Tag Archives: Washington State

WSDOT blames economic rebound for worsening congestion

Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is the worst. They really want you to believe that they have no way to plan for traffic congestion and how to manage it. I have some questions for WSDOT:

Typical traffic backup in the Seattle area.

Typical traffic backup in the Seattle area.

MyNorthwest.com: The congestion drivers in the Pacific Northwest are experiencing on a daily basis can be attributed to a successful economy, according to the Washington State Department of Transportation.

Delays on state highways increased 4.6 percent between 2012 and 2014, according to WSDOT’s 2015 Corridor Capacity Report. The increase mirrors economic growth.

Though statewide traffic congestion is up, the average statewide congestion in 2014 was 8 percent below the 2007 pre-recession levels, according to the report.

“As the report shows, transit and HOV lanes play a big role in creating more capacity on state highways and help us manage growing congestion,” said Secretary of Transportation Lynn Peterson. “We’re collaborating with our partners in cities, counties and transit to get the most capacity out of the state’s multimodal transportation system and provide commuters viable travel options.”

Of the five monitored freeway corridors in central Puget Sound, I-5, I-405 and I-90 saw increases in congestion. Tolling and carpooling reduced congestion on SR 520 and SR 167 by 71 percent and 24 percent respectively.

Drivers can thank themselves for the worsening congestion. Between 2012 and 2014, passenger vehicle registrations increased 6.9 percent, according to WSDOT. Licensed drivers increased by 7.6 percent.

Statewide travel delay cost drivers and businesses an estimated $808 million in 2014 compared to $773 in 2012. The Puget Sound region contributes for 96.8 percent of the total delay.

And it’s not just congestion that is on the rise. “Incidents” increased by 8.1 percent, according to WSDOT. WSDOT crews responded to 48,691 incidents.

Though congestion is on an upward trend, the number of commuters driving alone isn’t. People driving alone decreased from [a whopping] 72.7 percent to 72.4 percent of drivers between 2013 and 2014. Those carpooling remained static at 10.1 percent.

government solve all problems

WSDOT just installed new HOV/toll lanes on 405 that are making traffic a nightmare. That’s why they spin and sell for HOV/toll concepts. I’m so glad I don’t live in that area any more!


Washington state liberals hardest hit: Another Chick-Fil-A, another crowd – this time in Lynnwood

People camped out for the opening of the Lynnwood Chick-Fil-A

People camped out for the opening of the Lynnwood Chick-Fil-A

KOMO: They’re chowing down on chicken in Lynnwood. A brand-new Chick-Fil-A restaurant opened Thursday morning near a busy stretch of 196th Street there.

Traffic has been moving smoothly on the street – but the eatery’s parking lot is a different story. It’s been congested all morning.

The die-hard fans of the chain have been camped out for 24 hours – working to win Chick-Fil-A meals for a year. The store opened its doors at 6 a.m. to the clammer of pots and pans and those lucky winners getting their one-year supply cards.

Outside – on 30th Place – city crews altered the normal traffic pattern to make sure Chick-Fil-A diners did not delay shoppers at the nearby Lowes outlet. But so far this extra step seems to have confused more drivers than helped them.

The Lynnwood store is the third Chick-Fil-A to open in the area over the past four weeks. Previous store openings in Bellevue and Tacoma also attracted large crowds.

Maybe there’s a lot of closeted conservatives in Lynnwood (and Bellevue and Tacoma)? Or just maybe a lot of liberals supporting the hate group known as Chick-Fil-A trying to get free meals for a year!

But sells very well!

See also:


Hahahahaha: Seattle tunnel builders ask state for an extra $12 million


MyNorthwest.com: The contractors building the Seattle tunnel have asked the state for an extra $12 million.

KIRO-TV reports that Seattle Tunnel Partners filed a request for the funds in November. The change-order letter, obtained by KIRO TV through a public records request, alleges that when the contractors started digging a rescue pit to reach the broken-down tunnel machine called Bertha, they found conditions that were different than the state led them to expect.

Those conditions led to extra work. The request is the first one related to the construction of the rescue pit. The Washington State Department of Transportation says the request is under review.

Last month, state officials told lawmakers they denied 77 percent of the $210 million in change orders the contractors have requested.

You know you're laughing.

See also:


HaHaHa: WA ST Gov. Inslee wants new tax to fund $12 billion transportation plan

Gov. Inslee to Obama: Yeah, I got the suckas too in Washington state...

Gov. Inslee to Obama: Yeah, I got the suckas in Washington state…

KOMO: Washington Gov. Jay Inslee on Tuesday announced his 12-year, $12 billion plan for rebuilding the state’s transportation infrastructure. He said a third of the cost will be covered by a new tax on carbon pollution.

The governor expects the state to collect $400 million a year from the state’s worst polluters. Other expected sources of income for transportation include nearly $4 billion in tolls and other fees, plus more than $3 billion in construction bonds.

Inslee released his transportation plan on Tuesday at a news conference overlooking the new floating bridge, which is under construction on Lake Washington. The transportation budget items for the next 12 years the governor plans to propose to the Legislature include the following:

• Completing the bridge on state Route 520 with $1.4 billion in state dollars.

