This blog is about the Interstate 5 Bridge Columbia River crossing between Portland, OR and Vancouver, WA.
    I'm tired of the impotent planning by the locals on this subject. For years, interstate commerce has been strangled by the traffic jam on the I-5 Interstate Bridge. Its inadequate 3 lanes in each direction are made even more inadequate by I-5 dropping from 3 lanes to 2 lanes just south of the bridge in "Delta Park" in Oregon. On the northbound approach, Portland took one of the three I-5 lanes and created the only commuter in Portland metro and maybe the only commuter lane in all of Oregon. This lane starts just north of downtown Portland and continues to just before the I-5 bridge. 
    I want to discuss the issue of the southbound slowdown at Delta Park and the northbound commuter lane, but let me first say that I understand almost 60,000 people who live in SW Washington's Clark County commute to Portland and the surrounding area daily for work. All or virtually all tithe Oregon 9% of their pay so that Clark County, WA is reportedly the 2nd largest contributor to Oregon's oppressive income tax. Still, many Oregonians complain that Washingtonians take their jobs. Washingtonians, although happy to have work, must deal with ugly commute times made worse by the fact the they have taxation without representation because even though they are the 2nd largest source of tax revenue, they don't vote in Oregon. Clark County taxpayers pay into the Oregon general fund, little of which is used for the roads that take them to and from work. Aside from the I-205 bridge east of the Portland Airport built in the 1970's, few if any highway improvements have been made in decades - maybe 50 years. Why? Good question.
        From what I understand, Portland & Oregon have finally decided to widen I-5 southbound at Delta Park to 3 lanes later this decade or early next decade. This battle has been fought literally for decades because Portland is an extremely left wing liberal city that has openly opposed automobiles and is not business friendly. What's worse is that the Clark County tax money is simply squandered when it hits the Oregon general fund. Oregon's political climate is very disappointing and a reason why the state has so many problems and has a hard time attracting vital business such as manufacturing. Oregon's hi-tech industry has languished for years and there is little promise of any sun on the horizon for Oregon's economic issues. Portland is even worse and really too bad considering what a pretty city it is, aside from the constant barrage of panhandling homeless on many street corners. Delta Park is not the only part of I-5 in Portland that only has 2 lanes, but this has the most congestion. I-5, for those of you who might not be from here, is the only north-south interstate on the West Coast and connects Mexico, America and Canada. Three lanes is hardly adequate for this interstate, let alone 2 through one of the largest cities on the West Coast. Portland will never push I-5 to more than three lanes, but adding the needed 3rd lane at Delta Park is beyond mandatory.
    I consider the northbound commuter lane on I-5 through Portland simply a stick in the eye of Washingtonians. Portlanders obviously dislike the fact that Clark County residents work in their state and taking 1/3 of the northbound lanes only during the peak traffic hours of 3-6pm Monday - Friday is their way of discouraging this from happening. There is no southbound commuter lane currently and I've never run across another in Oregon. Several times each week there is an accident or a stall reducing traffic to one lane plus a commuter lane.
    Over a year ago, after much pressure, a task force was created to address the Columbia River crossing. The vast majority, or maybe I should say almost all, of citizens believe another bridge is necessary. I have seen excellent suggestions on connecting I-5 in Washington State to other arterials in Oregon State. A 3rd crossing is a no-brainer and the only way to successfully move the metro area into this century and beyond. For some reason that escapes most everybody, a 3rd bridge option was tossed out and the Columbia River crossing task force decided to limit their charter to solely the I-5 bridge crossing. Sadly, because of this short-sighted approach, their recommendation was to replace the current 3 lane each direction I-5 bridge with another 3 lane each direction bridge with provisions for light rail and bicycles plus possible provisions for a toll plaza to pay for the replacment. A disappointing failure of brain power to be sure. 
    But why such a mind numbing failure to think? Was it the promise of light rail that blinded their senses? Estimates are that no more than 3% of commuters could possibly use the system which would connect to North Portland's light rail. The simple fact is that the Oregon's Governor and Portland's Mayor care very little about this river crossing and are not behind any improvements. Neither of the two are business or economics oriented; many of their constituents have never traveled north over the Columbia River into Washington; and they are concerned mostly with progressive liberal social issues and finding ways to get more revenue to fund their programs. On the Washington side, the Governor is far removed from what goes on and instead looks north from Olympia to Seattle and KIng County who elected her on the 3rd recount of votes. The Vancouver Mayor has his vision for his city and another highway cannot play well in his mind's eye. He is a firm believer in light rail as the end all of solutions. He is wrong about this and should expand his vision.
    When all is said and done, I think that the task force had no other options but decided they needed to generate a result instead of just saying they couldn't make it work because of the politcal situation. The naked truth here is that the Portland/Vancouver metro area needs a 3 pronged approach - more highway capacity, commuter rail and commuter buses. Currently, Southwest Washington and Portland metro has inadequate highway capacity, marginal commuter rail only in parts of Portland and some surrounding communities and bus service that is not focused on commuters, but on low-income ridership. Go to New York City, go to D.C., to Boston or to Chicago and you'll see this approach at work and you'll still see problems. None of these cities could work without all three and they put these in place many years ago when they were much smaller than they are now. 
    Our metro area cannot successfully move into this century in a economically sound and business friendly manner without a common sense plan that address realities. To get this done, we need our elected federal Congressmen and state Congressmen plus local public officials to get behind a plan that will work today and into the future. No more non-sense, no more poor decisions by local task forces just happy to put a task force on their resume, and mostly no more short-sightedness. Let's embrace the future smartly. Add a 3rd or 4th bridge or tunnels, build commuter rail and build a commuter bus system for people who commute, not the poor to go to the mall. Smartly invest in the future.

