Dylan Wilbanks

Dear Mr. Rossi:

Dino Rossi, job-hunter

Well, here we are yet again, with you on the losing side of another election. And yet again, you weren't able to muster enough votes outside of King County to overcome the usual overwhelming support for Democrats this county musters. Although you did do two percent better in King County than in 2008, you still couldn't crack the magic 40 percent mark a Republican needs in the county to have a chance at winning.

So, here you are yet again, out of a job. And this time around, you can't go back to real estate. I mean, have you seen the commercial real estate vacancy rate in Seattle? Over 17 percent. You ain't gonna make much money selling or leasing property in this economy. And don't even think about selling residential. You do read Seattle Bubble, right?

And I know you're thinking, Hey, I can latch on as a "political consultant." Let me remind you--you've now lost three times. And even if you want to say hey, I did win in '04, you got your rear spanked in 2008 by Christine Gregoire, a governor so ineffectual she makes Bartleby look like David Allen. I mean, seriously, you came into that election with the momentum and you lost by seven percent? You've done so poorly Alan Keyes could be your campaign manager and you'd do better.

Oh, hey, I can be a lobbyist down in Olympia, you think. And do what exactly? Get some tax breaks for the BIAW when the state budget is about to get another $5-$6 billion blown out of it this next biennium?

---

Again, you want to win political office, right? And you need to get 40 percent in King County, right? How you going to do that as the land man for the BIAW or the NRA or whatever right-wing lobby firm comes along?

Now, now, put down that Dick's job application. I have a modest proposal for you. I know it sounds crazy, and I know it'll make every Reagan-loving bone in your body ache, but here me out. There is an opening for a well-paying job that I think you'd be perfect for.

President of the University of Washington.

---

No, no, come back here! Seriously. Listen. I think you're the perfect fit. Let me explain why.

UW has a terrible reputation down in Olympia. Conservatives think the place is filled with Noam Chomskys and Ward Churchills teaching kids about Evil Socialism or that Taxation Is Not Entirely Evil or There Are Other Books Besides The Bible And Whatever Sean Hannity Is Promoting This Week. Liberals think it's a Nice Place, but Seriously, Public Schools, Medicaid, and Huge Tax Breaks For Microsoft Are More Important. And everyone just doesn't see why higher education is all that important, given that Noam Chomsky never ran around screaming "DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS" like that great and glorious genius Steve Ballmer did.

And you know all this, Dino. You were in Olympia for eight years. You were in the caucuses. You wrote a state budget. (Although, honestly, I'd stop citing that as a career high point. I mean, writing a Washington state budget is pretty damn simple. Give 51 percent to education, cut everything else, throw state employees under the bus, and we're done!)

What UW needs right now is someone who knows how things work in the state capitol. And what better person than you, a staunch conservative, holding the banner of higher education high as you waltz in under the dome? It worked for Colorado when they brought in former senator Hank Brown. He single-handedly saved CU from annihilation just by being a Republican who could talk to Republicans about how important higher education was.

And keep in mind, we're talking about an institution that employs 29,000 people and generates $9.1 billion in state economic benefit a year. $9.1 billion. Yeah, that's not quite Microsoft, but a whole bunch of your supporters run companies that barely generate one-tenth of that. As an institution, UW brings in $1 billion in research dollars, second only to Johns Hopkins.

UW is a big deal. And they need someone who can sell the Legislature on what a big deal they are, or else that those billions will start to dry up. 

And we've already seen how people react when they're asked to pony up for quality education. They vote it down, and hard. Someone needs to be an advocate for higher ed in this state, and only Nixon, after all, could go to China.

Now you're thinking, "Hey, what's in it for me? I mean, I'll be surrounded by all these...liburyals. Some of them might even be vegans, or read The Nation, or think Keith Olbermann makes a good point once or twice a week."

