Washington State Faces Controversial Initiatives on November Ballot

Defend Washington

No on 2117

No on 2109

No on 2124

No on 2066

Progressive Voters Guide

[00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review show and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes.

Today, I am thrilled to be joined by the Executive Director of Fuse Washington and a leader in the Defend Washington campaign, Aaron Ostrom. Welcome to the program.

[00:01:04] Aaron Ostrom: Thank you very much. It's really a pleasure and a privilege to be here.

[00:01:08] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well, I'm excited today to talk about major, major issues for residents in the state of Washington. There are four statewide initiatives on our ballot that people will be voting on in the November election. Ballots are going to be mailed and people are trying to figure out what's going on. But these initiatives are so impactful, and that's what we're going to talk about today. Just starting out - how did we get here? What are the general gist of the initiatives? And how did they even arrive on the ballot?

[00:01:42] Aaron Ostrom: Well, stepping back - how we got to this place - since the Republican Party in Washington essentially became a right wing freak show, they can't really win elections. They're getting killed in the Legislature and legislative races. They can't win statewide offices. And so they're trying to legislate through initiatives is what's really is going on here. Because if you have enough money and you're really aggressive about deceiving voters, sometimes you can pull a fast one with an initiative. And all of these initiatives are bankrolled by one guy, Brian Heywood - a ultra-wealthy hedge fund manager from California - who spent more than $6 million to qualify these for the ballot. He teamed up with Jim Walsh, our far right MAGA State Party Chair, who sponsored all the initiatives.

[00:02:27] Crystal Fincher: Well, and I think this is surprising to a lot of people, particularly a lot of younger people who haven't been paying attention to politics for a while, being able to vote for a while - that one guy can bankroll and create issues for everyone in the state. But we actually saw this several years back with Tim Eyman - for some of us who are older. How does this happen? Is this fair? What does it mean that a person can decide to put an issue on the ballot?

[00:03:01] Aaron Ostrom: Well, and let me say - with Brian Heywood, what you have is Tim Eyman with a hedge fund. The initiative process was designed to give people a chance to weigh in on issues. But it is, like any election, potentially subject to abuse when people have a ton of money and don't mind playing fast and loose with facts and rules. And so, I think we need stronger protections in the initiative process against bad actors - folks who are willing to abuse the process and mislead the public and who kind of make it their game plan to deceive voters. I don't think the protections are strong enough against that. But the initiative process is something we have in Washington. It is one of the gifts that's used occasionally to do good things as well, whether - we've had stronger gun protections and stronger election rules and some positive things that have happened through the initiative process over the years as well. And what we really need is protections that protect the integrity of the process.

[00:03:59] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Now, one guy did spearhead and bankroll the entire process, but he did get the signatures required. He got tens of thousands of signatures from residents all over the state on, initially, three issues and then came in late with a fourth one. So I guess just overall, what are these initiatives and what do they do?

[00:04:26] Aaron Ostrom: All right. Well, let me talk a little bit about the problems with these initiatives generally, and then we can dive in more specifically. The first problem with these initiatives is their impacts. They cut taxes for big corporations and the wealthy and shift the bill to middle-income and lower-income families. And they harm the things that we really care about - our kids and our future. These initiatives have devastating impacts on childcare, schools, health care, transportation, protections for our clean air and water. The second problem with these initiatives - they're all intentionally misleading - they're all designed to deceive and confuse voters. The third problem, as I mentioned, they're all paid for by one unscrupulous actor, a multimillionaire hedge fund manager who moved here from California. Brian Heywood spent $6 million to qualify them, and they're all sponsored by Washington's far-right MAGA Party Chair. I guess the final problem, at a high level - not surprisingly when you consider where they came from - is that Heywood and Walsh are running a highly deceptive and misleading campaign to support the initiatives. They know they'll lose if voters understand the actual impacts of the initiatives, so they're trying to confuse people. They actually fought a losing campaign all the way to the state Supreme Court to try and block the state from including legally required information about the financial impacts of the initiatives on the ballot. So we can talk about - I'd love to talk about the specific initiative, but the big picture - they're cutting taxes from big corporations and the wealthy, shifting that bill to the rest of us, and really devastating impacts on protections and programs that are important to everyone in Washington.