 Hey Washington State!
    Vote for Mike McGavick. He is taking a common-sense stand on important issues. Everybody except the most liberal of Washingtonians will agree with Mike. 
    Who can explain why Senator Cantwell thinks that illegal immigrants should be allowed social security benefits? These people are breaking the law to be here taking our jobs because they work for peanuts. This non-sense that they are doing the jobs that Americans won't do is bull. They are doing the jobs that farmers and others can get away paying them a few dollars an hour because they aren't supposed to be here in the 1st place.
     The death tax, as it's called, is a socialist way of making sure that wealth such as a successfull family business, a farm or even wealth built thru investments such as a home, rental houses or even a 401K or other investment wealth cannot be passed to descendents without paying a hefty tax. Paying this tax often causes the descendents to have to liquidate to meet the tax obligation. What's vitally important to remember is that this is all wealth that taxes have already been paid on and is brutally taxed again on a person's death. Is this the American way to be successful in life and then have the government take a huge chunk of what you want to leave your children on your death so they have to sell everything to pay the tax? This take is simply wrong. And opponents to eliminating this tax have no argument except to say "How would we replace the money?"
     Drug testing for welfare recipients who care for children is a fresh idea and one that makes sense. If citizens are paying someone who is on welfare, doesn't it make sense that 1) They aren't using the money that comes from our pockets via taxes to buy drugs and 2) They aren't using drugs in front of their children? The truth is that there is a vicious circle of welfare recipients who are on the program generation after generation and don't break out. Drug use is a prime reason why individuals cannot make it or don't even try to make it. Stop the chain, stop the cycle. Why would Senator Cantwell not think that is a good idea?
     Lower taxes are a good idea. Letting people who work hard keep more of their own money allows them to invest and save so that they can retire comfortably and not work until they die. How many people do you know who must keep working into their 60's and 70's because they don't have enough money to retire? Plenty I'd bet. With higher taxes, Americans must rely on Social Security and other government programs that Democrats spotlight. Democrats are all about social programs because they know this will keep them in power and it's all about power. Keeping taxes high and raising taxes which Democrats promise to do (and how Maria Cantwell votes) keeps money out of our pockets so we can't save or invest and must depend on social programs, and of course, the politicians who push these programs are the Democrats. If people had lower taxes they can save more, invest more, buy a better house in a better neighborhood, buy a better car, better clothes, maybe even send their kids to better schools. Even more importantly, lower taxes enable businesses to grow or to start up and this means more jobs and a stronger economy. So why would Senator Cantwell not want to make the tax cuts permanent? I don't know, do you? If she really cared about her constituents, she'd be pushing to lower taxes even more but that won't ever happen!
     Keeping illegal aliens out of America is simply common sense. If putting up a fence on 700 miles of the Mexican-American border will help, why not do it? Unless of course, you want illegal immigrants entering the US and taking our jobs. If people want to come to America then they need to do it like all of our ancestors did. Like my grandfather did. Legally. He learned English. He worked hard. He retired on his pension and the money he saved and social security. Why shouldn't we keep out people who want to enter illegally? And what's wrong with recognizing English as the national language. If you visit Germany don't you expect Germans to speak German? If you visit Italy don't you expect them to speak Italian? There is a German culture, there is an Italian culture. In America we speak English and we have an American culture, but we also have an illegal immigration problem and these people don't speak English, they don't learn English and they don't assimilate with the American culture like my Grandparents did. What's wrong with promoting English as the national language and keeping American culture going strong? What's wrong with Senator Cantwell? Doesn't she think that immigrants who came here legally from all over the world want to become Americans? They do. It is unfair to them and all of us in America to not fight to keep our national identity that radical liberal groups are trying to take away because they don't like America. I'm a citizen of America. Of the United Staes of America. I don't want to be a "world citizen". I like being an American. I like living in America. I'm not alone in how I feel and I'm certainly not in the minority on this issue. Neither is Mike McGavick. 
     Washington needs to send a better person to Capital Hill then Maria Cantwell and Mike is this person. He is intelligent, he is reasonable and is ideas are not radical. His ideas and positions on important topics are common sense to anybody who really thinks about it. Support him and send a normal Washingtonian to Washington, D.C.. Let's put us back on the map again.

Senator Cantwell:

Mike:

Allow illegal immigrants to earn Social Security benefits?

Senator Cantwell: YES Mike: NO

Repeal the death tax?

Senator Cantwell: NO Mike: YES

Drug testing for welfare recipients who care for children?

