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.

Extra Fizz: Bike Bill Bumped

Politics, This Washington   March 5, 2010 at 9:18 am Josh Feit

Yesterday, to the glee of Cola BikeNerd Josh Cohen and Erica C. Barnett (also a BikeNerd, though not THEE BikeNerd), the “vulnerable users” bill, which would increase penalties against derelict drivers who injure or kill bikers (but had failed earlier in the session), got tacked on to another bill.

It was a swift legislative ploy by Seattle Sen. Joe McDermott (D-34), the sponsor of the vulnerabale users bill, who found a related bill to piggy back onto.

However, later in the day, Republican  Sen. Mark Schoesler (R-17) had the vulnerable users amendment “scoped.” Basically, Schoesler wanted to review whether McDermott’s amendment actually fell into the scope of the new bill–a bill to teach bike safety in driver’s ed classes.

Sen. Schoesler’s legislative play worked and the amendment was dropped.

Today is the last day for bills from the opposite house to pass out of the next house. The driver’s ed bill came over from the House. If Sen. McDermott wants to pass his vulnerable users legislation he has until 5 0′clock today to rewrite his amendment, make it fit into the scope of the driver’s ed bill, get it passed, and then send it back to the House with the amemdment.

BikeNerd and Erica have their fingers crossed.


  • giffy

    I'm not really sure more punishment is the answer here. As much as each side loves to blame the other, most bike v car accidents are caused by failures of infrastructure. When you have fast moving and hard to see vehicles in close proximity to large ones with blind spots you are going to have problems. Couple that with hilly terrain and other obstructions that can obscure approaching vehicles and you have a bad situation.

    For example I used to park a lot on Yesler around 14th. The hill crests not that far from there. It is also a rather trafficked bike route. I always check my mirror for bicyclists before I open my door, but the time it takes for a fast moving cyclists to go from where I cannot see them due to the hill, to where I can, can be less than the time it takes me to open my door. Legal responsibility aside if a cyclist were to hit my door who would really be at fault? I need to get out of my car, and the cyclists would likely be going below the speed limit. Neither of us could really act in a way that would prevent an accident such as that.

    With some rare exceptions people are intentionally doing things that result in accidents. Making penalties higher is not really going to change much behaviors since people tend to think they are behaving just fine. More education yes. More dedicated bike infrastructure yes. But this kind of stuff, eh, sure it will make bike riders feel good (or give a sense of satisfaction in the event of an accident), but it won't actually make anything safer. No different from the cell phone and texting laws which have been to have no effect on accident rates.

  • ben trovato

    The observations I've made in the course of multimodal transport (I drive, bike, walk) lead me to conclude that collisions are caused by the minority (hitherto small yet on the increase with the rise of the iPhone generation) of human beings who act as if patience is a vice, inattention is a virtue, and their grandparents' courtesy a hindrance to their sacred right to rush to the next stoplight or weave down the sidewalk.

  • http://twitter.com/VeloBusDriver VeloBusDriver

    Is it too much to ask that somebody go before a judge and be sentenced to community service after they have killed or injured somebody because their phone conversation was more important than safety of another individual? There are no criminal penalties here. NOBODY will go to jail because of this bill.

    Frankly, I wonder why law and order Republicans aren't calling for even harsher penalties. It mystifies me that Republicans are so dead set against such a tame bill. I consider myself a fiscal conservative and an independent voter but the state Republican party makes it virtually impossible to support their candidates. (I voted for Rob McKenna though!)

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed fattailed

    It seems that at least three quarters of the good stuff proposed in the Senate this year has been not only sponsored by Joe McDermott, but *championed* by him and cleverly maneuvered by him. (Sharon Nelson seems to be playing a similar role in the House. Hell of a district.)

    The guy deserves a full time job for sure, but it's a shame we're going to lose him to the County Council next year.

  • forevergreen

    So, by your logic, if someone punches you in the head and you don't die or if they punch you in the head and you do – the penalties should be the same as long as “they didn't mean it.”

    Thankfully, the public disagrees. One is assault and the other manslaughter, and the penalties are based on the severity of the outcome.

    Finally, most collisions are NOT a result of deficient infrastructure. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration research on the issue concludes that the vast majority are avoidable and can be attributed to operator error.

  • forevergreen

    As for your door example, you would be at fault as its illegal to open ones car door into traffic in a manner that forces other roadway users to have to change speed or direction to avoid a crash.

  • ivan

    Do not forget that we are also represented by Rep. Eileen Cody, chair of the House Health Care Committee, who has done heroic things in that area, and whose pace, performance, and work ethic is equal to that of Rep. Nelson and Sen. McDermott. Do not forget that County Executive Dow Constantine is also from the 34th.

    I don't know why you think it's a “shame” that we're going to “lose” Joe to the County Council. It's not like he's retiring from public service or something. He'll have double the salary and double the workload, and he'll give us our money's worth and then some.

    Sharon will move to Joe's Senate seat, where she will maintain the standard Joe has set in that chamber, and the District will love her successor in the House.

  • morning fizzy

    Actually intent is a major factor. You can't punch someone in the head without intent. If someone was just swing his arms around and happened to hit someone by accident it wouldn't be assault. The person you hit could sue for damages just like someone injured by a driver.

    All accidents are avoidable. Do you have any stats and links for the vast majority being attributed to the car driver having operator error?