I moved away from Seattle last month to join the U.S. Foreign Service but my hometown is still home. For everyone who has asked how I'm voting, here are a few thoughts.
From my temporary perch in Washington, D.C. — on my way to a tour in Mexico City — the potential of Seattle is more clear than ever. It's also obvious that Seattle desperately needs a break from its status-quo politics. The ongoing generational shift is bringing new ideas for business and culture to the growing city, yet political power has barely shifted. Life in Seattle may be too good to encourage radical change so here are three easy votes that could help improve the direction of the city:
McGinn for Mayor. Mayor Mike McGinn is generally right on policy: creating more livable neighborhoods, improving transit, promoting high-speed internet and taking care of the homeless. I'm impressed with his authentic outreach to communities throughout the city and attention to neighborhoods where residents don't write checks to campaigns or have the luxury of attending many town meetings. He has strong principles and stands for his convictions, plus he has steadily improved as a manager. His accomplishments so far have required overcoming active opposition since day one from the Seattle Times, the downtown business community and the city council, where several members actively sought to block him because they wanted his job. This is also a vote against state Sen. Ed Murray, who has run a vacuous campaign filled with half-truths and who has patched together a coalition by not actually standing for anything.
Sawant for Council. Seattle's change-resistant council desperately needs another progressive voice. I don't know Kshama Sawant personally, but the PhD in economics seems informed and articulate. Even if she won't have the votes to change much policy, she will shake up the council and encourage new thinking on social services. This is also a vote against the small-ball approach of 16-year incumbent Richard Conlin, who has an anti-transit, anti-urban record. I remember Conlin campaigning hard for the downtown tunnel as the "green alternative" despite it having zero provisions for transit, bicycles or existing congestion. Shame on environmental and transit groups who have cynically endorsed Conlin out of fear — or in the hope that a 5th term will suddenly embolden him.
Yes on districts, Amendment 19. A key reason unimaginative, conservative politicians win and stay in office is the prohibative cost of running a campaign across a city with more than 600,000 people. Seattle currently has a system where nine candidates run in a single at-large district. Instead, this measure would carve it into seven districts, where a candidate could win by connecting with voters (retaining two at-large positions would prevent Balkanization of the city). A district-based council would likely be more responsive, representing their local community instead of acting like nine mini-mayors.
These positions aren't popular with Seattle's most powerful interests — the same establishment was wrong about decisions like building more freeways and bulldozing the Pike Place Market, among others. It's time to challenge the conventional wisdom and vote for something better.