[00:06:08] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and I do think it is valuable to understand these initiatives as a whole. They were presented as a package, really, by the state Republican Party Chair and Brian Heywood. And as you said, they have major financial, social, environmental implications for residents in Washington - so these really are a group of initiatives targeted at a very specific agenda. I do want to get into the specifics of them. One of the first - really looking at repealing the Climate Commitment Act. Can you talk about what that means, what the Climate Commitment Act is doing, and what would happen if we essentially scrapped it?

[00:06:56] Aaron Ostrom: Sure, and this one is definitely important to me and to all of us. So Initiative 2117 defunds roads and public transit, increases air and water pollution, so it can give a big tax cut to the biggest polluters in Washington. It's going to strip billions of dollars from Washington's transportation system, efforts to fix roads and bridges. It threatens protections for clean air and water. It's going to increase toxic pollution and wildfires - that will result in more kids and adults with asthma and illness. And it does that by repealing a basic set of protections against pollutions and investments in a clean energy future that were set up by the Legislature. And really, once again, stepping back to the big picture, what they're trying to do is essentially repeal all the progress we've made in Washington in the last 6-8 years. They looked at the big things the Legislature did and are making a serious run at overturning these important policies that the Legislature passed to give Washington a better future.

[00:08:00] Crystal Fincher: I think that's an important point because every two years we elect our representatives to the state Legislature. Across the state, most of the state has decided that they prefer Democrats and Democratic policies. They did pass Democratic policies. They came back. They were reelected after passing those Democratic policies. People seem to be happy with that. And that's how we're used to handling policy within the democratic process. These are kind of an end run around all that in an attempt to - they couldn't do it legislatively, these were just too popular, they passed - but now they're trying to put them on the ballot to repeal them that way. Now, you talked about the progress that is being made, that has been made in terms of the climate. I think it's really important. This feels like this is really an argument about whether climate change is real - and there are very different opinions between the two parties there, and scientists and other people - and whether we have an obligation and a responsibility to mitigate the impacts of climate change, to protect our residents from breathing unhealthy air, having unhealthy water. Is this just another version of the argument of - Hey, it's not really real anyway. You can't prove that this is a result of pollution from industry, and we shouldn't really do anything about it.

[00:09:35] Aaron Ostrom: I think for them it is. They're still kind of in the stick-your-head-in-the-sand camp. But I would say the important thing here is - whatever you feel about climate change, the path to clean energy is good for you. It is a path of more jobs, of better health, of cleaner air and water. And it is a path of a better transportation system that offers more options. So what they're doing here is actually trying to take us backwards on all those things. And we don't have to have an argument about whether or not climate change is real. We just need to have an argument about - would people rather have more options in their transportation system? Do they want a transportation system that works? Do they want less air pollution and less water pollution or do they want more? And if they like a more efficient, healthier, cleaner future - vote No on Initiative 2117.

[00:10:35] Crystal Fincher: Something that I've seen attract a lot of people's attention and that certainly we have seen people express dissatisfaction with in previous votes is the gas tax. And the Let's Go Washington campaign in favor of Initiative 2117 says - Hey, we need to stop the hidden gas tax. This is why gas prices are so high, and this is hitting the people who can least afford it the hardest. How do you respond to that?

[00:11:03] Aaron Ostrom: Honestly, that's just one of many lies across their campaigns. Everyone knows that oil companies set the price of gas as high as they can get away with to maximize their profits. And there's nothing in that initiative that requires oil companies to lower gas prices. What it does is it takes away choices and alternatives by defunding the transportation system and reducing funds for roads and public transit and investments in clean energy and alternatives. So honestly, that's just a lie.

[00:11:36] Crystal Fincher: So what does it mean - if Initiative 2117 were to be successful, how would that impact people?