Senator Cantwell: NO Mike: YES

Make the tax cuts permanent?

Senator Cantwell: NO Mike: YES

Increase taxes on Social Security benefits?

Senator Cantwell: YES Mike: NO

Recognize English as the national language?

Senator Cantwell: NO Mike: YES

Increase fencing on the southern border?

Senator Cantwell: NO Mike: YES

Biggest spender in the 108th Congress?

Senator Cantwell: YES

For more details, click here...

 

3. Dear Editor,

Not too many of us walk around with halos on our heads, yet the liberal media thinks that’s exactly what our elected representatives ought to do. Unlike the media, I’m not so much interested in the sordid details of Mike McGavick’s DUI arrest as I am in what he’s done with his life since making a pretty dumb mistake.

By all accounts, Mike’s record has been nothing but a series of pretty impressive accomplishments. Not everyone has the guts or the temerity to make what appeared to be some pretty hard decisions that saved a major Northwest corporation. That’s what McGavick did. At the time, the media thought it was a wonderful thing that McGavick was saving Safeco’s bacon. But the minute McGavick declared his candidacy, the Seattle media turned on him like a pack of dogs.

This is my question to the media: How long does a guy have to pay for a dumb mistake made 13 years ago? I suggest the newspaper, television and radio reporters focus on issues rather than looking under rocks for sins that were atoned for long ago.

4. Dear Editor,

I realize that sensational stories sell newspapers, but I’m frankly just a little tired of the muckraking reports still dicussing Mike McGavick’s DUI. After all, the incident happened 13 years ago. Traditionally, society views it as a sign of good character when a man makes a mistake, takes appropriate steps to right the wrong, and then doesn’t repeat it. Apparently, the media is not ready to apply that standard to McGavick’s mistake made way back in 1993.

This is exactly with what is wrong with how the media covers politics. Instead of focusing on issues and where a candidate stands on issues, they are determined to dredge up dirt, even if the dirt is 13 years old.

There are few of us who could “cast the first stone.” I don’t expect my representatives to be lily white. In fact, I’m more suspect if a candidate tries to tell me they’ve never done anything wrong.

Kudos for McGavick for addressing the long ago mistake up front. Maybe now we can talk about the issues.

5. Dear Editor,

I know most reporters were salivating that there is some juicy gossip to report on Mike McGavick, but I find it refreshing that the Mr. McGavick candidly and openly reported his DUI arrest. I would have had less respect if he had waited for someone to unearth it.

I don’t condone what Mr. McGavick did, but I do respect a person for owning up to a mistake. In my experience, it is those people who have learned from their mistakes who are the most sincere and genuine, and indeed, who have the most compassion for other people’s mistakes.

I say Mr. McGavick should hold his head high. He made a mistake, admitted it when he didn’t have to, and has given service back to our community in many capacities since. It’s time for the media to find some real news to report, not a rehash of old, forgotten mistakes.

6. Dear Editor,

Mike McGavick has already admitted that his DUI arrest 13 years ago was the worst and most embarrassing incident of his life, but apparently every reporter in town felt the need to dig up every sordid detail to prove it was, indeed, McGavick’s worst and most embarrassing stunt.

Okay, so everyone’s had their say on this. If this is the worst he’s got—a 13-year-old mistake—not sure I would have wasted the ink on the story. Let’s get back to discussing how each candidate would vote on issues affecting Washington residents.

     Welcome to my first post. Why Naked Opinion? No, I'm not sitting here in the nude. This is about speaking clearly about my opinion without having to sugar coat it. No special 2006 politically correct talk, just my honest opinion and feelings.
     This November, those of us who live in Washington State have an opportunity to improve our elected representation by replacing Senator Cantwell, one of our two Democratic Senators. Many will simply vote for her because she is a Democrat, but she should not automatically have her $1 Million 6-year contract renewed. 
    Sen. Cantwell has aligned herself with Senators like Diane Feinstein and Hillary Clinton who don’t reflect the morals and values of moderate Washington voters, who make up the majority in our state. She’s voted against bills to decrease the tax burden on average, hard-working families and businesses – the backbone of our economy. She should have supported putting more of our wages back in our pockets, but she doesn’t understand that non-millionaires need every dollar to raise their families and save for the future. Sen. Cantwell believes that government should provide more services and more benefits, funding this on the backs of citizens and from the sweat of our brows.     
    We must not send Sen. Cantwell back to Capital Hill to keep voting to clean out our pockets looking for more money for pet projects in Alaska or Massachusetts or New York. More than this, after six years in the Senate, what has she done? What important legislation has she sponsored and what issues significant to Washingtonians has she fought for? Washington should be a powerful state in the US Senate with 2 of the largest seaports on the West Coast, the 2^nd largest wine industry in the US, leading companies like Microsoft and a strong economy, but it’s not. If hot and dusty Arizona can have a powerful Senator who makes things happen for his state, why can’t we? 
    We’re simply not getting our money’s worth and like any employee who’s not getting the job done, Sen. Cantwell needs to be let go. This fall, vote in Mike McGavick for the job. He understands the needs of Washingtonians, business and economics, and politics.