Yes, yes, we know. UW doesn't exactly have a Hoover Institution you can hide in. But think what you will get. A rancorous Faculty Senate filled with people who hate you. Hey, it's just like what the state legislature would have been like for you had you won either time you ran! You'll also get to see exactly how a place like UW is run and figure out how to make it run more efficiently. Heaven knows the place needs a good Stygian flood to wash the waste out of here. And you'll have the opportunity to say hey, I'm a university president who helped save the university Seattle liberals so love and Wazzu alums so loathe! 

Plenty of big politicians served as university presidents. Woodrow Wilson was president of Princeton when he ran for president. Eisenhower was president of Columbia between the war and his election in 1952 (and heck, it wasn't even a good fit, and he still won). Think what having executive experience as the CEO of a Public Ivy will do for your credentials.

Seriously, you want to be governor, this is the job you need to get. You turn 29,000 employees around to liking you and thinking you can be governor, you've just swung four percent of King County's registered voters to your side. (Yes, yes, Bothell and Tacoma aren't in Seattle, but stick with me.) You'll finish this election with 36 percent of the King County vote. Add in that four percent...and all a sudden you have a real chance.

But, you say, being president of UW will ruin my bona fides with the GOP! First, congratulations on knowing Latin! I hope that means you won't obliterate the Classics department. Second, it won't make one lick of a difference. Hell, they trumpeted you as being from King County back in 2004, as if That Would Matter. And seriously, you think all those Republicans east of the mountains really care? They're as kneejerk about voting GOP as King County voters are Dem. 

But what if I destroy the university? Well, you won't. UW will long outlast you. It's unkillable, like Dick Cheney. You could damage it pretty severely. I mean, your business track record is...let's skip over that. But really, the legislature is doing its best to destroy it already. Just blame them if the place falls apart. It worked for Emmert. And McCormick. And Gerberding. And Schmitz....

And besides, you do a terrible job, I'm sure Rob McKenna, fresh off getting spanked by how-the-hell-is-she-still-Governor Gregoire, will be more than happy to raise the university from the ashes like a phoenix, transforming him into the next Woodrow Wilson. He's an actual alum, after all.

Consider it, Dino. You know Olympia. You know how to write a budget. You are a master salesman. You could be the face of the University of Washington. All UW needs is someone with your qualifications to finally turn the tide of anti-higher education sentiment in this state. You could be the hero to liberals you sold yourself as in 2004 (and almost pulled it off). Four years in Seattle and you could be governor. Or senator. Or heck, the third U.S. president to have been a college president. All you have to do is put your name in the hat....

Firefighter G.F. Sevilles visiting classroom at Halloween, 1966: Item 75723, Seattle Fire Department Slides (Record Series 2801-09), Seattle Municipal Archives

I felt the need to respond to MvB's post about Seattle Schools because I'm no longer "outside looking in" with our school system. I'm a parent now, having endured the process of school selection and the ups and downs of kindergarten.

As an actual SPS parent...I find it amazing any kid gets taught anything at all. 

Large school systems are caught in a bind because they have to educate all kids. And educating all kids is the morally correct thing to do. But this leads to what I think are unfair comparisons.

Comparing a charter school to a regular public school is like comparing a boutique to a big box store. Of course the boutique is going to have more of what you want. But it's also going to lack a lot of things you may need because of how specialized it is. And that's been the case with charter schools--when some kid outside their specialization pops up, say a kid with undiagnosed dyslexia, they have nothing to offer for support, but you know, the school district does.

I ran into that shopping for a school last year. I went to what I thought was a fine parochial school, great test scores, diverse, solid teaching...but I mentioned my daughter is showing early signs of ADHD, and it was suddenly: "We can't help you with that; you're on your own." If you're outside of the norm, you're on your own.

---

Now, it's not that much better with Seattle Public Schools, an organization whose communication style can be best described as "written by unicorns, implemented by Sasquatches, and chaired by the Snuffleupagus." That is, if it exists, I haven't seen it. And I've heard stories of people going to the mat repeatedly with the district just to get help mandated under ADA and the Rehab Act. I've heard stories of parents fighting to get their kids 504 plans written and parents fighting to have the 504s removed from their kids files. On the other hand, at least they have something to fight.