[00:11:45] Aaron Ostrom: I prefer not to think about that. But, you know, the numbers are pretty clear. Like, it takes over $5 billion out of our transportation system. And it basically reduces, it eliminates limits on the biggest polluters in the state - so it gives them a license to pollute at higher levels without any penalties. It also devastates a lot of investments in clean energy and transportation alternatives. So basically it's like - if you think efforts to reduce our energy costs, build energy independence, and improve the transportation system, if that sounds good to you, vote No. If you want to go back to more pollution and being stuck in traffic without choices and you like trends on wildfire and asthma and want those to continue getting worse, this is an initiative for you. If you believe in the principle of making polluters pay, vote No. If you think that's a bad idea, this is the initiative for you.

[00:12:45] Crystal Fincher: Now, I do want to talk about Initiative 2109, which would repeal the capital gains tax. What is the capital gains tax - what does it do, what does it fund, and why is it so important?

[00:13:01] Aaron Ostrom: This one is just so transparent - super wealthy hedge fund manager wants a big tax cut at our kids' expense. And so it's going to defund our kids' schools and childcare, it gives a tax cut to the wealthiest 4,000 families in Washington by repealing Washington's limited capital gains excise tax. And to pay that tax, you have to sell millions and millions of dollars of stocks and bonds in one year, and generate over $250,000 as an individual on the profits from those sales. Basically, you have to make over $250,000 in one year on stock market speculation and be one of the wealthiest 4,000 people in Washington to pay that tax. So it's a tax that no one except for the wealthiest 4,000 is going to pay, and it funds our kids' schools and their childcare to the tune of $2.2 billion over five years. So he wants a tax cut at our kids' expense - this has got to be like top-five worst ideas ever.

[00:14:03] Crystal Fincher: I mean, it is pretty alarming, especially looking at the perilous state of school funding as it is right now. Thinking of further defunding schools - that would absolutely destabilize and devastate many school districts, turn families' lives upside down, certainly. This is really impactful.

[00:14:26] Aaron Ostrom: Yeah, I mean, our schools are already on the edge. And anyone trying to have a job with young kids knows what kind of crisis we have in our childcare system, which has huge implications for the economy. And it has huge implications for people trying to land and hold on to jobs and raise kids at the same time.

[00:14:45] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. I think parents are feeling it so much - the average cost of childcare now exceeds that of in-state tuition in college, which is just mind-boggling and a tremendous expense. Employers are asking for help because this is impacting the people that they're able to hire, the way their own employees are able to perform. Families are asking for relief - this is preventing people from being able to work because they can't afford childcare for their kids to be able to work. This is a significant source of revenue for the state. And I think you said just 4,000 residents out of the millions of people in the state are the ones who qualify to pay for this. So this seems like it's really about extreme wealth that wasn't being taxed at all before, essentially.

[00:15:37] Aaron Ostrom: Absolutely. 99.8% of the people in Washington will never pay this tax. It's a tax paid by unusually, exceptionally, insanely wealthy people that funds childcare and schools. And it just doesn't make sense to give them a giant tax break at our kids' expense.

[00:15:59] Crystal Fincher: Now, what do you say to people who support this, people who are concerned about this being a tax on small business and a tax on innovators - that this will hurt the economy and hurt the state?

[00:16:16] Aaron Ostrom: The Legislature exempted small businesses, farms, all those kinds of things from the tax. They'll never pay it. It's designed just for people speculating huge amounts of money in the stock market - which generates good personal wealth for them, doesn't really generate benefits for the economy or for jobs or innovation. All those folks are exempted from the tax - if you're trying to start a small business, if you have a home that appreciated in well, farm - all those folks, exempted from the tax.

[00:16:48] Crystal Fincher: Well, that seems pretty simple.

[00:16:51] Aaron Ostrom: It's pretty simple. I am very optimistic that voters can see through this one. It's kind of a poster child for all four of the initiatives - that they're trying to pull a fast one on working class people and give wealthy powerful folks a big tax cut at the rest of our expense, while slashing funding for stuff we care about. But it's so transparent with Initiative 2109, what they're trying to do.

[00:17:14] Crystal Fincher: Now, Initiative 2124 is about repealing, taking away long-term care benefits from about three and a half million working families in Washington. Why is long-term care so important? What does this mean to people to have this option?