• Spending another $1.3 billion on Interstate 405 between Bellevue and Renton.

• Another $2 million for work on state highways 509 and 167 and Interstate 90 over Snoqualmie Pass.

• About $278 million for Interstate 5 improvements near Joint Base Lewis-McChord.

• About $432 million for work on U.S. 395 from Francis to the Spokane River.

The governor says more than half the state dollars will go toward new construction and economic development. A quarter will be aimed at maintenance, operations and preservation, and 20 percent goes to clean transportation and public transportation.

Some of the comments from the article:


  • “Carbon pollution” In a world full of stupid memes, this has to be one of the most idiotic.
  • Same #@ &! different day from our governor. Bleh!
  • Inslee is lying anyway.  This new tax money will be pumped right into the teacher’s union. 
  • Washington’s transportation infrastructure is crumbling and inadequate, but the Wash DOT is also demonstrably incompetent. I say clean house before they get another dime.
  • More tax money out of our pockets?  For yet another transportation plan?  Haven’t we been down this road before?
  • No, no more money until they fix the mess under the waterfront and the mess of 520 and its faulty concrete and super high tolls. Done. I’m so so done. Fix those projects first, then we’ll talk about more money. But not before.

Washington state voters have not elected a republican governor since 1981. I am so glad I moved out of that liberal-infested state!



Washington State tax per mile: Plan in the works to tax you a ‘road usage charge’


MyNorthwest.com: The gas tax isn’t going as far as it used to as more people drive less and new cars are much more efficient. But are you ready to pay by the mile for how much you actually drive? Washington state is moving forward with plans to explore that idea.

By any name, miles traveled or road usage charges, the idea comes down to taxing you for every mile you drive.

The Washington State Transportation Commission will meet this week to take the next steps in potentially implementing this plan. Commissioner Jerry Litt said, eventually, it could take the place of the current gas tax.

“We have, as a commission, looked at it primarily as a replacement for the gas tax, but there are others who have said that, possibly, there’s both,” he said. “The potential for both.”

Regardless of whether this becomes the only funding source for roads or in addition to the gas tax, Litt said a better and more reliable funding source needs to be found.

“That decision really hasn’t been made yet,” Litt said. “What we do in our plan is, we emphasize that we need to look at sustainable funding sources and the road usage charge appears to be one of those.”

According to Litt, the idea is to make the price you pay about equal to what you pay now with the gas tax. “At this point and time, the study has been to look at a revenue neutral position, and if I remember right, it’s one to one-and-a-half cents a mile.”

Now comes the bigger question. How do you collect the tax or record the miles driven? Litt said the commission is looking at a few options. You could pay a flat, upfront fee for a certain amount of miles for the year. You could pay with an odometer reading every year when you get your tabs replaced.

The state might also put a transponder in your car, but this is where things get dicey. There are huge privacy concerns over this. People don’t want the state to know where they’re driving.

Oregon has come up with its answer to those privacy concerns. It is about to launch its voluntary vehicle miles driven tax next year. Drivers have the choice to enable the GPS in the plug or not. The benefit of doing that is that it will only charge drivers for miles driven inside of Oregon. If you don’t enable the GPS, drivers will pay for every mile, including those that are out of state.

Washington is still in the infancy stage, but paying for each mile driven is gaining momentum in Olympia.

Hey Washington voters:





Eat a lot of fish? Washington State is going to find a way to make you pay for that!

Inslee shakes hands with fellow environmental alarmist ManBearPig

Inslee shakes hands with fellow environmental alarmist ManBearPig

MyNorthwest.com (Dave Boze Show): Who doesn’t like fish and chips or the occasional salmon filet?

There’s just something wonderful about fish especially here in the Pacific Northwest. In fact, whenever friends come up to visit we always make sure they enjoy some seafood, because that is what you should have in this kind of locale.

However ask yourself: How much fish do you eat a month?

The reason that is relevant is the Department of Ecology sets water quality standards based on the assumptions of how much fish people consume per month. Right now, the state estimates the average person eats about a half a pound of fish a month. They say that that might be light. I’m not so sure.

We’re talking about the average person in Washington state. I probably have fish maybe four or five times a month, so it’s probably light for me. But I know people who have fish once a month tops, and they’re not having more than 4 ounces.

But what they want to do is change the estimate to around 12 pounds a month. That is Gov. Jay Inslee’s idea.

You might think, who cares, let them do it. But I was speaking to the Washington Policy Center this morning and they were telling me with Inslee’s idea of pushing the 12 pounds of fish a month, what that would require is new environmental standards for water quality. They said it would dramatically increase your sewage cost because sewage treatment facilities would have to find technologies that would vastly improve their ability to clean water.

There’s not even the technology to get it clean enough to actually fulfill the obligations that would be required under this 12-pound-a-month presumption. The estimate from the Washington Policy Center is that it could increase a sewer bill from about $35 a month to about $230 a month.

