About Me

Name: South Sounder
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Rep. Williams defends per diem

Rep. Brendan Williams, D-Olympia, lives exactly 1.94 miles from the Legislative Building (aka the State Capitol) yet he accepts the state's per diem meant for out of town legislators who don't have the option to walk or bike to work.  Today Rep. Williams tries to defend his actions in a letter to the  Olympian:

Once again, The Olympian reports that almost all legislators accept the state’s per diem (daily) allowance during session. And, once again, that fact surprises some people.

I had to give up my job as head of a statewide trade association to be a legislator. I’m now an attorney in private practice.

During session, I obviously cannot bill hours to support my young family.

For that reason, I do accept per diem, as does every legislator — but one — able to sleep in his or her home during session. There are dozens of us in that category, and I’m happy to not miss out on my 4-year-old’s childhood.

Most state legislatures provide session per diem. At $90, Washington’s is relatively low (Georgia’s is $173). And most states pay full per diem to noncommuters. Other states reduce it a bit. For example, in Nevada, those serving in the Capitol get $137.90 a day instead of a housing allowance; in Alaska, it’s 75 percent of $163 or $218 (depending on time of year); and in Iowa it’s $88.50 for those serving in the Capitol and $118 otherwise.

In 2004, I publicly stated I would accept per diem only if collective bargaining agreements were ratified by the Legislature. We have met that condition.

I never complain about the compensation taxpayers graciously provide. As my family’s sole breadwinner, I cannot afford to turn it down, either.

Anyone who has questions about this or any other issue can always call my office at 360-786-7940.

It is an honor representing you!

Rep. Brendan Williams, D-Olympia



Maybe it is time for Rep. Williams to quit and return to private life altogether, as he had threatened to do recently.  In a related story, the Olympian is reporting Rep. Williams may or may not quit when his term is up.  After reading his angry anti Wal-Mart rants (1), (2) in the Olympian, I would be shocked if he ever quit voluntarily. 




Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Rejoicing death

Just hours after the passing of Rev. Falwell (who I was no fan of), the folks at OlyBlog and the Olympia leftist community are quick to rejoice and display their hate.

  • "Can I get a Halleluiah? If I believed in God, I'd almost be praying right now and giving thanks, but I'll hold off on that for now." - Allie D., Olympia
  • "So long suckah" - Karan, Olympia
  • "Usually, we would not cheer the death of another human being, but Jerry Falwell is...different." - Last Word, Olympia

People disliked Falwell because of comments some people believe were hatefull and hurtfull.  What's the difference between what Falwell has said and the people above?  To me it is all the same.  So way to be Falwellian Allie, Karan, and company. 






Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Consensus and Science

Recently on Charlie Rose, oh about 14:00 minutes into the program, Al Gore proclaims:

"The debate’s over. The people who dispute the international consensus on global warming are in the same category now with the people who think the moon landing was staged on a movie lot in Arizona."


In a 2003 speech, Author Michael Crichton had this to say about consensus and science (emphasis added):

I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.

The whole Crichton speech is well worth the read.




Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »