Week in Review: November 8, 2024 - with Robert Cruickshank

Washington 2024 General Election Results

“Slog AM: Welcome to the United States of Texas, Bob Ferguson Is Our Next Governor, Tanya Woo Is History” by Charles Mudede from The Stranger

Find stories that Crystal is reading here

Listen on your favorite podcast app to all our episodes here

[00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I am 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.

Today, we're continuing our Friday week-in-review shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: chair of Sierra Club Seattle, longtime communications professional and political strategist, Robert Cruikshank. Hey!

[00:00:50] Robert Cruickshank: Crystal, thanks for having me back on again.

[00:00:52] Crystal Fincher: Well, it's a week that made some news. We had an election and the top of the ticket turned out to go to Donald Trump in quite a wide-ranging and clear victory - growing his margins in almost every state. Interesting, Washington was not one of the states where he grew his margin - one of only two states. Just thinking about - we've had a couple of days to process this - and what are your thoughts about the presidential result?

[00:01:28] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think there are internal factors to cause the defeat on the campaign and external context in which they had to operate. I think you can look and see that the Harris campaign really failed to distinguish themselves from Joe Biden, who is historically unpopular. Harris seems to have failed to really speak to the economic concerns of a lot of voters, especially regular Democratic voters in blue cities and the swing states. You saw a shift - even outside the swing states, though - shifts in places like New York City toward Trump. So this is what we're digging into down-ballot - noticing that there is just real erosion among core Democratic constituencies. You have to ask questions of the Harris campaign strategy around rolling out Liz Cheney, and really focusing on trying to win Republican voters rather than address those concerns of the base. There may be some evidence that, in fact, touting the Cheney's endorsement and campaigning with Liz Cheney may have cost her some votes. You need to look at her failure to distinguish herself from Joe Biden on Gaza and Israel. Did that cost her the state of Michigan? It certainly cost her a lot of votes in Dearborn, a heavily Muslim and Arab American suburb of Detroit, where you saw a huge shift to Trump over 2020. Maybe Kamala Harris breaking from Biden on Israel doesn't win her the election, but it probably gets her close - couldn't have hurt - and it would have been the right thing to do. So you need to look at a lot of those sort of internal decisions that the campaign made and look and see where they could have improved and done better.

But we also have to look at the context in which this all happened. First and foremost, Kamala Harris - a Black woman, a South Asian woman - what was the role of racism and sexism in the American electorate that got in her way and blocked her from winning this election? You have to take that seriously and look really hard at what that means for our country. Joe Biden's historic unpopularity - maybe it's the case, and I have seen it argued in the last few days, that Harris actually achieved something remarkable - that it would never have been this close if Biden hadn't stepped aside. You look at - another stat I've seen cited - that a lot of governments in North America and Europe that were in power during the pandemic lost power. You see that almost everywhere. People point to the counterexample of Mexico, where the incumbent party elected Claudia Sheinbaum just earlier this year - So maybe there is something you can learn from there too.

But I think as the Democrats do a major post-mortem going forward, it has to be a thorough autopsy of a catastrophe. And I think the Democratic Party at the highest levels has to understand they cannot continue on as they have been before. There are major, major problems they need to look at. Above all, I think the economic distress that a lot of people are feeling - driven, I think, in large part by housing costs. People talk about the cost of living, but you can adjust how many eggs you buy. You can adjust how much gas you buy and when. You can't adjust your rent. You can't adjust your mortgage, especially when interest rates are high. And the fact that you see blue states that have made it so hard to build housing - pushing blue state voters into the arms of red states. Someone can leave the Bay Area for Austin, Texas and vote for a Democrat in Austin, Texas - but they're still adding to the population and electoral vote count of Texas, which gave 40 of its electoral votes to Trump. So these are all factors that Democrats have to look at and recognize that - yes, there are decisions Harris and her team should have made differently, but it's so much bigger than that.

