Washblog

Maria Cantwell still has not decided to oppose the central policy of the Bush Administration and her rhetoric clearly supports John McCain's view of the Iraq war.

How will Southwest Washington enjoy the pollution on the Green and Cowlitz rivers from Cantwell-praised Dirk Kempthorne's approved mining near Mt. St. Helens?

With this radar project, Senator Cantwell didn't get as much funding for Washington state as the Administration wastes in graft and corruption in Iraq in a week.

A TRILLION dollars on the Iraq war: That's enough  to buy a personal, individual Doppler Radar for every single resident of Kitsap County, Mason County, Grays Harbor County, Pacific County, Wahkiakum County and Cowlitz County combined.

They could walk around with them like cell phones. Sure, it would be tough for the little kids to fit their personal Doppler Radars in their cubbies at school, but it's not much more absurd than what we've done with the money so far.

Should we add up how many hospitals Senator Cantwell could have secured for Southwest Washington with the Iraq money? How about roads? How about flood insurance? How about health insurance?

Has Senator Cantwell signed on to Darcy Burner's  Iraq plan or does she still have a more...McCain-ish position?

But hey, maybe this radar is some Air Force Surplus that Senator Cantwell got cheap.

And the Grays Harbor group should thank the Senator. Maria Cantwell gets requests from a lot of advocacy groups in Washington and she devoted time to and successfully acted on behalf of this particular one. So polite thanks are de rigeur.

But should we all thank Senator Cantwell?

On balance, I think not. I wasn't involved in the meetings and neither were most of the people here. In my view, the activists gave Senator Cantwell a present, not the other way around. They presented to Cantwell - on a silver platter - an opportunity get one of those nice, uncontroversial, feel-good goodies that politicians absolutely love to get.

This is a tiny appropriation that benefits essentially everyone and even redresses an inequity in coastal protection. I can't even think of how a Republican would form an objection to it. It will probably even benefit the residents of Oregon and as long as she makes the request for a Washington siting first (and has some stories of bad flood damage on her side) I don't even see how  the Oregon delegation could object.

In short, I really can't think of an easier appropriation to get. Senator Cantwell is an ADVOCATE for Washington state. She has a positive obligation to get benefit for her state and represent her party, not just sit there "polishing" her resume. Why should we thank her for doing her job - poorly?

We're in a national campaign. If Senator Cantwell thinks that her job is just to get re-elected so she can play it safe and sprinkle the federal trinkets on her constituents, she should be replaced. This presidential race pits OUR anti-war Senator versus the most escallationist Senator in the entire Senate. The most winnable congressional race in this state pits a leader of the anti-war candidates against a Bush rubber stamp. Iraq is the central issue of this campaign and Senator Cantwell has shown ZERO leadership.

Senators Obama and Clinton can't vote for timetables when they are running for Commander-In-Chief. That's basic. But Senator Cantwell can certainly do more than voting for losing resolutions and reluctantly supporting the inevitable presidential nominee at the last possible minute when her state supported him overwhelmingly.

In short, Senator Cantwell can get on board or find other work. She's one of the most replaceable Democrats of 2012.

This "gift" isn't even a gift yet.

It's not even a gift certificate.

From The Daily World: "the senator hopes the funding will make the final cut in a 2009 appropriations bill."

And in March there was this: "A doppler radar system could cost $4 million to $9 million, depending on where it goes and the infrastructure needed to install it."

So has this promise been made or hasn't it??? And is this a promise for a full Doppler radar system, or one-half to two-ninths of a Doppler radar system??? My intuition tells me that fractional radar systems are not nearly as valuable for predicting storms as full, actual Doppler radar systems with all the pieces.

Am I being abused on behalf of an actual, accountable promise by Senator Cantwell to deliver a complete Doppler radar system to Southwest Washington or am I being abused on behalf of a two-of-four-to-nine million dollar partial promise to include but not necessarily defend what could or might not be the near-majority of funding for an as yet otherwise incompletely funded Doppler radar for Southwest Washington?

Do I have to change my estimate of how many Washingtonians the Iraq war money could buy personal Doppler radars for or don't I?

 I'm in agreement that the $2 million towards Doppler Radar in SW Washington is a 'beginning' and there is a ways to go.  Widening the subject as is happening here may bring us more advocates and activists towards getting this job done - the job of obtaining and building a Doppler Radar in SW Washington, which is not specific just to SW Washington but is good for the state in many ways, as funkycamper has pointed out.  

