Influencing Debate By Blogging Against I-912

Jerry Cornfield at the Everett Herald wrote a piece this Sunday that looks at the I-912 debate as it is playing out on the blogosphere, and he quotes me a couple of times.

"The problem with 912 is the misinformation, and there is a need for education," said blogger Daniel Kirkdorffer (http://www.kirkdorffer.com/ontheroadto2008/).

He's also told the stories of Republican lawmakers who voted for the increase including an extensive Oct. 3 post on state Sen. Dave Schmidt, R-Mill Creek.

"Part of what I'm doing is to point out the facts and the political realities," he said in his blog. "I'm not looking to try to convince anyone to change their mind. I'm looking to sway those in the middle who may be undecided."

Clicking along, one can touch down on http://www.washblog.com/ and http://www.evergreenpolitics.com/ for regular appropriations of articulation against the measure.

Indeed, people who have already made up their mind on I-912 are not the people I'm generally speaking to when I write about I-912. This blog, by my very nature, tries to be more measured in tone, without sacrificing my propensity to argue a position. There are a lot of undecided voters out there who are looking at reasons why they should vote for or against I-912. Many are unaware of what the transportation bill is looking to accomplish, or the 270 projects targeted, or the amount of money the gas tax is seeking to raise to fund these projects, to name just a few things.

There are many topics regarding I-912 that a blogger can write about, and I've written about most of them: the safety issues, the political issues, the economic issues, the environmental issues, etc... However, I think the one main over arching issue is that the people that drive on our roads, who sit in our traffic, believe that transportation is a top priority, and we need to do something about it. Today, they can see, and have benefitted from many projects, in the works or recently completed, that have stemmed from a previous gas tax increase. The transportation bill seeks to raise $5.5 billion more from gas tax money to continue to make a dent in the tens of billion dollar backlog of projects that are needed statewide. I-912 does nothing but add another roadblock to reducing gridlock, which is not what most drivers look forward to each day.

Getting back to Jerry Cornfield's article, I think he missed the mark when he ended with this:

No doubt, some voters will eavesdrop on blog conversations before deciding. But on balance, there's no evidence that the Internet exchanges will alter the outcome, said Lee Rainie, director of the Pew Internet and American Life Project.

"People generally have their views made up and aren't looking for information to change their mind," he said. "They want information to fit into their belief system."

IMO, should I-912 fail, it may be actual evidence that the blogosphere did have an impact. As it is right now, there is already evidence that the anti-I-912 blogging is have an influence on the mainstream media. The bloggers were the first to bang a regular drumbeat denouncing I-912, and in the past couple of months we've seen a lot more coverage in newspapers, often working on angles that were first addressed in the blogosphere. I believe my own series of postings focusing on Republican legislator support of the transportation bill, and Goldy's focus at HorsesAss.org on David Irons' and Dino Rossi's positions, energized similar types of articles in the Seattle PI, that called for more Republicans to speak out against I-912. Other's, such as at NPI have focused on the safety issue, with regular postings about what we risk if we neglect our infrastructure, and we've seen an increased focus on the same issues in the newspapers.

A lot of politicians are also reading what's being said in the blogosphere. Bloggers are a vocal bunch by nature, and offer another means for politicians to get a sense of the pulse of the people. None of the bloggers I know that have written against I-912 are doing so as part of the larger "No of I-912" campaign. The battle we are engaged in is that of concerned citizens of this state fighting against an initiative we believe is worse than bad for Washington. This is a grassroots fight against I-912.

The more people become familiar with the issues, and about what they would be losing in return for the little they would be gaining should they vote for I-912, the closer this race appears to be getting. Bloggers were the most vocal at first, and the campaign backers and business community didn't take up arms in earnest until much more recently, once weakness in support for I-912 could be sensed.

So the blogosphere is at the forefront of the battle against I-912, not just an echo chamber.

That said, it comes down to this: the legislature passed a transportation bill that addresses $8.5 billion of an estimated $30 to $40 billion project backlog. The projects being focused on are the roadways and bridges that are most at risk of failing, or the biggest safety concerns. The bill also funds a plethora of localized traffic congestion issues statewide. The choice before voters is whether to pursue these projects by accepting a 3 cent gas tax increase this year, followed by 3 cents next year, 2.5 cents in 2007 and 1 cent in 2008, or whether to repeal the gas tax increases, thereby eliminating $5.5 billion in project funding and reducing the money needed for the projected projects by 60% or more.

This is the clear choice. We either help fund our future by voting against I-912, or we vote for more of the same by voting for I-912. If you haven't made up your mind yet, keep visiting this site as I'm sure to be writing more about the issue in the coming couple of weeks.