October 14, 2010 12:23 pm

We need to keep 26th District Rep. Larry Seaquist in the Legislature. No one has done as much for our district as he. He helped to create the Department of Commerce to place a primary focus on creating jobs. He sponsored the legislation that reduced regulations and red tape for businesses as well as for eliminating the B&O tax on new small businesses.

Seaquist voted against the final budget as he advocated for a sharper eye and sharper scalpel in reforming it. One such effort is illustrated in his quest to stop nearly $2 million in bonuses for our state’s middle managers.

As a former battleship captain, he understands the ferry system and offers concrete ways to reduce waste, resist fare increases and increase service. Additionally, he led the successful charge in the House to keep bridge tolls low.

Seaquist reaches out to all persons in this district for solutions to our governmental issues. You will find no more cooperation between Republicans, Democrats and independents than in his “Refreshing Democracy” forums. He extends that bipartisan spirit to his deliberations in the House.

With a proven leader like Seaquist, we need not consider anyone else.

Leave a comment Comments → 3
  1. jandkgibbs says:

    Well, again I find myself in disagreement with Mr. Baldwin. He concludes his letter with the following statement, “With a proven leader like Seaquist, we need not consider anyone else”. Well here are a few reasons.

    1.Seaquist touts he voted against the overturn of I-960 and the budget that raised taxes on our food. Well its one thing to brag about your no vote but the bigger question is did he debate his party on the floor of the house? I watched much of this on TVW and all I saw was Larry sitting on his hands. This tells me he got a swing district pass by the democrat caucus to vote no. This is what happens when the dems have a large majority in Olympia. This needs to be corrected and balance restored. You can bet that if they needed his vote he would have voted with his party.

    2.To fix the problems in this state we need elected officials that are not bought and sold by the unions, trial attorneys, tribes and democrat advocacy groups. Always follow the money.

    3.Seaquist always says we need to reduce the size of state government by 20% but why hasn’t he crafted or sponsered a bill to do just that. Answer, the unions won’t let him.

    4. Larry sponsored a bill to help keep tolls low but for me this is another case of good government gone wrong. Good intentions by politicians in an election year that resulted in a bill so full of unintended consequences, new bureaucracy, fuzzy math, and is more an employment act for the DOT than a bill that would hopefully keep tolls from raising to soon. Not one member of our Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) liked this bill. Ask Larry if he discussed this bill with the CAC when the bill was crafted or was this bill rushed through on an election year.

    Yes, we need new leadership. A candidate that is not beholding to his union and tribal contributors, someone that crafts a bill by listening to all groups involved and someone that is truthful with the voters on how and why he votes and when given a free pass by his caucus.

    Doug Richards will win. Vote for new leadership and some real change not just more of the same.

  2. Doug Richards is not going to win, the voters are lining up just like in the primary. As one who supports Jan, Derek and Larry, they are all doing a great job for the district. I know I polled 100 of them and they are breaking heavily for Larry. Oh Yeah!!

    Seaquist has reduced ferry management, he has cut executive bonuses and pay. He also proposed a detailed audit to cut 20% out of DSHS that was in the budget but Christine line item vetoed it. He is for real. He is not the governor. He tried numerous times to convince Haigh, Rolfes and Appleton to vote NO as well on the budget. What you see on the floor is not where the game is played. It is played out in discussions. Those three would not budge they were bought and sold to Chopp. They would not change despite the efforts of Seaquist. Well before the budget vote he stated he was voting No and it was because of structural changes in the revenue picture. he had numerous town hall meetings discussing the problem months before hte vote. Oh and right before the vote they said you can pass. Cow barn stuff that is what Gibbs is talking. Despite Larry’s graphs tables and charts he presented ot his colleagues even before the session they would not listen.

    Many Ds like many Rs are also ideologues, but Seaquist is not. Both parties have them and they are a pain in the neck and it is why America is where it is.

    On ferries he is becoming the go to guy. Most this stuff on King 5 on the ferries it is coming from Seaquist’s office.

    All you read above by Gibbs is pure garbage and speculation. It is from the hard right. Baldwin is a D, but on Seaquist he is correct. However, I do not talk to much with Ds accept Larry and Derek, the rank and file are angry at me for supporting Jan. Why, because she is a decent well qualified legislator. Larry and Derek – they are amongst the best legislators and senators in the state. Both parties respect them. Oh and it shows at the debates to the point of embarrassment.

    When I was passing out lit supporting the three incumbents, one woman said hearing positve things about the incumbents convinced her to stick with the great legislators that we have. Anyone going to the debates know Larry and Derek deal in specifics and their opponents in platitudes and Jan’s opponent is really only focused on health care. What the lady liked out by my lit, was it was not from either party. It is my own money and research. I could have dismissed that, but when 100 tell you that you get a picture of what is going to happen.

    In my yard are three signs for Jan, Larry and Derek. Why – we could not do better – Plain and simple.

    I will not reiterate the negatives about Doug, but there are a number. Why do I need to people already realize Larry is the better candidate. TNT got it right! Larry is simply the best candidate and is so much more qualified than Doug it is ridiculous. Indes we know what to do vote in the incumbents they are working hard for the 26th!

  3. Gibbs you forgot this caveat. Larry’s opponent did NOT support I960 when it was on the ballot I know this for a fact. He did NOT vote in that election! LOL! Neither did Marty.

    If you do not vote you are not part of the process. When Bush won in 2000 and if I did not vote I have no right to complain. However I did vote so I can complain.

    At least when Larry voted he DID vote NO for the suspension of I960. You can put out your phony rationalizations, but that is what he did.

    Oh I remember voters. Oh my he never hardly votes and he is running for office. Oh than I am going with Seaquist. I usually vote Republican, but you have to at least vote. I will put this next to my phone for when my ballot comes! Yep they are not all ideologues that is for sure! Heard that quite a number of times. there are decent Republicans out there. Yes indeed and they are voting for Seaquist.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0