And that's the worrisome part to me about these charter school reformers--they're more than willing to yank their "special snowflakes" out of the public schools, but everyone else's "special snowflakes" with any issues get drop-kicked back into a school system that's now choc-a-bloc with discipline problems, learning disabilities, and kids that cost more to educate than the per capita rate.

---

And at the same time, you have a lot of parents and guardians who really just don't care, and the district is aligned to deal with that plurality. Last year I got read the riot act about my daughter's behavior and then flipped out as a result (since it brought back some painful memories of my elementary school teachers trying to convince my mother to have me institutionalized--I'm not kidding about this.)

It took me a while to realize my daughter wasn't the problem. The problem was the district assumed I didn't care, and therefore I must be made to care. 

Here's what I think about all these damn reform ideas that get half-assed through every couple of years: 

STOP.

Let's focus on reforms that have been tested and proven. Like smaller class sizes. Like mentoring teachers and weeding out the burnouts. But more than that, let's focus on getting schools the right way around on leadership. 

One thing I've learned is a good school is made up of:

• Good principal
• Good teachers
• Parents who give a damn
• A strong PTA
• Solid communication on all levels

Any of that falls apart, the school gets bad. And the thing is, Seattle is full of schools where some part of that is going badly. Do-nothing principals. Burned out teachers. Parents that are out to lunch. Weak and ineffective PTA leadership. No communication.

All the charter school crap in the world can't fix these problems. They just shift them to a new venue. Or, they shift the parents and teachers and principals who would do something into places where they can be isolated from the parents and teachers and principals who don't care. And the compartmentalization of America soldiers on. 

And it frustrates me, too, that the loudest voices in this whole mess are people like Charlie Mas, who openly protests against any idea, good or bad, and the fly-by-night editorializers like Tim Burgess and Richard Conlin, who drop some Surely This pet solution into the conversation to muddy the waters some more. (That said, all of Tim's kids went to public schools, so at least he has some experience with this system.) And then there's Mayor McGinn, who launched his campaign talking about the city taking over SPS but has been completely silent since then. Talk about a fly-by-night platform.

You know, as I'm writing this, I'm realizing there's a far bigger problem:

You, collectively, don't care.

Maybe you, singular, do care. But you, us, this nation, we don't care. We complain about it all, but our solution is to slash school funding over and over again. We worry about "our future as a nation" but conveniently forget that our future is in school right now. Or maybe education just isn't as important as whatever it is we care about today. Mosques in Manhattan. Taxes. Paris Hilton's latest drunken spree. 

Or maybe it's the opposite. We throw money at the solution because we're Good Little Liberals, but we don't ask for a return, and God forbid us from ever asking for assessment because That Destroys Education! Meanwhile, we do nothing to help bolster creativity. 

Let's stop trying to solve the problem like some old patent medicine show--throw whatever at it and then walk away when it doesn't work. Let's start treating this like cancer--research, testing, treatment, palliative care, prevention, many cures for many different problems. If we treated cancer the way we've treated the public school system the last 40 years, breast cancer mortality would still be very high and everyone would be smoking like chimneys because lung cancer has nothing to do with tobacco. 

Solving Seattle Schools' problems will require a community effort to collaborate and innovate. It will also require the end of the half-truths, backbiting, bickering, simple solutions, stereotypes, and political bull that's been shoveled around for years. Here in town the Hutch and the University of Washington run a billion dollar cancer research, prevention, and treatment economy that has fundamentally reshaped the war on cancer.

If they, two of the most ego-laden academic environments on this planet, can collaborate on that, then why can't the School Board, City Council, teacher's union, PTSA, and anyone else that wants or needs to be at that table collaborate on a War On Bad Education?

After all, education, like cancer, takes years to progress. Editorials, like snake oil, only take an hour to put together and sell.

The biggest thing, though, is that we all have to give a damn again about our neighborhood schools. Every one of them needs tutors, or classroom helpers, or money, or whatever it takes. And I'm looking at all of you unemployed twentysomethings on Capitol Hill. You're not doing anything in September, anyway, not with nine percent unemployment. Go walk down and offer your services. If they don't know what to do with you, keep showing up. Like I said, communication in this district is non-existent. Get your background check done and start doing what needs to be done. They need you, even if they act like they don't.