[00:04:55] Crystal Fincher: It is so much bigger than that. As I look at it, I think - the scope of Trump's victory and looking at the margins in the various states - it does not appear that a change in strategy, a change in tactic, was going to change this result. It seems like that was out of bounds. This is one of those results that looks baked in from before the race. Whether that was the case before Biden started his campaign, who knows? Biden would not have won - that is not a thing - I'd seen some of that talk around. That's a pretty conclusive thing. Most people who actually work in politics, do this stuff - know that that wasn't going to happen. So it then turned into Kamala or bust, and it just looked like the votes just weren't there to be won.

And I do think there were tactical errors. And this has obviously been brewing for a long time. This is a reaction or a result of longtime problems with Democrats that also came into these campaigns. But the Democratic Party, or the coalition of people and organizations that have made up the Democratic Party, are no longer unified. It does not look like how it used to look. The coalition that is there now is not capable of winning. And I think that Democrats really do need to take a close look at who their base is, what the response to their messages has been by various people. I think you raise a very accurate point in that - for the majority of Democrats who are voting, who do remember the Bush administration, the getting into a misguided war in Iraq and all of the consequences that flowed from there - our involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq. And the role that Dick Cheney played in there, and Lynne Cheney coming - it's not just issues of policy disagreements - it's issues of our impact and reputation on the national stage, about our participation in war crimes, absolutely massive expenditures while we saw suffering here in the United States. And that's something that Democrats ran against - that people had a visceral, strong, moral objection to. Turning that around and trying to make the case that - okay, Donald Trump isn't the typical Republican. He's a threat to democracy. And really trying to make that case to Republicans and seeking constituencies that we saw majorities go for Republicans, go for Donald Trump before. Failed. Conclusively failed. They spent a lot of time, energy, and effort reaching out and seeking those votes - and they aren't there to be had. I think we have repeatedly learned the lessons that if Republicans have the choice between a Democrat that sounds like a Republican and a Republican, they're choosing the Republican. And Democrats really have to reconcile why they keep doing that - to the detriment and above the objections of the people who have made up their winning coalition. And I certainly hear a lot of people - a lot of them centrist pundits, former Republicans who are now in the party - who lament the Democratic Party for going too woke and they've been too progressive. When, looking at the campaign strategy, they were clearly appealing to Republicans and it failed. So if there's going to be anything that we're going to criticize, it should be the thing that they did. And if we're going to do any evaluation and revision, it should be to move away from the thing that failed.

And so the future of the Democratic Party, whatever that is - that there's going to be so much conversation and discourse around that, you can tell how excited I am about that. But I do think overall, just for people listening - and I think we do a good job of that here - probably listeners to Hacks & Wonks do a better job than most. But people can't tap in every four years and tune in for a presidential vote and tune out, especially with what we're likely to be dealing with moving forward. It's going to take getting engaged locally - understanding what your local government and levers of power are locally - and starting there to create change. To build a sanctuary and haven for the community that we value and the people that we value, who may be targeted as we move forward - and will certainly be targeted as we move forward. I just think, obviously, a suboptimal result. But here in Washington, oddly, there's such a difference between the night that was had nationally and the night that was had locally - because Washington Democrats had one of the best Election Nights that they've ever had. How did you see our state elections?

[00:10:34] Robert Cruickshank: It went incredibly well. If you look at sweeping every statewide elected office, pulling ahead in the race for Supreme Court - Sal Mungia leading now, who's the more progressive-friendly candidate for the state Supreme Court. Three of the four initiatives definitely going down to defeat - the right-wing initiatives that were put on the ballot to roll back progressive policy. The fourth one, Initiative 2066, which would undermine the transition away from natural gas, is too close to call. We could win that one too, once King County finishes its ballots. Democrats picking up maybe one or two seats in the state Senate, maybe two or three seats in the state House - we'll see as things come in. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez hanging on in southwest Washington - we should talk certainly about how she pulled that off. Emily Randall winning in the 6th district - northwest Washington, which is a very rural district, very working class district too - and she did a great job speaking to that. And I think you see this - you see that Democrats, aside from the president, did well. In North Carolina, Democrats swept all the statewide offices. Democrats held on to almost every Senate seat. They certainly lost John Tester's in Montana, they may have lost Bob Casey's in Pennsylvania, Sherrod Brown in Ohio - and that's it. Pelosi moving Biden out of the White House and out of the presidential race didn't save the White House, but it saved everything else potentially. I think Pelosi saw what was going on. Democrats still have a path to winning the U.S. House.

