Rep. Ed Murray is one of my state legislators. Here's why I think he might be vulnerable to losing his seat in November.
Ed Murray doesn't keep his word. I called his office a few weeks ago to encourage him to vote for the charter school bill. The aide told me that Murray supported the bill. One of Murray's colleagues in the House Democratic Caucus also told me that Murray had committed to support the bill. Just before last Wednesday's floor vote I called Murray's office again to reiterate my support for the bill. His aide reassured me he had no information to suggest that Murray's position would have changed. But Ed Murray voted against the bill. His NO vote didn't matter in this case, the bill passed anyway. Maybe Murray thought his vote was a safe way to pretend to be a hero for the teachers union. But still, my reaction was "What a duplicitous bozo. How can you trust this guy?"
The short answer is: I don't think you can trust him. This seems to be the way Ed Murray operates.
Last year as chair of the House Transportation Commitee, Ed Murray claimed to support accountability measures for Sound Transit, the runaway train agency, but then killed the bill in his committee. (It looks like he changed his position as part of a deal that would give him a future light rail station in his neighborhood)
A lot of people in Seattle are unhappy about Sound Transit's billion dollar cost overruns and lack of accountability. Other powerful elected officials have recently been thrown out of office for giving free rein to Sound Transit. Ed Murray could be part of the next wave to fall.
Monorail Car Tax Also a Bad Move for Murray
Ed Murray seems to have a fetish for protecting unpopular and badly managed transit agencies. He also introduced a bill this session to change the voluntary Monorail car tax that the voters approved, into a mandatory tax that the voters did not approve. Fortunately, the Senate Republicans, who apparently have more respect for voters and taxpayers than Ed Murray does, allowed the bill to die in committee.
Ed Murray has never had to run for his seat
Murray was appointed to his seat in 1995. He was "re-elected" in 1996, 1998, 2000 and 2002 with a Soviet Union-style 100% of the vote. He has never had to face an actual opponent. The district is so overwhelmingly Democratic that no Republican has run here since at least 1996 and possibly earlier. And the local Democratic machine has simply re-annointed Murray every two years.
It's probably tough to take out a committee chairman in a single-party district, but not impossible. In any event, the people of my district deserve a real choice in November and at the very least, a vigorous challenger could only teach Ed Murray to be a more responsive legislator. I hope to see Murray face some tough opposition this year.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 15, 2004 11:29 AMSo is this your campaign announcement :-)
I expect that you will by far have the coolest bumper stickers!
Posted by: Mike Silverman on March 15, 2004 01:32 PMSorry, Mike, I'm not going to run for this office or for any other office. It's a campaign announcement only in the sense that if the right person steps up to run against Murray I would support his or her campaign.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on March 15, 2004 03:04 PMIf not you, then please encourage somebody to run. When a guy like this runs unopposed, he takes it as a hyper-mandate. If it happens seven cycles in a row, could you blame him for believing it? A good reality check would be good medicine.
Posted by: Mike Kole on March 15, 2004 03:49 PMI hope to see Murray face some tough opposition this year.
Go for it.
If the top-two primary isn't thrown out by the courts, a conservative--oops more conservative or less liberal than Murray-- D could take it to the general and have a shot...
Posted by: gopgirl on March 16, 2004 08:51 PMJust a few comments, first don’t believe everything you read in the media. The reporter only gave part of my comments. The entire statement “It has been years since I have significantly door belled in my district because I am doorbelling for democratic candidates in swing districts.” In addition I pointed out to the reporter that when I do doorbell I meet moderate Dan Evans republicans who live in the 43rd. Again an indication that I do door bell. In addition the public record shows that I hold numerous campaign events in my district during election years. This year we already held a meeting on gay and lesbian issues that was attended by 500 people.
Finally as I told the reporter that, candidates left unchallenged is not a healthy thing for democracy, which includes me. I have both lost and won elections, but that is why we have them. Besides what is the worse that could happen, I could get a job that helps to really support my family and have evenings and weekends off.
On charter schools: First the comments of an anonymous member, unless you can tell me who it is, it is hard to know the context of the conversation. But forgive me for fully considering an issue, hearing all sides, before making up my mind. In the end based on the information I had in front of me I did not vote against the bill. I will be honest I still not sure if it was the correct vote (a statement that has overwhelmingly angered most on the constituents I have heard from on this issue). I am happy if you are interested in discussing my reasons in more detail (remember this is a part time gig, so give me some time to reply).
In regards to the comments made about transportation, I disagree with them, believe they misrepresent my positions and statements and again willing to provide more information if anyone is interested.
Finally regarding comments like pasty face, it has been years since I have been attacked for my Irish (and growing up Catholic) heritage. But on behalf of my pasty faced non tanning family, what a jerk….ooops…..I forgot Seattle politicians are not suppose to talk like that
Ed Murray