the 17 point scale endorses a no vote on initiative 91 (i-91) rough draft

what is i-91? well, i-91 demands that the city receive fair value in any lease deals with for-profit sports organizations.

before i explain why this initiative is electoral garbage, let me offer two less relevant bits of insight. first, please recognize that i'm a political squirrel. in other words, the political corner of my brain is small and rather undeveloped. moreover, i spend most of my time running around looking for peanuts, so i don't nurture what little understanding that i may have--don't expect a flawless, bullet-proof argument. second, despite my political naivete, i feel that most of the propaganda against i-91 takes the wrong approach. arguments against i-91 tend to stress the fact that a yes vote is a big blow to local area sports. although this is true, i think it's a shame that i-91 rebuttals don't do more to appeal to non-sports fans. yes, a no vote is essentially an angry kick in colletive seattle sonic groin, but if you're a sports fan, i presume that you're already voting no on this initiative. thus, it makes more sense to begin by addressing the issue asportically.

who's supporting this initiative? citizens for more important things. i have to hand it to them: the bankrollers for this initiative have given themselves a clever title (but their website is messy and irritating; i felt like they were trying to sell me something. blechh!). cfmit was founded by nick licata (my least favorite city councilmember. earlier this year, president licata was quoted as saying that the sonics had "close to zero" cultural value in the city of seattle) and is currently led by chris van dyk, who, incidentally, isn't even a seattle resident. cfmit has noble aims. they hope that by slaying professional sports, money will be diverted to education and social services.