[00:17:35] Aaron Ostrom: You know, we're all going to get old eventually, and most of us have parents that are aging now. But actually, if you look more broadly at this - eliminating our long-term care program, it really hurts women, particularly. And increases cost and medical debt for all of us. This would repeal a program that is currently for 3.9 million working Washingtonians. And if you eliminate that program, it essentially forces people - mostly women - to leave their jobs to provide unpaid care for people who need it. And increases all of our out-of-pocket costs for those cares, and it throws us back into the exceptionally expensive private insurance market that only the wealthiest people in Washington can afford. So this is really not just about - are you old or will you need care? It's about a community where if we don't provide care for older people, then women and a bunch of other people have to provide that care. And that has tremendous costs for not only all the people who are directly impacted, but everyone who works with, lives with, and loves them as well.

[00:18:43] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. I've talked to my fair share of people who've been surprised or haven't had to think about this yet, but this isn't something that's covered by regular health insurance. This is just kind of a hole in coverage that odds are, and statistics show, people are likely to need in their lifetimes. Our parents are likely to need them. Yet, it's extremely expensive. These are the kinds of costs that bankrupt people, that force people to have to sell their assets to be able to afford. This is a major issue that for a lot of people, it's easy to think of it as some far off thing that we don't have to deal with. But this is having impacts in our community today, like you said, for predominantly women who are having to take on additional caregiver responsibilities, for the growing group of people who are taking care of both kids and elders. What effect does this have on a community to have this versus not having this?

[00:19:54] Aaron Ostrom: It's like more broadly - do we want to live in communities that look out for people and help people live a reasonable life and have a reasonable quality of life? Or is it just everyone fends for themselves, and if a lot of people end up bankrupt and in rough shape, that's just - it's a dog-eat-dog world. And this is one where you look at the package. And if you're a working mom who's trying to take care of young kids, and you're in that sandwich where you've got aging parents - they're shooting at you from both directions. They want to get rid of your childcare and when your kid gets a little older, their schooling. And they want to eliminate any assistance that your aging parents can get. A lot of it's just practical stuff like - okay, I have aging parents. People get older, lots of times they lose their ability to walk and they need a wheelchair. And if they could get an electric wheelchair and a ramp, does it increase their ability to stay in their home? Well, that's not only better for their quality of life, it's better for all of us - because it's much cheaper to help people stay in their homes than it is to try and figure out how to pay for nursing care. And when the system fails in that stuff, people go bankrupt. The cost of medical debt and bankruptcies in this country is a crazy number. It's an astronomical number. And they're kind of hit us from both ends - on both childcare and senior care - it's just kind of malicious.

[00:21:19] Crystal Fincher: It can feel malicious. It definitely can. I mean, families are struggling. Now, people in favor of that initiative say it's because families are struggling financially that this should be repealed, that this just provides an opt-out to the program and it helps families keep more money in their pocket and have more of a choice on what is the right solution for them when it comes to their long-term care needs. Is this a problem to have a payroll tax for this?

[00:21:52] Aaron Ostrom: This is once again, where they're just - all these initiatives and their claims about them are deceptive and misleading. They know very well that this will bankrupt the program and blow it up - that the only way an insurance program works is if everyone participates. Otherwise, the wealthiest people opt-out because they can afford private insurance and then system isn't solvent anymore. So what they're really doing is blowing up the system while pretending to create options. The only people who have the option of private care are the people who are wealthy enough to pay for it. It's extraordinarily expensive.

[00:22:30] Crystal Fincher: It is extraordinarily expensive. Now, I want to talk about Initiative 2066.

[00:22:38] Aaron Ostrom: Yeah, well, I was just going to say, like - if higher childcare costs and higher senior costs aren't enough to keep you happy, let's increase your utility bills. Which brings us to Initiative 2066.

[00:22:51] Crystal Fincher: Now, they say this is an initiative that will stop the gas ban. Is that what this initiative does?

[00:23:01] Aaron Ostrom: Another lie - there seems to be a pattern here. What Initiative 2066 does is repeals a planning law that's designed to help utilities plan the transition to cleaner energy. And it blocks local governments and the state from planning a transition away from more polluting fossil fuels to cleaner energy. And at the same time, essentially - if you do that, it attacks energy efficiency and leaves us with higher utility bills.

