Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

x close
The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

Senate Democrats Kill Bill That Mandated Protections Against Foreclosures

This Washington   February 11, 2010 at 1:54 pm Josh Cohen

Big banks in Washington got a little protection yesterday when South Seattle Sen. Adam Kline’s (D-37) foreclosure bill died in the Senate Ways and Means committee.

As we reported in Morning Fizz, the bill passed in the voice vote, but when it came time for the yeas to sign on (the critical part of a bill’s passage out of committee) several democrats backed out. Here’s an update: The actual ‘No’ votes were Redmond Sen. Rodney Tom (D-48), Snohomish Sen. Steve Hobbs (D-44), and Seattle Sen. Ed Murray (D-43). (The bill ended up three votes shy of making it out of committee. No Republicans supported moving the bill to the Senate floor for a vote.) Tacoma Sen. Debbie Regala (D-27) signed as “pass without recommendation” which is essentially a neutral vote since it does not move a bill out of committee. Regala tells PubliCola simply: “I didn’t feel the bill had enough merit for me to support it.”

The bill would have given homeowners some protections from foreclosure—a plus in Washington where, according to a study by the Center for Responsible Lending, foreclosure proceedings began for 30,000 people last year with another 130,000 expected over the next three years. The bill would haverequired a mandatory good-faith mediation between lenders and borrowers to evaluate the possibility of modifying the loan. The modification would help homeowners pay their mortgage and keep their homes. According to Beverly Spears, Director of the Statewide Poverty Action Network, the bill was a win-win for banks and borrowers since people could get a second chance on their homes and lenders could get paid. Spears is disappointed by the outcome of the committee meeting.

“That Democrats would be defending the banks is just unconscionable to us,” said Spears. “It was taxpayers who bailed out the banks when they were in trouble. All we were asking was a good faith effort on the part of lenders to see if they would meet with the folks and modify their loans to keep them in their homes.”

The bill was amended in Ways and Means to exempt small lenders and credit unions leaving only big banks on the hook for the good-faith mediation and renegotiation.

I have calls into Seatte Sen. Murray. (Tom had been a ‘No’ vote all along, according to Spears.) Sen. Kline wouldn’t comment on his colleague’s votes saying simply he was glad we were doing the story and felt the bill would have prevented unnecessary foreclosures.

As we reported yesterday, a separate bill mandating protections against foreclosure—preventing banks from foreclosing on temporarily unemployed people—was gutted in the House.




  • WK9

    What does Murray have to say for himself? What does Kline's primary challenger, Eric Liu, say about the bill?

  • sarah68

    Who cares what Liu says? Kline sponsored the bill, for petes sake, and the 3 other Dems voted no. What are their excuses?

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed fattailed

    Can we assume that the voice votes for Yes but then no sign-ons was an attempt to muddy the record for political opponents down the line? If so, very very glad Publicola reported on this and put it clearly *on* the record.

    And how appropriate that BS paperwork would play a role in killing foreclosure legislation. A poetic injustice.

  • Ed Murray

    Happy to tell you my position.
    First, I leading the senate democratic effort to end tax exemptions and raise new taxes to save very important programs. The bill included a fee, one I might be willing to support, but only in relation to the larger package we are attempting to put together. One big vote on a whole series of fees is a whole lot better then a bunch of individual votes.
    Secondly the explanation of the bill left more then a few members confused.
    Thanks,
    Ed Murray

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed fattailed

    Sen. Murray: That *might* explain a “no” vote on this bill. But you didn't vote “no”. You pretended to vote “yes” and then actually killed the bill. That's the part that needs some explaining. And no, it's not much consolation that you might grab the funding source and apply it to something else in a big last-minute budget package.
    .
    And you're also saying you also voted yes/no because *other* members were confused by the explanation of the bill? Is evoking “other members” like this a legislator's equivalent of “I have a friend who…”?

  • zanneg

    Ed Murray- that is not leadership. All the other democrats came away thinking the bill had passed and you undermined it to go for a larger package that you're “attempting”. That's a relief. Thanks a LOT Senator. I'm so glad you killed a bill that had broad support to wait for a larger bill that might never get passed… a bird in hand…

  • Ed Murray

    I did not vote yes during the voice vote. I am curious why you would think so. I think it is shameful that Spears would attack the very senators who are attempting to raise taxes and save important programs, particularly programs that assist the poor. It is amazing to me that while Tim Eyman and the tea baggers are down here banging our heads in we would be attack by people who should be spending their time helping us in our effort to raise taxes.
    Thanks,
    Ed Murray

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed fattailed

    If publicola mis-reported the voice vote, apologies on that score.

    Maybe you would get some support on revenue if you all would share with the public what the heck you're planning.

    FYI, Screwing over allies is hardly the way to build support in this session or in your inevitable future run for higher office. What have the senate dems moved forward this session? Not housing. Not labor. Not environmental protections. Bankers have done ok though.

  • Mud Baby

    Thanks Ed, for informing the electorate of mass confusion on the part of your party members, which you apparently could be bothered to even attempt to alleviate. Sheesh!

  • zanneg

    I am ALL for advocates being on the side (and speaking out on the side) of legislators who are doing work to support people with low incomes. But if you're trying to quiet an anti-poverty advocate BEFORE you've done ANYTHING this session, then you're just pushing people who don't usually have a voice, who Spears is representing, further to the periphery, further away from being allowed to disagree with the Democrats (who, by the way, need to be educated on issues that affect poor people, too). All Poverty Action has been doing is working to beat down Tim Eyman's initiatives (over 4,000 calls fall of 2009!) to pave the way for you to do right by poor people in our state. It is shameful that YOU wouldn't recognize THAT and attack Spears. Low-income advocates have very few priorities this session. One major priority is foreclosure prevention. Another is revenue raising. As an advocate myself, I think it is fair for us to criticize your position on foreclosure prevention while, at the same time, working to support raising revenue to protect vital programs. If you think we have to pick one to make you look better, you should reconsider what's “shameful”.