State Sen. Stephen Johnson (R-Kent) has officially announced his candidacy for state Supreme Court position #2, currently held by Susan Owens. Owens has voted with the majority on most of the Court's worst decisions of the last 5 years and deserves to be voted off the bench. Sen. Johnson has been an excellent Senator and I expect he'll be a first rate Justice.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 22, 2006 03:37 PM | Email ThisIf someone who knows Steve can provide us with a comparison of both he and Susan Owens - how she voted on the "bad" cases, and how he would have voted had he been on the bench, it would likely generate strong support for Johnson.
Posted by: Paul on March 22, 2006 03:58 PM1 Does he have a website?
2 I just googled and got the above.
3 Is he allowed to contrast/compare himself to Susan Owens
4 Given the limits on judicial campaigning, how do we determine if our personal views are closer to him or here
5 If people agree w/ his message, how do they donate to his campaign
And most people can't tell the difference between them, except those that have come across the Johnson that interprets the law.
Being non-partisan positions, it will be tough to get the old mom and pop Democrats to vote R or D. If it ain't a D, then they don't vote for them- no matter what.
Posted by: swatter on March 22, 2006 04:09 PM“For more than 70 years, Washington’s constitution has protected homeowners from paying excess levies beyond 1 percent of the value of their property without a 60 percent supermajority vote,” said Sen. Stephen Johnson, R-Kent, former chair of the Senate Education Committee. “And even with this significant safeguard, property taxes generally increase 100 percent every decade.
Frankly, we need smart, pithy men like him on the State Supreme Court. Let a certain Janelle M. Guthrie (current State AG spokesperson, former Senate Republican Communications Director) take his place in the State Senate - I know her, she'd do a stellar job.
Posted by: A Watchdog on March 22, 2006 04:27 PM1. Mrs. Guthrie would need to live in the 47th district in order to run for Sen. Johnson's open Senate seat.
2. I know her, too. It ain't gonna happen.
Posted by: jimg on March 22, 2006 05:48 PMWho cares if they are all named Johnson, if they vote to uphold the Constitution?
Posted by: Clean House on March 22, 2006 07:47 PMher boozed up, hammered highness, Bobbie Bridges...
Excuse me, does anyone beside me find it annoying, cloying and bizarre that seemingly professional adults still use kindergarten nicknames?? Teddy, Bobbie, Patty...
Posted by: Cheryl on March 23, 2006 07:31 AMI hope it's midterm, because we really don't need an empty seat in a competitive area.
Posted by: Cliff on March 23, 2006 09:41 AMJohnson is an old fashioned, turn of the century republican who demonstrated severe lack of knowledge when he chaired the Education committee in the Senate. The above quote about simple majority shows not only that he lives in the past, but that he has a bare grasp of the facts, at best.
He's one of these "if the teachers are for it, I'm against it" mentalities. Sometimes that's right. But all the time, it's not.
Johnson on the court would regress our state to the worse past....let's pray together he doesn't succeed.
Posted by: LovinUSA on March 23, 2006 10:23 AMSome comments on the Sheehan opinion are here:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/forum/boards/viewtopic.asp?topicid=74290&page=75
Posted by: Des on March 23, 2006 10:50 AMDude...... if against Johnson.
I'm all for him!
where do I vote ( many times)
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 23, 2006 11:33 AMHave fun wth your 34% others as you watch Johnson fade into the sunset...where his thinking belongs.
Posted by: Lovinusa on March 23, 2006 11:39 AMThe Internet is the tool of choice for informing these voters. Existing organizations who already have large numbers of activists in their database will find common cause in joining together to inform their constituents of who the judicial candidates are, and what they stand for. Several such organizations that come to mind are:
• Tim Eyman’s group – who have been hurt by recent Supreme Court decisions
• Evergreen Freedom Foundation – who similarly have been “stiffed” by the court
• Christian Coalition for WA
• Eagle Forum for WA
Since the socialist majority on the court has offended so many disparate groups, they can all find common cause for replacing Susan Owens with Steve Johnson.
Further, the fact that these judicial offices are “non-partisan”, the illiterate and uninformed – who make up a large block of traditional democrat voters – will be unable to concentrate their vote for Owens.
So, someone in the know should provide the comparative data on the two candidates so that appropriate Voter’s Guides can be prepared. The data should be broad enough to include issues that are of importance to each group who can then craft their own Voter’s Guide for the greatest appeal to their members.
If the state Constitution required a 60 percent vote to cut taxes for a specific group of people, would you be for or against it?
For or against. One word. No waffling.
Posted by: jimg on March 23, 2006 11:57 AMYeah, a bloody shame. She's one bright, intelligent, strong leader.
Posted by: A Watchdog on March 23, 2006 02:37 PMBut as with all candidates you need to check PDCs and voting records to be sure.
So please go to the following web sites and research the candidate before making a commitment.
Legislative web page to check voting records
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/
Public Disclosure Commission Contributors list (Check on Owews as well)
http://www.pdc.wa.gov/servlet/ContServlet
Want to bet that in the end the RINO Mainstreamers are going to betray Johnson and help Owens get re-elected. That is why it is important to check especially Owens PDCs frequently to see if any names of Mainstreamers pop up there.
Posted by: Conservative, Not Republican on March 23, 2006 06:09 PMIt is absolutely undemocratic (and evil) to have some people's votes count more than others.
With any 60% majority, that's exacty what you have. 6 YES votes = 4 NO votes. That means the No voters' votes count more than a YES vote.
Any *real* conservative would think this is evil too.
Posted by: LovinUSA on March 26, 2006 12:03 PM