So I think down-ticket, things generally went better for Democrats. But we can celebrate that here in Washington and should. At the same time, the challenge facing those successful Democrats here in Washington state is enormous. They are going to have one of the most important legislative sessions they've ever had coming up in 2025. Trump is going to blow a massive hole in the state budget. Even if they only do half of what is in Project 2025, we know that there are going to be massive federal cuts to education, to transportation. People may not remember, but Trump tried to remove a billion dollars from the federal contribution to the Lynnwood Light Rail link. Patty Murray was able to get that restored, but that was at a time in Trump's first administration when there were more guardrails in place. Those guardrails are gone. The Republican guardrails are gone. He's not going to have the guardrails in his administration anymore. He is more radicalized and he knows better how to use his power. So do the people around him. And they're going to be much more ruthless. So the Democratic legislature, the new governor Bob Ferguson have a huge task before them - where I think they're going to have to fundamentally rethink how we fund public services in this state. And they don't want to do that. Democrats would love to believe that this is just another typical Republican administration, that this is going to be like Trump's first term - where his bark is worse than his bite - and that they can just sort of muddle through and hope that Democrats take Congress back in '26 and Trump will not be on the presidential ballot in 2028 unless something else changes. But that's not how this is going to play out for Democrats in Washington state. They won big victories - absolutely. But now the really tough part comes - in using those victories to truly Trump-proof this state and its residents from what is going to be coming from the federal government and is going to be awful.

[00:13:56] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's going to be awful. And I don't even know that it's possible to Trump-proof the state. It really is going to be about mitigating the damage and trying to manage the likely gaping holes that appear in various budgets - the infrastructure projects, long-term capital investments and projects that lose their portion of federal funding. We are in an education funding crisis here in the state already, and this incoming administration has been very vocal about their plans to dramatically reduce, if not defund, education on a federal level. As well as attempt to drive local education dollars into private schools using vouchers, which does defund public schools and drives up private school costs for everyone. And then we're going to see the dismantling of the regulatory state. We can see, especially just by our initiative results - and Washington residents standing up for the Climate Commitment Act, preventing that from being repealed - that we value clean air, clean water. We value taking our responsibilities seriously to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to reduce pollution, to ensure that we're maintaining a clean and healthy environment for people - because it does have so many various impacts on our health, our community - and that is going to be under threat. We're going to see those kinds of regulations disappear. So what does that mean in terms of our response?

[00:15:35] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, and something that comes to mind is this week, The Stranger - I think it was the day after the election - talked about we're all the United States of Texas. And Washingtonians do not want that. We don't want corruption and pollution, privatization - where extractive industries and right-wing extremists run everything - that is not what we are in this state. And I think that voters have given the Democratic majority in the Legislature and the new governor, Bob Ferguson, a clear mandate. And the tools - we kept the Climate Commitment Act in place - that is billions of dollars a year for clean energy, clean air, clean water projects. We kept the capital gains tax in place. And those were not close votes - it's 63% No right now on that initiative. The public has said they want to tax the rich to fund education. So they have the tools, they have the resources, they have the mandate. And I think the question now is - do we have a Legislature and do we have a governor that are willing to step up and do the bold, hard work before them to try to mitigate this as much as you can? And that's really going to be the test that they're put through pretty quickly. I think Trump has made it very clear that from Day One - he is going to unleash all of this on people. Starting with undocumented immigrants - that is target number one. And we're going to have to see what is this governor, what is this attorney general - Nick Brown - what is the State Legislature going to do to protect them? I believe them when they say they do want to protect against that, but the U.S. Supreme Court is more radical than it was in 2017 when Bob Ferguson, as attorney general, was winning his victories. That legal path may not be there for them this time. So they have a lot of work to do, starting immediately, to plan not just a normal transition, not just a normal legislative agenda, not just a normal budget - but how do you respond to the catastrophe that's happened at the federal level?

[00:17:26] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's certainly a tall task before them. And I do see a challenge with a lot of the responses that I've heard and seen - that talk like this is going to be in a Republican administration that reflects ones that we've seen in recent history, that this is just going to be Trump - the same as the first term, it'll be like that again. As you said, it's not. It's not that. Nothing that they've signaled is that. And their transition team is already at work - they've been preparing for this and are coming in ready to immediately implement the plans that they've been talking about.

[00:18:08] Robert Cruickshank: Well, and there's one thing in particular I want to raise. Christopher Rufo - we all know who that guy is - he's the right-wing extremist culture warrior who's been parachuted in Florida universities to push back against what he calls the woke agenda. He was in Seattle, with kids in Seattle Public Schools, when he started formulating all of this. During the pandemic, he moved to Gig Harbor and he's since left Gig Harbor. But this is a guy who is from our city, who had kids in our schools - and is going to put a target on our schools. They will defund, but they're also going to try to use other mandates to change how we teach our kids and what we teach our kids. And how we protect LGBTQ kids, in particular. We, in Washington state, are going to have to fight back against that. And we're also going to have to be confronted with the reality that the type of education we want for our kids, the type of society we want for everybody - we're gonna have to pay a lot more for it because the federal government won't. And we're going to have to put our money where our mouths are. I think the voters are ready to do it. Is the LegIslature?

[00:19:17] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, that's the big question. Well, we've talked about the initiatives - three of them going down to resounding defeat. One that relates to natural gas is still too close to call. Really interesting to see - that's been the closest of them - it was really challenging to message against, because it was so muddy what they were really trying to accomplish. But really preventing a transition away from natural gas into cleaner, more efficient, less costly fuel sources. This would prevent that, would mandate that natural gas be made available, remain available, and prevent government from offering rebates, incentives - the types of things that we see for lots of other initiatives, projects, implementations for helping people upgrade - businesses, organizations do that. We'll see how that turns out. But I think overall - really what that package of initiatives was, was an attempt to legislate outside of our Legislature by Republicans who have abandoned all hope of winning at the ballot box here in Washington state. That was backed up by them losing ground in the House and the Senate, losing all of the statewide positions. Their message just does not connect with Washington residents overall. Their message is having a hard time even holding together their Republican coalition in Washington state. Their base is more fractured than it's ever been, and it showed up in their election results. That result for Dave Reichert was not even a standard result. And he certainly is not the most extreme Republican running - he had to do work to kind of prove his Trumpiness and MAGA bona fide to people. But it's not happening for them in the Legislature - they are not connecting. And it's not a fluke. It's not that - Oh, the Democratic Legislature just isn't allowing that to happen, the Democratic Legislature is passing things that they don't have a mandate to pass.

I think those initiatives that he put on the ballot actually backfired for the overall Republican project in Washington state - because they were trying to make a case, have spent years trying to make the case that Washington residents don't want to right-size our tax code. They don't believe in taxation. Now, Washington residents absolutely want to see appropriate value from their investments. They do want to make sure that they're being handled responsibly, efficiently. But they do believe in a strong safety net. They prove that over and over again. They stood up for the Washington CARES long-term care act - preventing that from being repealed. And so it really is, now, not a question. And the residents from every corner of the state have said - This is what we stand for. And it's going to be up to our Legislature to respond in-kind and listen to people. And certainly for Democrats to not make the mistakes that we're seeing at the federal level - in hearing this message from your constituents and not taking heed and acting in their best interests and according to their wishes.