[00:23:32] Crystal Fincher: Now, they're saying it's actually this gas ban that will lead to higher utility bills because you're taking away an option for energy that lots of people count on and that can be an important element in a diverse energy mix moving forward - and that we need those and people count on it for jobs. How do you address that?

[00:23:55] Aaron Ostrom: I mean, that's just a lie. The bill that initiative repeals does not ban natural gas, does not change a utility company's requirements to serve customers who use natural gas. It's just trying to help plan for a future with more better, more efficient, less costly energy choices. And help us make a transition away from more pollution-intensive, more expensive fuels to more affordable, cleaner fuels.

[00:24:25] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think your point is so important. And it's worth repeating - there is no gas ban. There's just no gas ban. They're messaging it as one. And there's a lot of people who've heard that messaging who are concerned that - Oh my gosh, something that I've used in the past that I might want to continue using is all of a sudden banned. It's going to cost me a lot of money to replace appliances and to do all that. They're forcing me to spend money on new and different things. That's just fantasy, essentially.

[00:25:00] Aaron Ostrom: Like the rest of these initiatives, it's hypocritical and misleading. Because the only ban anywhere around this initiative is actually in Initiative 2066 itself, where it bans local governments and utilities from providing incentives to move away from natural gas and towards cleaner energy. It removes their authority to provide the kinds of energy that works best for their constituents and customers. So they're the ones who are actually banning choices here.

[00:25:29] Crystal Fincher: Now, interestingly, you would think if there actually was a ban - which there's not. And if this would hurt energy companies, that energy companies would be rallying behind this and saying - Oh my gosh, we don't want a gas ban. That's not what's happening at all, is it?

[00:25:48] Aaron Ostrom: No, it depends on the particular company a little bit. But if you're a utility in the business of serving a wide range of customers - like Puget Sound Energy, for example - you need all the options you can get to essentially serve those customers in a complicated future where fossil fuels are - there's less and less of them, they cost more and more, and the impacts of their pollution is becoming increasingly unsustainable and unaffordable. So they're interested in trying to explore and support alternatives, and Initiative 2066 basically tries to repeal and take us backwards on the ability to provide those kinds of choices. And once again, stepping back to the bigger picture - this one is part of a nationwide scheme by well-funded interest groups who want to stop the transition to clean energy, make as much money as possible themselves, and pass the bill to the rest of us with higher utility costs.

[00:26:48] Crystal Fincher: That seems suboptimal. So we've talked about these four initiatives overall, and you referenced a court case before that you and allies fought, you won, where they were essentially saying - We don't want to tell people anything about the financial impacts of this on the state. Why were they saying that? And why is it important to have the full picture?

[00:27:18] Aaron Ostrom: So, because initiatives are complicated and what people see on the ballot is a 25-word summary of the initiative - of pages and pages of law with huge financial consequences - it's really important that voters actually have information about what an initiative does so they can make an informed choice. And law currently requires that on the ballot, when you read a summary of the initiative and vote on it, that you get a very short summary of its financial impacts - if it has big impacts on the state budget. And the problem for the sponsors of these initiatives is that when people see those impacts, they don't like them - they don't want to cut billions of dollars from schools and childcare and from our transportation system or from our long-term care program. And so, they need people to not understand these initiatives to have a good chance at passing them. And the polling is kind of clear - their support drops a lot when people understand the financial impacts. So their goal was to basically overturn that rule, hide that information from voters - that's how they win - is confuse, deceive, and conceal. And they fought that one to the Supreme Court on a case that really didn't have much merit and lost every step of the way. So it's not a ton of information, but it is a small amount of important additional information that voters have about these initiatives when they look at their ballot and decide how to vote.

[00:28:54] Crystal Fincher: Now you talk about that polling - that polling definitely did show that support drops when people hear what these bills actually are and the financial impact of them. What else did that polling reveal?

[00:29:08] Aaron Ostrom: I think we have a good shot of defeating these initiatives - that when people understand the impacts, there's a good chance that the support drops below 50%. And again, I would say the research is also pretty clear that the package of initiatives is unpopular. That a package of initiatives that cuts taxes for big corporations and the wealthiest people in Washington and shifts the bill onto working class families and that devastates protections for our future - is not attractive to people. So if we can get the word out that that's what these initiatives do, I think we have a really good chance of sending Heywood and Walsh packing on these.

