I NEED to preface this with a little personal info for my own piece of mind: I joined Wolf PAC because it is a bipartisan effort laser focused on one goal. I'm a staunch independent. I think the two party system is really hurting our country, I vote third party or independent whenever I can, and I've seen good people -and a-holes- in both demographics, so what follows is not easy for me.
Wolf PAC did not put me up to this, I'm doing this as requested by several friends, and some horrible part of me thinks I just didn't receive enough abuse when I did this for the primaries.
US Congress and Senate: We're bypassing these folks, they're a big part of the problem. When in doubt at the national level, DRIP (Don't Reelect Incumbent Politicians).
Governor: I haven't found either candidate specifically addressing campiagn finance reform.
Lt. Governor: Habib said he was supportive, we'd love his help in the senate. Haven't heard from McClendon.
Auditor: Miloscia said he'd support us. Doesn't matter in that position, but there you are.
District 7- Walkinshaw. He and Jayapal Both support us, but he was super helpful, and was the first to sign our request for vote. Constituents had a real problem getting any time from Jayapal, she just straight up ignored them whether session was in or not.
Superintendent: Reykdal was our sponsor in the house. I am extremely supportive of him because of this.
State Legislature, house and senate: If you don't know your district it will say on your ballot, or you can use this
Knee-jerk partisanship is really pissing me off. In other states the republicans sponsored THE SAME BILL and then democrats wouldn't vote for it. Here we have the opposite problem, and we were blocked by republicans, so Wolf PAC has been told our best bet is to flip the senate to a democrat majority- Close races are 41, 28 and 17. I think our best bet is to get both republican and democrat sponsors, either way.
In the legislature, vote democratic incumbents, vote AGAINST Republican incumbents WITH TWO EXCEPTIONS: Chad Magendanz(5th LD) and Linda Kochmar(30th LD), who bravely crossed the aisle to vote for us.
Districts to note:
1st LD: The Democrats passed a resolution to support us. Unanimously.
5th LD: Magendanz said he'd co-sponsor and has done a lot to help us. If I were in the 5th I'd vote Magendanz, as we need a republican sponsor (and he's a good man). However both Magendanz and Mullet are supportive but mullet didn't speak out during the vote where Magendanz did and broke from party lines. IF we can flip the senate to a democrat majority we're told our bill should pass with no problem, but Magendanz has proven to be a good man and has taken a lot of time out to help us. I would love to see him as a sponsor or co sponsor next session.
9th LD: Even if you're a republican, in the 9th LD, please vote Goulet. Dye is an embarrassment and bragged about taking Koch money.
12th LD: Wyss only because he never voted against us. Hawkins did.
17th: Probst, please.
18th: Rivers says she is supportive and took time out to help us. I know a lot of progressives don't like her for other reasons. Holt walks the walk and refuses to take big money.
28: Peloquin, please
30th: Yes to Kochmar, no to Hickel
39th LD (my district): Linda Wright has taken a lot of time to talk to us and says she is highly supportive, and her opponent voted against us (and lied to me twice). Koster(R) Says he is supportive and his opponent Metcalf does as well, so go with other issues on that one.
41: Wellman, please
One person I'd like to mention who didn't bring our bill to the senate floor despite at least 50 of her constitutents asking her to do so (that's a lot of people to hear from on one issue), is Pam Roach. She's still a senator, but she's also running for Pierce County council. She doesn't listen to her constitutents. Just Sayin'.
Initiatives: (These are personal opinions and I am not a lawyer)
I735: YES. Asking congress to propose an amendment, Wolf PAC is MANDATING congress call a convention to propose an amendment. Either way, we need an amendment. Hundreds of people have worked very hard to get 735 on the ballot.
1464: Damnit. They're on the right track, and I want to see union and corporate money out, but there's some wooly first amendment issues on this one and it's convoluted as hell (23 pages?!). I want to tell them to go back and write it again, properly this time. If it passes, I'm willing to bet the Federal courts will step in and say it's unconstitutional because of... Citizens United!
732: 27 pages! You guys are dicks. Oh HELL No. It's supposed to lower taxes on individuals and take them out on carbon producers -sounds great! It charges people by industry and hey-ho guess who gets a break: Boeing. but pea shucking companies and farmers get to pay extra tax on gross revenue, hospitals included. Did the sponsors even read this?! Go back and write this fairly in five pages or less if you're gonna do it.
1433: I was on the fence about minimum wage- I have my own business that serves business owners, so you can imagine I'm not a big fan of laws that adversely affect me or my customers. Then I saw Australia's numbers. Businesses don't need tax breaks or loans or incentives as much as they need CUSTOMERS. Customers are people with disposable income who make a living wage. If your business plan for success involves paying your workers less than a living wage, rethink it. BUT FFS can you NOT have it cost the state 300 MILLION?! Sick leave... Yeah, no one wants to pay for work that isn't being done, but the CDC and WHO can tell you all about the problems NOT having it is causing. Reluctant yes.
1501: What? Only eight pages this time...for stuff that's already illegal and WTF SEIU. Don't give out cagegiver information because it's PRIVATE, not because it's illegal. Thwere are also lists the caregivers need to be on so they can sign for shit. This is fishy as hell. No.
1491: Um. There's already restraining orders, the Lautenberg Amendment, and takes 14 days and this still isn't adressing the underlying problems behind gun violence. It causes more backups for the courts and due process/2nd amendment on this one is pretty wooly, I'm a no. 21 pages.
Wolf PAC is working to get corporate, union and dark/foreign money out of the election system via an amendment convention of the states (AKA article V amendment). To call an amendment convention fo the states we have to pass a bill through the legislatures of 34 states with close to the same wording. So far we have five: NJ, VT, CA, IL & RI.
Last legislative session our bill, HJM4000, passed the house, but the senate wouldn't even bring it up for a vote. So we have to do it again next session, it'll be the same bill with a couple of obvious changes-the name of the president- Getting supportive legislators in place is going to be crucial to this passing.
I may edit this as I get more information, but my ballot is going out on the 5th, so if you have additions, corrections or objections, let me know NOW.
You've already decided who you're voting for as president. Wolf PAC is a thing because we currently live in an oligarchy, the president can't call a convention to propose an amendment, the only thing they can do is pressure Congress. I'm voting third party, I always vote third party. If a third party can get 5% of the popular vote, they're eligible to receive campaign money from the FEC. Everyone wants more and better choices. Never have they had as much of a chance to do so as they do now.