“As you can imagine, changing our fish consumption rate from a half-a-pound a month to 12 pounds a month, that is quite a dramatic increase by any measure,” says Erin Shannon with the Washington Policy Center. “So the corresponding clean water standards that that will trigger are simply – absurd is one word – but it’s going to have a dramatic impact on everyone in the state.”

Apparently, Oregon has adopted this standard, but they haven’t been able to implement it yet because the technology doesn’t exist. Now that treatment facilities need to get new permitting, they’re not allowing the new permitting until they come up with the new treatments, but they can’t come up with the new treatments because they don’t exist yet.

So Washington wants to follow this because basically Inslee thinks of himself as a hybrid of Al Gore and President Obama. You look at his book, “Apollo’s Fire,” he’s kind of following the Al Gore environmental alarmism. Then he’s trying to follow the executive style of President Obama, governed by regulation, if you can’t get it through the legislative branch because it’s divided government there, push through whatever you can and see what sticks.

So Inslee is pushing here for this 12-pound-a-month fish consumption rate. I’m trying to think if it’s even possible to eat 12 pounds of fish a month. People don’t eat three pounds of fish a week. People would get tired of it.

Boeing even entered the discussion. They’ve warned that this could have unintended consequences for continued Boeing production in the state because of the potential for millions of dollars of extra payout. Boeing spokeswoman Megan Hilfer told The Seattle Times: “We support a water quality standard that protects human health and the environment, while at the same time, allows for the growth of our business and the state’s economy.”

The Seattle Times reports Gov. Inslee and the Department of Ecology are expected to announce the new proposed standard Wednesday.

There’s going to be a public comment period, and this would be finalized only with approval of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. But let’s face it, they’ve been seeking to approve any new regulation they can for awhile.

So at this point, I look at this and I think this is yet another way of government trying to find a way, in the name of protecting us, of making everything more expensive. At some point I think we need to say no to these kinds of thing.

The politicians have something in common with this swine...

The politicians have something in common with this swine…



Washington State Senators Support Requiring Insurers to Cover Abortion

As Dave reported on March 24th, a bill passed the Washington State House by a vote of 53-43, in favor of the mandatory coverage of abortion under Obamacare. On Monday, it was revealed that many senators support this measure. Here’s an update:


25 state senators express support for abortion insurance bill

KOMO News: A majority of Washington state Senators have signed a letter supporting a measure requiring insurers to cover abortion, but the bill’s fate remains uncertain.

The letter — dated March 5 but made public Monday — was signed by 25 of 49 state Senators and presented at a packed Senate Health Care Committee hearing where the bill was debated. After the hearing, frustrated supporters, who had long demanded a hearing on the measure, said they expected it would not pass out of the Republican-controlled panel.

“It was just for show,” said Sen. Karen Keiser of Kent, one of three Democrats on the seven-member panel. “It was simply a way to provoke a circus in the sense of having a lot of people show up and wave their ideological persuasions in front of us.”

The hearing attracted more than 250 people from both sides of the abortion issue, with many of those wearing rival buttons and ribbons and dressed in dueling color schemes left to watch the proceedings on a screen in a nearby room.

Committee Chairwoman Randi Becker, R-Eatonville, declined to answer questions on the bill’s status immediately following the hearing and did not respond to subsequent phone calls seeking comment. If it does not advance from her panel by Wednesday, special measures would be required for it to get to the floor for a vote.

The bill, which supporters call the Reproductive Parity Act, was passed by the House by a 53-43 vote in February, with mostly Democrats in favor and Republicans opposed. Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat and a bill supporter, has urged the Senate to vote on it.

The bill would make Washington the first state to require insurers that cover maternity care — which they all most do — to also pay for abortions. Similar legislation has been introduced each session in the New York State Assembly for over a decade but has never received a public hearing.

In testimony before Becker’s committee, those supporting the measure said it would ensure continued abortion coverage in the state once federal health care reforms taking effect next year trigger bureaucratic hurdles for insurers paying for the procedure.

The bill would ensure that a woman’s decision about whether to get an abortion “is left with her, her family, her health-care provider and her God,” said Elaine Rose, CEO of Planned Parenthood Votes Northwest, addressing the committee. “Not with government, not with her insurance plan, and with all due respect, not with any of you.”

Opponents countered that abortion insurance coverage is already widespread in the state and that the bill is unnecessary. They also said the measure threatens the religious freedoms of businesses and individuals who oppose abortion rights and do not want to subsidize the cost of the procedure for others.

“You all have the second amendment right to bear arms, to own a gun,” said Peggy O’Ban, spokeswoman for Human Life of Washington. “But does that mean I have to buy it for you?”

Shortly after the hearing, Sen. Mike Padden, R-Spokane Valley, told bill opponents gathered in the hearing room that momentum was on their side, but encouraged them to keep applying pressure on lawmakers to prevent it from receiving a vote in the full Senate.

The only one with no voice

The only one with no voice

The decision about whether to get an abortion “is left with her, her family, her health-care provider and her God”? If you want to keep it so private, why not pay for it yourself?

That statement also doesn’t sit very well with me, considering a Planned Parenthood representative used the same argument when it came to infanticide. I’m sick of my taxes paying for the murder of innocent children.