Elect Kevin Ranker, re-elect incumbents, to Legislature

Voters chose Democrat Kevin Ranker and Republican Steve Van Luven ahead of Henderson.

We decided to meet a second time with Ranker and Van Luven to probe further into their knowledge of Whatcom County issues. In our first meeting, both had shown some knowledge of regional issues and outlined impressive resumes showing their ability to step into the Senate seat being vacated by the retiring Harriet Spanel.

After our second meeting, we are convinced that Ranker is best prepared to represent Whatcom County.

Ranker, a San Juan County Commissioner, has taken a lot of time to educate himself about the Whatcom County issues important to 40th District voters. On Lake Whatcom, for example, he was able to spell out some unique ideas for helping get state funding to protect our community's drinking-water source.

He talked at length about the possibility of using the state's revolving loan program to replace septic systems around the lake with hookups to sewer system. That system is current in use in places like Hood Canal, but Ranker said he has met with several state officials to float the idea of expanding the program for Lake Whatcom, and that most agreed it was a good idea.

He also talked about developing a new rural storm water runoff ordinance that more closely deals with issues important around the lake, instead of forcing Whatcom County residents to try and live by storm water rules written by, and for the benefit of, people in the Seattle urban area.

Surprisingly, Van Luven had little new to offer about the lake. A man with long family ties in Whatcom County, and now a summer of campaigning behind him, he still fell back on the unrealistic idea of forcing the city of Bellingham to begin drawing more water from a water diversion in the Middle Fork of the Nooksack River as a way to help "flush" the lake. The city has foregone drawing a lot of water from its diversion, particularly in the dry months, as it looks to support efforts to save endangered salmon species in the river. Any reversal of that stance would likely have to come from the city, not the state senate, and seems sure to spur lawsuits from federal officials and Indian Tribes working to save salmon.

Unfortunately, that was the breadth of Van Luven's new ideas for Whatcom County across the board. Instead of offering specifics on how to support Western Washington University or the redevelopment of Bellingham's waterfront - both in the 40th District - Van Luven fell back on generalities about his experience as a state representative in a Bellevue-area district as evidence that he knows how the system works and how to get things done.

Ranker, on the other hand, talked about helping Western promote niches in which it can be successful on a statewide and even national scale, such as marine environmental work, and of how to get funds from statewide Puget Sound cleanup work to help push waterfront redevelopment. He had several new unique ideas, such as using public arts funding to help push local artistic involvement in the new waterfront.

Of course, local issues aren't the only issues a 40th District State Senator will deal with. We found on almost every issue Ranker was able to spell out a clear potential answer, including the state budget. We were concerned that he wouldn't rule out increasing taxes in our earlier meeting, and urge him to fight any plan to raise taxes on a citizenry already stretched by tight economic times.

Van Luven stands firmly against any new taxes, a stance we continue to admire. But we found his answers on statewide issues as vague as his thoughts on Whatcom County issues. On health care, for example, he said he had no idea what the solution to current problems would be.

We found Ranker much more clear on many topics, despite Van Luven's obvious advantage in political experience in his nearly two decades of service in the Legislature in another part of the state.

We encourage 40th District voters to send Ranker to Olympia.

STATE HOUSE, 40TH DISTRICT

Both Jeff Morris and Dave Quall will return to the state House this fall.

Quall, a beloved former educator in Mount Vernon, is running unopposed for his seat.

Morris faces only token opposition from Green Party candidate Howard Pellett. We found Pellett unaware of many of the issues the state faces and short of ideas on how to solve them.

The district is well-served by Morris, a leader on technological and energy issues in the state. We are pleased to recommend district voters cast their ballots for him this fall.

STATE HOUSE, 42ND DISTRICT

In the 42nd District, which represents all of Whatcom County north of Lakeway Drive and Lake Whatcom, two fine incumbents are seeking re-election this fall. We recommend voters send both Kelli Linville and Doug Ericksen back to Olympia for another term.

Both are fiscally conservative and both have a record of making time for, and working with, constituents from their district. Both are aware of the issues the state faces, particularly with an expected budget deficit, and have the experience to tackle the manner in a way that won't harm taxpaying citizens of Whatcom County.

? Like most citizens of the district, our editorial board has always sided with Linville's pragmatic, fiscally conservative approach to government. Linville, D-Bellingham, is a leader in her party in the push to have government run by setting priorities and spending money on the top priorities first - only addressing lower priorities if there is extra revenue in the budget.

That stance is likely to serve our state well in the next two years, as the state deals with falling revenue and a projected deficit of $3 billion or more.

We like Linville's opponent Jere Hawn too. Hawn is a program manager at Western Washington University and also an expert on quality operations management and efficiency. He talked to our board at length about how applying that expertise in Olympia could help glean waste in our state system. We have no doubt that his kind of expertise is desperately needed in some of our state agencies.

There is little to separate the Linville and Hawn on the substantial issues. Both are against new taxes. Both want more efficient and better-prioritized government. Both have ideas about where to cut government to deal with the deficit. Both want to get rid of the Washington Assessment of Student Learning test and to create some sort of merit-pay system to reward the best teachers. Both are against a universal, state-run, health care system.

But we believe Linville has the better, broader experience. She has been a strong leader for our community and for the state for many years. She is in line for even more important positions in the House, including potentially being chair of the House Appropriations committee, where she could better enact some of the fiscal-sanity clauses she has promoted for nearly two decades. Voters should send Linville back to Olympia to continue that work.

? Ericksen, R-Ferndale, is a leader in his party. He takes seriously the job of leading opposition to issues important to Republicans in Washington and calling out leaders of the Democratic Party when necessary. We don't agree with all of his ideas, but many we believe are well-worth pursuing.

For example, Ericksen talked of having all state educators move to the state health care plan, an idea that could save taxpayers millions of dollars annually. He talked about exempting schools from the state fuel tax, which could help schools have money for much needed in-class programs. He has ideas about how to get more people who can afford health care insurance, including reluctant young adults, to buy some, lessening the financial strain on hospitals and clinics.

We are also convinced Ericksen would not vote for a tax increase in these tight economic times, something every legislator should be able to say.

Ericksen's opponent is political newcomer Mark Flanders of Bellingham. Flanders described himself as a fiscal conservative who is progressive on "green" issues. He said he considers partisan battles a waste of time and was critical of Ericksen's work for his party, saying it cut into time he could have been serving his district.

Flanders was short on specifics about how his stances on issues differed from Ericksen. He agreed with Ericksen about not raising taxes and getting rid of the WASL test, for example. He talked about applying business principles to state agencies as a way to eliminate waste.

He said he didn't think the state would have to deal with the health care issue because he believes Sen. Barack Obama is going to be elected president and the system would be dealt with on a national scale.

But on some other issues he could only offer that once he got to Olympia he would look at them and then decide.

We admire Flanders for choosing to run, but we feel Ericksen is clearly the best choice for voters.

Recent Stories

• PeaceHealth should receive support for ethical stance
• Holiday Port kicks off season of community activities
• Extend your hand to the needy this holiday season
• Local shopping will help our economy this season
• What's next for Washington state's Republican Party?