I was thinking the other day about the poor state of the Obama Administration and how they'd managed to get so much done and yet only lose ground in the process. The problem, as I see it, is the difference between strategy and tactics when it applies to a military campaign.

Strategy is the overall scope of your battle plan. You will take that hill, then push on to the city below. Tactics are the decisions you make in battle. How will you deploy your troops? How will you send them up the hill? Should you use airpower or artillery?

Obama has a master strategy here--fix a whole bunch of problems that have needed fixing for a while, and fix them permanently. The problem is that politics is entirely about tactics, the daily ebb and flow of the battle. And they're getting outmaneuvered on all sides by the political Right, which is fewer in numbers and shoots themselves in the foot every chance they get, but has managed to keep the Obama Administration so harried they fired a USDA executive last week without stopping to consider the story's origin or veracity.

What does this have to do with Mayor McGinn though? Well, he has the same problem. He has a strategy, but he lacks the tactics to get it done, especially in the face of a City Council emboldened by having a political novice in the executive's chair. 

---

Think about his continual sputtering about the Viaduct. He does have a strategy, and it's not a bad one. He's pulling from the playbook of Fabius Maximus, the great Roman general who was maligned for his strategy against Hannibal. Fabius knew that Hannibal was a tactical genius: At Trasimene Lake, the Carthaginians slaughtered a far larger Roman army because Hannibal used the landscape and surprise to force the Romans out of their battle plan, rendering classical Roman tactics completely useless. Fabius knew Rome could not fight Hannibal's war.

---

Instead, he took a far different approach, one of guerrilla attacks and scorched earth that left the Carthaginians only holding the ground they stood on and without enough supplies to go on. The plan worked--as the food rations shrank, Hannibal considered whether it was time to board the ships and head back south.

But the plan did not sell well at home for Fabius. He was derided in public and slurred as "Cunctator"--the Delayer. Ground down by souring public sentiment and young upstarts wanting to take it to Hannibal, Fabius would lay down the mantle of dictator a year later. Within a few months 80,000 Roman soliders would die at Cannae, a battle that's still studied in military colleges for the genius tactics of Hannibal. Fabius was restored to honor, and his strategy--the Fabian strategy--has been used countless times over the last two millenia.

And that's precisely what McGinn is doing. It's a Fabian strategy. The longer he can delay on the tunnel plan, the more likely the tunnel plan will die. [Ed: Today's McGinn quote: "It appears that Council is doing everything possible to prevent a public vote. Yet they still have not dealt with the underlying issue--who will pay for overruns given the $2.4 billion cap in state law. Until the state law is changed, Seattle remains at risk of paying cost overruns."]

And all of us know this--the Fabian strategy seems to be how politics works in Seattle. But there are differences, mind you. A large majority of Seattleites don't want the city to be on the hook for cost overruns, which suggests that McGinn's strategy, while disjointed and obstructionist, would ultimately work.

At the same time, though, McGinn has no exit strategy for the Viaduct, other than going with a parkway. And then what? I'm not opposed to a parkway, but it will require a great deal of work, and expensive work at that, to improve "through-puts" on I-5 as he gave as his alternative last year. 

The City Council is going to move forward on the tunnel whether McGinn is onboard or not. McGinn will keep up his Fabian strategy for as long as he can. Ultimately, though, even Fabius ended up being wrong, standing opposed to Scipio's plan to take the war to Carthage's doorstep. That gamut ended with Hannibal's defeat at Zama and a decisive victory for Rome, leaving it alone as the major power in the central Mediterranean. What if the tunnel is deemed a success in the long term? Then McGinn the Environmentalist Savior becomes McGinn the Cunctator, yet another boulder in the road and the epitome of everything wrong with politics in Seattle.

Politics are tactics. Treating politics as strategy only works if you're not the one leading the troops.