[00:22:43] Robert Cruickshank: I think that's spot on. And I think there's good news and bad news for Democrats here. The good news is that a 25-year-long project - first with Tim Eyman running it, and now Brian Heywood, the millionaire funder of these initiatives, and Jim Walsh, the Republican Party chair who backed these four initiatives - they've spent the last 25 years appealing to the electorate to overturn things that the Democratic Legislature did that they don't like. And for a while, they got away with it. But it started to fall apart in the late 2010s. Eyman's kept losing, he's now out of the picture. Brian Heywood and Jim Walsh came in to try to do the same thing and failed. They straight up failed. Democrats have won, as we talked about - swept all statewide offices, growing their majorities in Olympia. This is all the good news.

Bad news is - they are going to try to appeal to the federal government now, whether it's the Trump administration or Congress or the Supreme Court, to try to undo what we want to do here in Washington. We have to be mindful of that. But Democrats also have to be mindful of what happened to Biden. Biden won a clear majority in 2020. He had a Democratic Congress to go with it. And they delivered a lot of good stuff, but it didn't resonate. It didn't really solve the underlying problems facing the voters. And so there is a warning here for Washington Democrats, too - that they should not assume that just because they've been on a winning streak lately, that that will last indefinitely. The same shifts away from the Democratic Party that you saw in other parts of the country, whether they're swing states or not, could happen here. It has happened here before. Democrats won huge victories in 1992 at the state level, and Republicans took control of the State Legislature in 1994. So I think that it's important for Democrats to really recognize they can't rest on their laurels. This is not going to be easy. This is not going to be like Trump's first term. They have a huge task ahead of them, and we expect them to step up and lead.

[00:24:44] Crystal Fincher: Now, there are a number of other races that occurred throughout the state - in different counties, locally, legislatively. What are the races that stick out to you, and what do you think that says about Washington voters' preference and where they're at?

[00:25:03] Robert Cruickshank: Democrats are not in danger of losing a single seat anywhere in the state. There were efforts by Maia Espinoza, who was the right-wing social conservative Moms for Liberty candidate for state superintendent in 2020. She came back this year and ran against T'wina Nobles in the 28th state Senate district and is getting handily defeated. That's good. That was a really close race in 2020 and Nobles has improved her margin of victory over a strong right-wing challenge. Democrats are looking really strong in Clark County - not just in Vancouver itself, but in the suburban parts of Clark County - that's where their pickups really seem to be concentrated right now. They were showing surprising strength in the 12th district, which straddles the Cascade Divide - parts of it are over in Chelan, Wenatchee, but parts of it are in suburban King County. Democrats may not pick up seats there, but they're doing decently. They're going to pick up probably a state Senate seat up in Oak Harbor area. They did not do the flip that was hoped for in the 14th District in Yakima - still votes to be counted, but Maria Beltran and others are trailing there. And I think that's something that Democrats are going to have to look into - potentially a story of problems winning over Hispanic voters that have been seen elsewhere in the country. But overall, lots of good signs for Democrats here. But the big question is - what are they going to do with it? Because if they aren't delivering for voters, if voters are not seeing things improve - they're going to be held responsible for it. And it's not just the threat from Trump in terms of state budgets. His tariff policies could do real harm to Washington state, which is a very trade-dependent state. We're going to see inflation. We could see our export businesses in real trouble in the first few years of a Trump administration. So Democrats need to just be aware that all of this is possible, and be planning for it, and have robust public response to make sure that people are taken care of to the extent possible and mitigate the harm that Trump is going to try to cause.

[00:26:59] Crystal Fincher: Now, one local election I want to talk about is the City of Seattle election. There was the citywide seat that Tanya Woo, who was appointed to that seat as a replacement to Teresa Mosqueda - who went to the King County Council. And Alexis Mercedes Rinck as a challenger - a clearly more progressive challenger, sharp contrast between Alexis Mercedes Rinck and Tanya Woo - dominated in that race. Similarly, we saw a similar dynamic in the 43rd Legislative District, which is in Seattle, where Shaun Scott dominated Andrea Suarez. Just two very, very conclusive, huge victories there. What do you think that says? And what kind of impact will that have on our local government moving forward and the elections next year for Mayor and City Council in Seattle?

[00:27:59] Robert Cruickshank: Well, I think the first thing it says is that we need to move local elections to even years. The only reason that there's a right-wing City Council in place - or maybe not the only reason, but a large reason why - is because those elections happen in odd years when the electorate is smaller. That said, Tanya Woo lost in an odd year last year. She lost again this year, and this is not a close defeat. Tanya Woo got destroyed. Alexis Mercedes Rinck's margin of victory is going to be somewhere in the teens - 15%, 16%, 17% - when all is said and done and all the ballots are counted. It is a clear sign the public in Seattle is done with this City Council. The City Council is unpopular - its policies are unpopular, its ties to big business and corporations are unpopular. And that people do not want the city run by the Chamber of Commerce and its allies. I think the fact that Tanya Woo lost last year and got her seat on the Council anyway because Tim Ceis memorably intervened back in January and said - Look, all those donors kind of paid for this seat, make sure that it goes to Tanya Woo. That's what happened. I think voters rejected that. So Bruce Harrell up for re-election next year, Sara Nelson up for re-election next year. They're in real trouble. I think that they are going to have to look at this and decide if they want to keep on this right-wing path. I don't think that they're going to win even in an odd year. I think the amount of public anger at this Council that is out there, its unpopularity is significant.

And you see this also carry over to the state legislative race. For Andrea Suarez, who's one of these avatars of right-wing Seattle - socially conservative, hanging out with Republicans, denouncing progressives, denouncing anything to try to really truly help the homeless. Thought she had a chance and she got blown out too. Two to one. Shaun Scott could hit 70% by the time all the ballots are counted. She tried to smear him in all sorts of ways. Smear him as a socialist. Smear him for being Black - darkening his skin in the mailers - awful racist things. And it didn't resonate. This is still Seattle. We are still a progressive city. We still want progressive policies - we want reasonable progressive policies. It's important to note that Alexis Mercedes Rinck did not run the left-wing type of campaign that we saw in the past. And neither did Shaun Scott. Shaun Scott did not shy away from the fact that he is a socialist, but he really emphasized popular things like taxing the rich to fund our public schools. So I think that this is a clear lesson for Democrats in Seattle, certainly, going forward - that there's a clear path to win. It would be great to move these elections for city offices to even years, but I think there's a path even next year for progressives to win.

[00:30:45] Crystal Fincher: I agree with that. And I just need to throw in, even with this result - we have seen this Council majority act in ways that have obviously run counter to the desires of Seattle voters. There has been one councilmember who has really stood in opposition, who's really been the voice of the public - Tammy Morales. And we have seen that councilmember bullied - and I'm using that in a literal sense - by this Council majority. Just inappropriate activity, inappropriate comments on the dais, shutting down her ability to speak, berating her publicly for things that are factual - have been reported by media, have been fact-checked - and failing to carry out their duties in terms of votes that they're obligated to take, responding to resident petitions. Failing to pass forward initiatives that had qualified and everything had happened - from the resident point of view, all the requirements were met - and acting to obstruct those things and to sabotage those things. But really pointing a lot of that ire at Tammy Morales in weird and mean ways. And I just hope they also reconsider that treatment and that behavior - because clearly, Tammy Morales has been aligned with Seattle voters. Tammy has been standing up for the things that voters just stood up for and said - We want this. It's the opposite of what you're talking about - that does not represent our values. And so I hope they reconsider that. I hope there is an understanding on their part that that continued treatment and obstruction is only working against them. And working against the residents of Seattle - that is gumming up our local government. And we cannot afford that moving forward with all of these other challenges that are coming. So I hope that's a reconsideration.