Friends of Grays Harbor has carried the ball and they could use as much support as they can get. As funkycamper has pointed out, this is an issue for Washington state and not relegated just to us rural folks living in SW Washington.

  Noemie, the question you pose - why would NOAA not wish for Washington state to have adequate radar - weather reading coverage?  That remains a very BiG question.  It was not adequately answered by the two NOAA Representatives at the roundtable meeting, except for the excuse of costs and a short budget (dlaw - I can hear you reminding us that the cost of Iraq would give everyone a Doppler Radar to carry around and more..).  But given the preponderance of evidential facts that have been presented to NOAA prior to this roundtable meeting and again at the meeting, it seems to me more that NOAA has dug in it's feet, so to speak, in some kind of stubborn refusal to acknowledge the severity of weather along Washington coastline, and throughout the inland waterways.  I'm not sure how that is an affront to NOAA's credibility but it seems somehow to be, in that they offered up opposing studies showing there is adequate weather reading coverage in Washington state.  I'm just your average citizen, but even I can see that simply is not the case.  

  The mystery remains in my eyes that every other state in this nation has more than adequate Doppler Radar coverage -- except Washington state.
As funkycamper has pointed out the dangers, she is not exaggerating the severity.  It is 'The Deadliest Catch' off the Washington coast - more so than the Alaska coast. I can only guess at what holds NOAA back from full cooperation in getting the needed Doppler for our state.  

 At the roundtable meeting, I got to make the last comment before the meeting adjourned  -- as a public citizen, asking NOAA Representatives  when the decisions had been made as to placement of the Dopplers across the states.  They answered that it was in the early 1990s, and I nudged them a bit asking in light of the storm (hurricane) wouldn't this be a good time to reconsider placement for Washington state.

  The meeting adjourned, and one of the NOAA Representatives came over to where I was standing right away to invite more comment.  Funkycamper (Judy) was standing next to me, and she's right, she was spitting nails and had a great deal to say to the NOAA representative.

  I did have the impression that NOAA might be willing to entertain revisiting the issue, but I also had a distinct impression they would not authorize the needed funds to actual build the Doppler. I left the meeting feeling like it had been informative but that nothing was likely to come of it.  Thus, it was a surprise to learn that, in fact, something did come of the meeting, and that something is progress.  

  Therefore --- each and every step that Senator Cantwell is able to take towards that end is a major step.  While I recognize it is easy pickings for what could be considered a feel good politician's feather in the hat inasmuch as the Friends of Grays Harbor did the legwork and did indeed hand it to her on a silver platter (as you pointed out dlaw), I also recognize that she could just as easily say to us that she did what she could and be done with it.  She advanced the project and we are hopeful she will continue to advance the project until we do, in fact, have the Doppler.  

  In another instance, I know that Senator Cantwell moved another unpopular project forward - that of the screening testing for depleted uranium exposure for troops exposed in the wars in the Middle East.  Yes, that is an after the fact, in that the troops should not have been exposed in the first place, there should not have been a war initiated into Iraq in the first place, and Senator Cantwell should not have provided her support for the invasion and occupation.  

  Let me say this clearly though.  My son-in-law, the one who is in Iraq now in his second 'stop-loss', extended 15 month deployment would say thank you to Senator Cantwell for her efforts to get us a Doppler Radar.  He would not want us at home to be without resources that might save our lives.  He would want me to thank the Senator, while at the same time admonishing her for her support of the Iraq invasion.

  I really do appreciate the comments that are happening at this discussion, as they bring weight and context to both issues - Senator Cantwell's influence to help obtain the full package of building an actual Doppler Radar in Washington state, and Senator Cantwell's influence in voting to support this President's ordering the pre-emptive invasion into Iraq.    

On the Surge in Iraq "--we have set the bar so low it's buried in the sand at this point." - Barack Obama

There seems to be this "oh but she delivers on..." attitude that is simply at odds with the facts.

Cantwell HAS NOT delivered on this radar and if McCain wins she WILL NOT be able to deliver.

The money won't be there. It just won't happen. That's why she only got this B.S. promise of $2 million from the committee. They're hedging their bets.

You may read this as a symbolic success. Fine. Looking at the numbers, I read it as the committee trying to buy off Washington with a symbolic gesture they don't have to deliver on. I think the numbers are on my side.

That doesn't mean that the Grays Harbor group didn't accomplish anything. To the contrary, they challenged the bureaucracy successfully and got the issue on the agenda. But what it does mean is that Democratic legislators have to take a comprehensive, strategic approach rather than being bought off by half-promises.