[00:29:52] Crystal Fincher: That certainly seems useful. So what is the work ahead from your campaign to defeat these initiatives? How are you going to achieve that?

[00:30:02] Aaron Ostrom: That's actually relatively straightforward - is get as much information as possible to the folks who are voting on this initiative. And folks who, when they understand what the effects of the initiatives are, are inclined to vote No. So it's every possible channel - TV, digital, social media, at the door, on the phones, going to community meetings - and just talking to people about what these initiatives do and who's behind them. As long as we can reach people with that information and reach enough people with that information, we're in a good position to pull these off and to defeat all four of them. So anything people want to do to help us get the word out is really the key to protecting the state's future on these.

[00:30:49] Crystal Fincher: How can people learn more information about the campaign or find out how to get involved?

[00:30:56] Aaron Ostrom: The easiest way, kind of one-stop shopping on all the initiatives is Defend-Washington.com - that's the website for the Defend Washington campaign - Defend-Washington.com. And this is the - Defend Washington is the campaign against all four of the initiatives. Vote No on all four of these. Just vote No on all the statewide initiatives on your ballot. There's also, you know, if any one of those initiatives really calls out to you, each one of those initiatives has its own No campaign that's doing really focused work on that initiative. And you can go to No on 2117, or No on 2109, or No on 2124 and find out more information and opportunities about each one of those initiatives. But all the campaigns are working together and that's kind of where Defend Washington and Fuse come in - the easiest way to beat any one of these initiatives is just to beat all four of them. And just make sure that people know to vote No on all the statewide initiatives on their ballot. And so that's really what Defend Washington is doing, and all the campaigns are working together on that. And if you go to that website, you can volunteer to knock on doors and phone bank, you can join the speakers' bureau, you can help us distribute our information, or join our social media rapid response team. And you can also make a contribution because it costs money to get the word out.

[00:32:18] Crystal Fincher: Definitely does cost a lot of money to get the word out to people all across the state - quite costly, unfortunately. Now, a lot of people who do listen to Hacks & Wonks are people who try to be plugged in, try to pay attention, and who other people are calling or messaging to say - Okay, see these initiatives, what's going on? They're the people who other people ask how they should vote. So if you're advising people who are being asked by other people, and they get asked - What about these initiatives? What do you think they should tell the people who are asking?

[00:32:58] Aaron Ostrom: Two things. One, I think the story on the four initiatives is pretty simple. All your statewide initiatives are funded by a millionaire hedge fund manager from California, Brian Heywood, who wants to give himself and his super friends rich a massive tax cut at the expense of hardworking families in Washington. And don't let some rich hedge fund guy from California control our state's future - vote No on all four of the initiatives. If they want a little more information about the initiatives - or frankly, every other race on the ballot - we've got state Supreme Court races, we've got sheriff races. And yeah, in addition to the four initiatives, we've got a governor, we've got Congress, we've got the whole Legislature. They can also just refer their friends to ProgressiveVotersGuide.com. We provide a voter's guide that covers every race on your ballot. And a lot of these races don't even have a partisan cue - the state Supreme Court - you've got a choice between a highly-qualified , progressive Democrat, pro-choice and a very conservative, anti-abortion Republican. But there's no cue on your ballot to tell you that. So, whether it's initiatives, or Supreme Court races, or sheriffs, or State Legislature, send people to ProgressiveVotersGuide.com and we'll give you a full review on every race that's on your ballot.

[00:34:11] Crystal Fincher: I am so happy you brought that up because so many people rely on that. . It's such an incredible resource. I think it's the most popular voter guide in the state, and is just full of useful information for people who are trying to figure out what's going on with it all. We'll put a link to that in the show notes also. Really appreciate you taking the time to speak with us today, help us understand these initiatives and what they really mean to families across the state. Thank you so much, Aaron.

[00:34:45] Aaron Ostrom: Thank you so much for giving me the time to talk about these initiatives - totally awesome to have an extended conversation with you about them.

[00:34:53] Crystal Fincher: My pleasure.

Thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks, which is produced by Shannon Cheng. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on every podcast service and app - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes.

Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.