[00:32:54] Robert Cruickshank: I just want to strongly agree. This is and should be seen as vindication for Tammy Morales - for her leadership, for her work. And a huge rebuke to the rest of that City Council - the way they have acted, the way they've treated Tammy, the way they've treated the public. When the public shows up in the Council chambers, Sara Nelson calling the cops on people and doing it all in the service of a right-wing, big corporate agenda. That has all been rejected resoundingly at the polls. And it will be rejected, I believe, again next year - especially if we get good progressive candidates to run good campaigns against these incumbents. So these incumbent city councilmembers are out of step. It's going to look even worse when these tactics are echoed by Trump himself in the federal government. We don't need these Trump-style behaviors from Cathy Moore or Sara Nelson or anyone else on that City Council. So there's a lot that they're going to have to either get right or get out.

[00:33:48] Crystal Fincher: Now, there are a number of school levies and bonds on the ballot across the state. A number of them are struggling to pass - this at a time when those levies are trying to plug holes that exist. And without their package, these districts are looking at cuts to teachers, cuts to services for students, cuts to transportation - really the things that most of us think of as being absolutely essential for our schools. What does that mean for districts around the area? And what charge does the Legislature have?

[00:34:23] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, there were school bonds and even school levies, operating levies that failed around the state. Some passed, like in Port Angeles. But others failed - east and west of the mountains. And this just exacerbates the existing problem of the education funding crisis that exists here in Washington state. And the public gets it. A few weeks ago, up in Edmonds at a high school, nearly a thousand people showed up for what was called an Education Funding Crisis Town Hall put on by the local school board members and local education unions. They worked together to put this on - they got eight legislators there. And it was this great event where the legislators heard loud and clear that there is a major education funding crisis. Now, voters sent them back with a tool to do something about this. We have a capital gains tax. A lot of it goes to school construction and towards early learning, but more of it needs to go to the actual operations of schools. This is something that Mark Mullet - state senator who is no longer in the State Senate - opposed. He didn't want the capital gains tax revenues going to school operations because he's a charter school guy. Well, you can expand that capital gains tax now. You can make more wealthy people pay it, or you make the same wealthy people pay a higher rate. You don't need to move money from out of existing programs into something else. We're going to have to raise more money out of that capital gains tax. That's something that I don't think people really wanted to talk about before the election, but it needs to be talked about now. You have that revenue source. Let's really use it effectively. There are other revenue sources they can look at. Seattle Times polling showed that 65% of voters want to tax the rich to fund education. The capital gains tax repeal is failing with about 63% voting No, which confirms that is the case. The public wants the Legislature to step up, tax the rich, tax big businesses to fund our public schools. They have a very clear mandate to do this. And this is even before Trump comes in - potentially eliminating the U.S. Department of Education, potentially eliminating Head Start, eliminating Title I grants for low-income schools, all this looming. The Legislature has to step up in a big, big way for our schools right now. And that is going to be, I think, their number one priority in terms of issues - aside from just the general Trump reaction and response. Public education has got to be atop their agenda for the 2025 session.

[00:36:39] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well said. We will certainly be talking about election results, impacts of this election in several future shows. This is going to be an ongoing thing. But certainly a lot to consider moving forward and some mandates set before lawmakers that we will see if they listen to and act on.

And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, November 8th, 2024. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful co-host today was chair of Sierra Club Seattle, longtime communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank. You can find Robert on Twitter and BlueSky, as well as me on Twitter and BlueSky at @finchfrii or @cruickshank. You can type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar on your preferred podcast app - just type "Hacks and Wonks" in the search bar and subscribe to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our midweek topical shows delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, please leave a review. 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 episode notes.

Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.