This blog is designed to give readers a glimpse of our editorial-page operation and how we make our decisions. We’ll let you know who we’re meeting with, what they’re telling us, what events and issues we’re looking at. We’ll also pass on information and observations that may not make our print editions. In addition to the editorial board members who post on this blog, the board includes Publisher David Zeeck, Executive Editor Karen Peterson and Managing Editor Dale Phelps.
Editorial board bloggers
Editorial page editor Patrick O’Callahan oversees the online and printed opinion sections of The News Tribune. He came to The News Tribune in 1987 and has worked at Washington newspapers since 1979. E-mail him at patrick.ocallahan@thenewstribune.com
Editorial writer Cheryl Tucker, in addition to writing commentary, manages the daily production of the editorial and op-ed pages and edits letters to the editor. She began her journalism career in 1974 at a Virginia newspaper and came to The News Tribune in 1978. E-mail her at cheryl.tucker@thenewstribune.com.
Editorial writer Kim Bradford manages the online opinion section of The News Tribune and writes commentary. She joined The News Tribune in 2005 after working 11 years at newspapers in Washington and Maryland. E-mail her at kim.bradford@thenewstribune.com.
Guest bloggers
Editor emeritus David Seago retired from The News Tribune in 2008 after 41 years at The News Tribune. E-mail him at sds99@harbornet.com.
Richard Davis’ column on state politics frequently runs in the print edition of The News Tribune. He was president of the Washington Research Council, a statewide think tank, from 1986 through 2006. Currently, as a principal with The Simeon Partnership, Inc. he coordinates the activities of the Washington Alliance for a Competitive Economy, a business coalition founded by the Research Council, the Association of Washington Business and the Washington Roundtable.
Karen Irwin of University Place, a mother of four, has been a frequent contributor to The News Tribune's print editions. She has also written for Seattle's Child, Puget Sound Parent, the Tacoma Weekly, the Fayetteville Observer Times and the political blog Right Meets Left. She graduated from California Lutheran University with a degree in English literature and is currently working toward a history degree.
Michael Allen, professor of history at the University of Washington Tacoma, was born and raised in Ellensburg. He served with the U.S. Marines in Vietnam from 1969-70. He has written five books, including the prize-winning "Patriot's History of the United States: From Columbus' Great Discovery to the War on Terror," "Rodeo Cowboys in the North American Imagination" and "Western Rivermen, 1763-1861: Ohio and Mississippi Boatmen and the Myth of the Alligator Horse." Allen lives in Tacoma and Ellensburg and has three children.
- All
- Editorial cartoons (284)
- Editorial outtakes (315)
- Election (109)
- How we work (185)
- Taking notice (1816)
- What's coming (890)
- Who's visiting (122)
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| << < | > >> | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |
- July 2009 (7)
- June 2009 (94)
- May 2009 (80)
- April 2009 (91)
- March 2009 (99)
- February 2009 (90)
- January 2009 (125)
- December 2008 (111)
- November 2008 (89)
- October 2008 (111)
- September 2008 (87)
- August 2008 (75)
- More...
XML Feeds- lesismore
- flynzoid
- Guest Users: 436
When Pierce County holds its first ranked choice voting election, will The News Tribune also rank candidates in its endorsements?
That's going to be something new for our editorial board. We haven't formally discussed it yet. A lot depends on the fate of three RCV-related county charter amendments on the Nov. 6 ballot.
Let's assume Proposed Charter Amendment No. 4 fails. That's the one that would delay RCV until November 2010. If RCV is used in the 2008 general election, as voters decreed last year, voters will probably get to rank only their top three choices.
OK, I can live with that. No matter how large the field of candidates for any office – county executive, county council, assessor-treasurer, sheriff and auditor – we would rank only our top three choices, just as the voters would.
Proposed Charter Amendment No. 5 would limit ranking to the top three choices for each office, both in 2008 and in the future. Proposed Charter Amendment No. 6, however, would require that voters be allowed to rank all the candidates in each race – WHEN suitable tabulation software is available. Right now it's considered unlikely the software would be available for the 2008 general election.
So let's assume that voters won't get to rank all candidates until 2010. Now what?
Say four, five, six or more candidates seek the same office. If the voters are expected to rank them all, shouldn't the editorial board do the same?
Seems right. But personally, I don't look forward to having to render an opinion on which poor candidate in a field of, say, six candidates is the worst of the bunch. That's a pretty hard knock.
That might be one point in favor of just ranking three in each race. Simpler for the voters, too. We'll be looking at the pros and cons of that when the ed board decides its stance on Amendments 5 and 6.
All this sounds a bit like "who's on first?" doesn't it?
COMMENTS:
For decades third party candidates (like Bruce Guthrie for example) were deserving of a vote but received next to none due to that wasted vote myth. People who really wanted to vote for Bruce above all others were afraid they would end up with Mike or Maria. They ended up voting their fears instead of their values, regardless of how much sacrifice was made to get Mr. Guthrie's message out.
CRV will allow all of those voters to put Bruce as #1 and then Mike or Maria #2 knowing that both votes be counted.
I would suggest only ranking the candidates that you sincerely think are capable and qualified to do the job. If the editorial board only feels one candidate among seven is worth voting for??? Just rank that person #1 and move to the next race.
The easiest thing to do would be to rank based on the same criteria that you use in a regular 'winner take all election'. Review the issues and the candidate: What experience do they have political and otherwise? What is their campaign about? Are they sensible or off their rocker? How informed are they about the seat they are seeking to fill? How much community service do they involve themselves in?
I think that this dynamic of voting will bring back some of the excitement to the election process.
Comments are not allowed from anonymous visitors. Please login or register to comment.
