Jim Moeller’s Foggy Diversion

by lewwaters
Jim Moeller

Jim Moeller

Good old Jim “sue your constituents to invalidate their votes” Moeller (D. Portland/Vancouver), ever the narcissist, is a master at diversion to make others look bad, while minimizing how he and those he aligns himself with may personally benefit off of the public’s money.

Second to none in arrogance, we have seen Jim put off projected in excess of $1 Billion budget gap to push through homosexual marriage, denying he would take advantage of it himself, successfully joined in a lawsuit to invalidate the vote of constituents and others in the state who have 5 times voted in a 2/3 majority requirement for the legislature to increase our taxes, worked diligently to strap Clark County citizens with higher taxes, increased license fees, tolls, increased gas prices and much more to force acceptance of Portland, Oregon’s financially troubled light rail and more, all the while portraying himself as some sort of ‘watchdog’ for the public good.

When it was revealed earlier this year of legislators writing off the expense to dry clean their clothes to taxpayers while in session Moeller was quoted saying, “dry cleaning is similar to other items [I] can expense, such as food or lodging, while the Legislature’s in session,” adding he considers what he wears during session as “his uniform.”

Two things he loves as much as he does himself, taxes and unions, promoting both in any manner he can with no regard for what it may cost a struggling middle class taxpayer or cause jobs to dissipate in the county.

I was kind of curious why, recently, he began acting once again as if the great watchdog for the people when he began pushing for better and more stringent rules for lobbyists filing their reports, primarily focusing on lobbyists buying meals for legislators, Moeller himself receiving in excess of $350 in a free meals during legislative session.

The Lazy C, long a fan of Moeller’s credits Moeller as being “way out in front of the pack on this one” for “championing a bill proposing that lobbyists pay a fee that would go to the maintenance of a searchable electronic database of lobbyist expenses” and crediting him with displaying “Leadership Washingtonians need or deserve.”

While we do deserve to know just what Lobbyists are paying to curry the favor of our legislators, let’s face it, they are spending either their own money or the money of whoever hires them to lobby a specific position. They are not spending our tax dollars.

Where is Jim Moeller’s “Leadership” where our tax dollars concerned? Why doesn’t he display that deep concern when it is our tax dollars being diverted away from what we pay taxes for and into the deep pockets of unions?

A recent report released by the Washington Policy Center, Public Education Dollars Diverted to Pay Union Executive Salaries, is far more troublesome to me than lobbyists paying for legislators lunch.

While we keep hearing from Jim Moeller how we need to step up and better fund education in the state, meaning of course, meet more teachers union demands, we now read, “Each year school districts pay full salaries and benefits of public employees who leave school classrooms for a time to work full-time for private labor unions. While working as union executives the employees perform no teaching or other educational duties for the school district.”

Moeller aligned himself with the unions, especially when they successfully sued to block citizens efforts to make it more difficult for the legislative majority to just raise our taxes as they desire, primarily to go to education demands, and now we read that over $5 Million was diverted last year to go to union executives?

Lobbyists may have spent as much as $65,000 buying lunch for legislators, but union executives suck over $5 Million out of our precious education tax dollars and Jim Moeller, credited with such Leadership in exposing lobbyists, does not bat an eye lid?

Let us not forget, it is these union representatives leading the charge to invalidate voter desire and overturn voter intent in charter schools, tax increases and our efforts to reform education and improve how our children are educated.

Where is Jim Moeller on any of this?

Where is that “Leadership” the Lazy C boasts of?

Isn’t the use, or should I say misuse, of our tax dollars more important than a lobbyist buying someone lunch?

Let us not forget that it was these very teachers unions, back in 2008, that caused the state to lose a $13.2 Million Math & Science Grant over the unions steadfast demand that they administer the grant as they saw fit in accord with union rules and not as the grant providers offered it.

Two of the schools that lost out where right here in Clark County.

Where was Moeller then? Writing his ill-fated and confusing “candy tax” maybe?

No doubt this report from Washington Policy Center took some time to research and compile, most assuredly speaking with a lot of people in Olympia and around the state.

Is too far of a stretch to think maybe, just maybe, Jim Moeller raises such concern over lobbyists to try to divert attention away from light being shined on his pet unions?

5 Comments to “Jim Moeller’s Foggy Diversion”

  1. He will use anything he can to slander Republicans. He would rather slander them than actually listen to the voters. By using lobbyist such as his friend , Identity Clark County’s Paul Montague, to divert the attention and Republican bash he hopes we won’t notice how bad of a legislator he really is.

  2. The same slime ball that raked in per deim last year for special session when he wasn’t there….


  3. Criticism of expenses by legislators (e.g. dry cleaning) will eventually result in the legislature voting itself a “per diem expense payment” that does not require any accounting. It will then be abused by having intersession “committee investigations” where a hearing is held somewhere … and then the legislators attending will get 3 days of “per diem” payments (day before, day of, day after) for each hearing or “investigation” held. (I’ve seen this before in the state I escaped from.)

    Moeller obviously is one of many self-serving politicians who will kowtow to his union supporters and other rent seekers who will pay to curry favors. Politicians of his ilk are happy to raise taxes whenever they can — they don’t care if it’s a targeted increase (like a candy tax or some other “sin” tax) or if it is a more general tax increase. The whole point is to gain more and more tax revenue so that special favors can be bestowed on those who support the politician. This equation always leaves out the “constituents” who are fooled by main stream media who ignore hypocrisy and gray ethics so long as the politician is “their guy” in office. (Such generosity by the media is never bestowed upon “the other guy.” For an example of this, simply compare the press criticism of G.W. Bush during and following the brief recession following 9/11, where headlines trumpeted the “jobless recovery” — while B.H. Obama is given a complete pass with much worse results following the “great recession.”)

  4. “Friend,” you miss a fundamental concept. Like most Capitalists (me), you suspect there is a tit-for-tat exchange: money-to-cronies = more-votes. Progressive/Social-Justice/Equality/Marxist thinkers don’t necessarily swing that way. Public Employees (and more specifically, Public Employee Unions) are the most successful manifestation of the “equality” agenda. The more money they can get into the public sector, the more Progressive/Social-Justice/Equality/Marxist-like our society becomes.

    Please don’t confuse the Equality folk’s goals with a Liberal’s (me). I want to be as far away from Marxism as I can get but still want to REDISTRIBUTE WEALTH. A Marxist does it so that everyone can be “equal” – a Liberal does it so that all the wealth doesn’t accumulate at the top.

  5. Martin, I’ve mentioned this before, but you are about the only person I see making such a fins distinction between Liberal, Progressive Socialist or what have you.

    You somehow fail to see distinctions between those of us on our side of the aisle and we cannot see that distinction you draw on your side.

    Especially given that is your side constantly voting to implement the very things you tell us to “don’t confuse.”

    And, if you think Marxists are really about “equality,” you’re blinded by fine distinctions that do not exist. They may preach it, but show me any Marxist society that those leading are not sitting pretty while those beneath are not struggling with very little.

    It may say so on paper, but paper doesn’t count, the real world does.

Leave a Reply. Comments are moderated. Spam & off topic comments will not be approved at Blog Author's discretion. THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ZONE!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: