The Association of Washington Business wants Gov. Christine Gregoire to gut a family leave bill waiting for her signature. Don Brunell, president of the business lobby group, wrote the governor last week urging her to veto everything in the bill except the section that calls for a task force to study implementation of family leave. (This from a link on Richard Davis' AWB Olympia Business Watch blog.) Brunell quotes an author Gregoire often cites herself to make the case:

Thomas L. Friedman, author of The World is Flat, commented in a 2005 New York Times essay, "A Race to the Top," on the disparity between the countries of Europe, with stagnant economies and crumbling welfare benefit structures, and our new competitors in eastern and southern Asia — India and China, and the dynamism of their economies. Wrote Thomas, "French voters are trying to preserve a 35-hour work week in a world where Indian engineers are ready to work a 35-hour day. Good luck."

I think of this quote whenever our Legislature considers — or passes — employment regulations that attempt to align us with "the rest of the civilized world," as proponents of paid family leave contend. What the Legislature has done with E2SSB 5659, by contrast, is enact a programmatic mandate that only one other state in our nation, California, has put into place, and one that is entirely foreign to our new global competitors to the east.

As you have noted many times, our state's businesses compete on this global scale. We must be mindful of the regulatory costs that our state imposes upon them that hamper their economic competitiveness. Paid family leave, as envisioned by the Legislature, will be one such cost.

Holly Armstrong, Gregoire's communications director, told me just now the governor is still reviewing the bill, but is expected to sign it and hasn't shown any inclination to strip it down to a study.

At the meeting in Bellingham this weekend where Democrats voted to ignore the results of the state's presidential primary, the party's central committee also passed a resolution in support of Ehren Watada, the Army lieutenant who refused orders to go to Iraq. The News Tribune's Sean Cockerham covered the meeting and I think alone got that news. He wrote:

The resolution supporting Watada passed easily, although it was by show of hands so there wasn't an exact vote count.

"We support and commend Lt. Ehren Watada for his courage, moral leadership, and commitment to duty demonstrated by his act of resistance to the continued costly, destructive and immoral U.S. military occupation of Iraq," the resolution said.

Mike Carnahan, a Democratic Central Committee member from Clark County, spoke against the Watada resolution. It's an all-volunteer military, he said. "I find it offensive as, a veteran, to have him doing what he's doing," Carnahan said.

But other veterans on the committee said that, particularly as an officer, Watada shouldn't just blindly follow.

Watada opponents are starting to weigh in on the party move. From the blog A Soldier's Perspective:

Slowly, the Democrats are showing their true colors and continued disrespect for our military. They support the breakdown of military discipline, defeat in military operations, and the political destruction of our Commander-in-Chief.

The Olympian has this headline today:

Pay raise delay irks Gregoire

Gregoire was at The Olympian to talk to the editorial board Thursday. And in a town full of state employees, she of course was asked about pay raises in the budget approved by lawmakers last week. That budget delays raises for non-union state workers for two months after unionized employees get their increase.

That saves about $15 million a year. But lawmakers also saw it as a way to give union employees a benefit for their membership.

Gregoire told the paper she opposed the delay. And she used the parlance of the Capital to describe what happened when she tried to get the Legislature to see things her way:

"I got rolled," she said.

But Gregoire proposed the delay.

It was included in the budget proposal she unveiled in December. House Democrats supported the idea, too. The Senate Democratic budget would have given raises to all workers come July 1.

What Gregoire described to The Olympian sounds like a pre-emptive surrender on her part. She said she proposed the pay raise delay this year because she lost that fight last year:

"I knew I would get run over again. I got run over last time," she said Thursday. "So this time I inquired, 'Is this what's going to happen again?' And I was told bluntly, 'Yes.' So I decided I wasn't going to get into a dogfight over this one."

So maybe the writing was on the wall this year. But can you be irked when lawmakers adopt something that was included in your own budget? And how does that constitute being rolled?

Oregon Rep. Brian Clem, a Democrat, has introduced a bill to allow well behaved dogs into bars. The Oregonian reported:

Clem's 11-year-old Weimaraner, Ooji, was upstairs snoozing in the Capitol when Clem testified Thursday before a House committee. But Clem brought along a framed picture to show the committee just what a great guy Ooji is.

"My dog goes to work with me. He sleeps next to me. He eats dinner near me," said Clem, whose wife, Carol Suzuki, is equally smitten by Ooji.

Washington state Sen. Ken Jacobsen wasn't only an early adopter of the dogs-in-bars movement, it was a riskier political move for him because he had a cat at home that thought he should have better things to do with his time in Olympia. Clem is obviously a dog person and won't face those domestic pressures.

But as the movement spreads across the country, Jacobsen can be happy that his chaos theory is at work. Here's how he explained it in The Times last month:

"I'm into the theory of chaos. And in the theory of chaos, if this particle exists and this one comes into existence and this one doesn't know that one exists? It still affects the behavior of that one," he said, moving his hands around as if they were giant particles.

The state Supreme Court said in an opinion released this morning that KVI talk show hosts did not need to report their advocacy for an anti-gas tax campaign as an in-kind political contribution. And the court has reinstated a countersuit filed by the No New Gas Tax (NNGT) campaign against local governments that initially sued.

We hold that RCW 42.17.090 did not require NNGT to disclose the value of KVI's radio broadcasts supporting the initiative campaign as an in-kind contribution. The statutory media exemption, RCW 42.17.020(15)(b)(iv), excludes from the definition of "contribution" political advocacy for or against a political campaign by the hosts of a regularly scheduled talk show, broadcast by a radio station that is not controlled by a candidate or political committee. We reverse the order dismissing NNGT's counterclaims and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

The opinion was unanimous. The majority opinion was written by Justice Barbara Madsen and signed by Chief Gerry Alexander and justices Tom Chambers, Charles Johnson, Susan Owens, Mary Fairhurst and Bobbe Bridge. Justices Jim Johnson wrote a concurrence, which Justice Richard Sanders also signed, saying:

Today we are confronted with an example of abusive prosecution by several local governments. San Juan County and the cities of Seattle, Auburn, and Kent (hereinafter Municipalities) determined to file a legal action ostensibly for disclosure of radio time spent discussing a proposed initiative. This litigation was actually for the purpose of restricting or silencing political opponents and was quickly dismissed after the filing deadline for the initiative.

Johnson and Sanders say the case showed a "disregard for core freedoms of speech and association."

The case began with a lawsuit filed against the campaign trying to repeal a 9.5-cent gas tax increase. The suit was filed by San Juan County and the cities of Seattle, Auburn and Kent.

In 2005 Thurston County Superior Court Judge Chris Wickham ordered that KVI hosts John Carlson and Kirby Wilbur to report their on-air support as in-kind contributions from their employer, Fisher Communications, which owns KVI.

Wickham also dismissed a countersuit filed by the initiative campaign, saying the local governments were stepping on the radio hosts First Amendment rights.

More from Madsen:

The distinction between "political advertising" and "commentary" may be relevant in deciding whether a media entity is performing a legitimate press function. However, the distinction does not turn on the content of the communication. In accordance with its statutory authority,11 the PDC has further defined "political advertising" as it relates to the media exemption:

Political advertising does not include letters to the editor, news or feature articles, editorial comment or replies thereto in a regularly
published newspaper, periodical, or on a radio or television
broadcast where payment for the printed space or broadcast time is
not normally required.

...

Under the PDC's regulation, the media exemption applies to coverage of a
candidate or ballot measure that occurs during the "content" period of a broadcast, as opposed to the commercial advertising period, when payment is normally required. Hence, if a radio station makes available to a campaign broadcast time for which it ordinarily receives a fee, i.e., commercial time, an in-kind contribution would result. However, the mere fact that a broadcast has value to a campaign, or includes solicitation of funds, votes, or other support, does not convert "commentary" into "advertising" when it occurs during the content portion of a broadcast for which payment is not normally required.

Times reporter Sharon Pian Chan spoke to Carlson, who said:

"It's a great day for freedom of speech in Washington and great day for freedom of speech in America. I am stunned that it was 9-nothing. I thought we would win but rarely do you see the court come down 9-nothing.

"There was a lot at stake if this decision had been upheld. Basically radio commentary would have become de facto advertising and free speech would have been commercial speech."

At Crosscut, Kimberly Marlowe Hartnett points to reports on the large number of Russian and Ukranian churches in Oregon that have been active and vocal in opposing gay rights legislation in the Legislature there.

Some other members of churches with large Russian and Eastern European memberships firmly disagree with the loose-knit group calling itself The Voice of Oregon Youth, telling reporters that the activists do not represent them and emphasizing that there is no monolithic Russian-Christian community. At this point, however, their voices are muffled by the rallying cries of those fighting against proposed civil rights protections for lesbian, gay, and trans folks. While not linked to any particular group, a threat was made on a lawmaker's voice mail that "all who vote for queers will die by November."

Marlowe Hartnett — a former Times reporter who I'm happy to be able to read regularly again — points out that in Washington we've already seen an alliance between established conservative churches and Eastern European immigrants. Ken Hutcherson, of course, has also traveled east, to protest the gay rights movement in Latvia.

The state Supreme Court is expected Thursday to release its decision in a high-profile case that could decide whether political advocacy on talk radio should be defined as a campaign contribution. The court has listed the case among those that will be released in the morning.

The case focuses on conservative KVI hosts John Carlson and Kirby Wilbur. They campaigned on the air in 2005 for a ballot measure that would have overturned the biggest gas-tax increase in state history. For background, see this 2006 story by Ralph Thomas:

The case stems from a lawsuit filed by San Juan County and the cities of Seattle, Auburn and Kent last year against Nonewgastax.com, the group backing Initiative 912, which was aimed at repealing a new 9.5-cent gasoline-tax increase.

Carlson and Wilbur promoted the initiative vigorously on KVI, asking listeners to collect signatures and donate money to the effort. Many of their on-air remarks suggested they were launching the initiative.

Last year, Thurston County Superior Court Judge Chris Wickham ordered that the I-912 committee had to disclose the on-air pitches as in-kind contributions from Fisher Communications, which owns KVI.

There are all sorts of strange bedfellows in this case. I'm eager to see how it comes out.

Darcy Burner is one of three Democratic congressional challengers in a contest to see which of them will get the first endorsement of the 2008 campaign from Democracy for America, the grassroots group founded by Howard Dean.

Burner is one of the finalists in the Grassroots All-Star contest. She is up against Charlie Brown in California and Eric Massa in New York.

The endorsement may not seem like a huge deal, but for challengers already in the race for 2008 it is the sort of thing that could bring more early money from progressives across the country. Both Massa and Brown are using their campaign Web sites to encourage people to vote for them. Not Burner, though. Her Web site only asks for donations.

She is doing a little campaigning for the honor, though. The second of two low-budget campaign videos she has produced urges people to go to DFA and vote for her.

You can see the first episode here. Burner filmed and edited the spots herself. They're a far cry from the almost over-produced ads she ran in '06. I thought Burner's personality was largely lost in some of the ads.

David Goldstein says Burner's YouTube spots are a sign of further disintermediation in politics.

First the Internet enabled politicians to connect directly with voters, disintermediating the legacy press out of the equation. Now tech savvy politicians like Darcy Burner are attempting to use the Internet to connect directly with voters, disintermediating political advertising out of the equation... and the high-priced, professional media consultants who create it

.

We'll see about that. The spots are refreshing and obviously something very different and much more personal than what we see in a campaign. But at this point they're just sidelights. Burner worked closely in '06 with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and her campaign showed plenty of signs of being shaped by "high-priced, professional media consultants."

Self-produced YouTube ads in the spring before the election year are one thing. There are plenty of examples of creative use of the Internet in campaigning. But I've yet to see a major candidate commit to Goldstein's "disintermediation" once they become serious contenders.

House Minority Leader Richard DeBolt suffered minor injuries in a traffic accident yesterday, according to the Centralia Chronicle. (Subscription required.)

The Chronicle's Sharyn Decker reports that DeBolt, R-Chehalis, was ticketed for running a stop sign in the accident that sent his pickup truck flying and landing on its roof. None of the three drivers involved suffered serious injury. The accident happened after lunch Monday in Centralia.

The Chronicle reports:

"I really don't know what happened," DeBolt said shortly after the collision, as he stood on the sidewalk, cellular telephone in hand, looking over his truck that lay upside down in the middle of North Gold Street. A patch of apparent blood showed through the left shoulder of his blue dress shirt, near two holes in the fabric.

"I don't know. The next thing I know, I was in the air," DeBolt said. "I had my seat belt on."

DeBolt was also cited for expired tabs on his truck. He told the Chronicle he didn't recall if he stopped at the stop sign, though witnesses said he had run through the intersection without stopping.

"I can't imagine me blowing it, it's not me," DeBolt said.

If you follow Snohomish County politics, you already know Executive Aaron Reardon is doing battle with the County Council, including his fellow Democrats. It's a fight over spending, or really a fight over rumors of spending.

Council members were unhappy at reports that Reardon was going to use as much as $300,000 of county money to help fund a party and rollout celebration for a new Boeing jet. That's already led the council to pass an emergency ordinance to control the exec's spending authority.

The Herald yesterday had details of the growing level of frustration council members felt. That's most clear in exchanges between deputy county executive Mark Soine and Council Chairman Dave Gossett, a Democrat.

"Are you planning on county funding for these events?" Gossett asked Soine during that first meeting.

"Like I said: We're not in a position to disclose any events that may be taking place," Soine said.

On April 9, Gossett again asked about costs.

Soine said: "Until we finalize some discussions with Boeing, there is, you know, I'm not in a position to discuss any events publicly."

Gossett: "So perhaps $50,000 would cover it?" And later, "Could it be up to $100,000?"

He added: "You don't have to talk about the particular event, you just have to tell me a round number of what the expenditure might be. I can't imagine how that creates any breach of confidences with anyone."

Soine again said there were no numbers he could share, but he offered to meet privately with Gossett.

That happened, Gossett said, but Soine still didn't answer his questions.

On April 16, the conversation turned even more testy.

Soine told Gossett that talking about costs, without firm plans, would be speculation.

"Well, speculate," Gossett told Soine.

"I will not speculate," Soine said.

Gossett: "$300,000."

Soine: "I will not speculate, Council Chairman."

Gossett: "So, essentially we are talking about $300,000 of taxpayers' money for this event."

Soine: "You can characterize my comments however you care, Mr. Chairman, but I will not speculate on dollar amounts."

The paper posted some of the documents here. At Sound Politics, Eric Earling says they are "a slap-your-hand-against-your-forehead detailing of the seemingly poor communication from the Executive's office coupled with some robust pique from the Council." Earling says it's making them all look bad. (He actually says it's making all election officials look bad, but I'm pretty sure he means elected officials. He must have forgotten to override the Official Automated Sound Politics Election Official Blame Sentence Generator.)

House Speaker Frank Chopp promoted his and his fellow Democrats' progressive credentials this morning. He touted things such as the mental health parity bill, an increase in school construction, grants for free community college tuition for some students, family leave and expanding subsidized health insurance for children.

Chopp is well aware of criticism from some on the left that he and the big House majority he controlled were too timid. At times that criticism was loud and clear from fellow Democrats in the Senate. But he said the House has been successful in pushing progressive legislation for three years running.

"But if you do that progressive agenda and you're thoughtful about how to work with people, it'll become a mainstream agenda. The things that we've done the last three sessions are ... very progressive legislation. But people consider it commonsense, middle of the road, mainstream. Well, that's the best of all, because we're trying to figure out what the people of the state want, as well as what they need."

The Senate was particularly unhappy with the version of the family leave bill that became law. The bill that passed doesn't include a specific funding source, while Senate Democrats wanted to use a payroll tax on employees to fund the mandated leave. Chopp said today he has three ideas for funding that are "better than the proposal from the Senate."

His ideas — which he said are all still in the early stages of review — include using interest earned from the unemployment insurance fund and trying to get money from the federal government as part of a children's health-care program.

Chopp also pointed out that one of the groups that was lobbying hard for family leave was the Economic Opportunity Institute, a group he formed before his time in the Legislature.

"Some of these things that are coming to fruition are things I've been working on for 15 to 20 years."

Last night Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, mentioned a homeowner's bill of rights and a restriction on gravel mining on Maury Island as two Senate priorities that died in the House.

Chopp said he supported the Maury Island bill, but that he did not have the votes in his caucus. When pressed about that, he said that was a question for "the 19 people in caucus who told me 'No.' "

The homeowner bill, though, Chopp said needed work and consultation with people in the housing industry.

"We will bring people together ... to make sure that we do something that will actually do what it intended and make sure that we do it the right way.

...

"If you haven't ever had to get a building permit, if you've never had to get a contractor to build an apartment building or a large home complex, if you've never had to deal across the table from an permit issuer, if you never had to go to an insurance company to get construction insurance, if you've never had to go to a bank to get interim construction financing, if you've never had to deal with the egos of architects; do you want me to keep going? Then you ought to consider those points of view."

Chopp is always thinking about the next election. He said this morning he has already identified candidates for the 2008 election season.

"We already have six to pick up more seats," he said to laughs from reporters. "I'm not joking." We asked who they were, but he said, "No, I better not. I have them. You'll see them."

This morning was the first time Chopp had held a media availability since February. That was the event where he mistakenly — and he says jokingly — accused NASCAR legend Richard Petty of having a DUI on his record.

That came up this morning when Chopp was asked about the session, and what he would have done differently. He said he made mistakes, and despite his staff encouraging him not to be specific, Chopp said when pressed:

"I'll think about that. Wait a minute, the last time someone said that it was George Bush. He couldn't think of a mistake so I don't want to repeat that mistake.

"Let me say, actually I thought I made a mistake when I talked about Petty, Richard Petty. I just thought that was, well, stupid and thought it was inappropriate. And I really get down on myself when I do something wrong that might have hurt somebody. I had no right saying that. I meant it as a joke. But I agonized over that. I think it was wrong what I did."

The House is debating the operating budget. The Senate is milling. It all should be over in a matter of minutes. Gov. Chris Gregoire will appear soon with House and Senate leaders at a media availability. At least the leaders that are still here will appear. Senate Minority Leader Mike Hewitt isn't expected, the governor's staff said. In fact, most of the Senate Republicans appear to have already left.

The governor will soon issue a press release where she declares:

"This legislative session was marked by strategic and responsible changes that Washington familes can count on."

Among success touted by Gregoire is the proposed constitutional amendment to create a rainy day fund, an expansion of pre-kindergarten programs, a delay in the math and science WASL, and providing subsidized health care insurance for 38,500 additional children.

UPDATE: The Legislature has adjourned. At her press conference Gregoire said:

"This year we maintained a simple but important agenda."

She said that on environmental issues, this will go down as one of the most productive sessions ever.

MORE: Brown highlighted the two issues where there was the most bipartisan cooperation in the Senate, a prison reform bill and a proposed constitutional amendment for a rainy day fund.

She also touched on issues that were left undone -- saying that included everything from allowing dogs in bars to a homeowner's bill of rights. The latter was a point of serious contention among Democrats, with some blaming Chopp for killing that bill.

Chopp was brief in his comments, and praised his party's performance.

"In short, the session has been a great session for one Washington. Democrats delivered and we got done on time."

The rainy day fund and a constitutional amendment to allow school levies to pass with a simple majority will appear on the November ballot. Chopp said he would campaign for the simple majority proposal. Brown and Gregoire said they'd work for both constitutional amendments.

But none said they planned to campaign for the regional transportation package that will also appear on the ballot.

The Legislature is at a stand still while the House and Senate figure out the last few details before dropping the gavel for Sine Die. So for my entertainment, I was just watching this submission to The Seattle Times digital short contest, which the House and Senate caucuses watched today:

The Speaker is played by Patrick Schaefer, the House's video intern this year, and the members are played by his pal Faraz Zarghami.

The House Clerk's office confirms that the family of O'Brien telephoned today to say that he had died.

O'Brien was one of the most powerful Speakers in state history. (The House office building is named after him.) Former Senate leader R.R. "Bob" Grieve said in an oral history done by the Secretary of State's offifce:

John O'Brien was one of the toughest and most capable people that Olympia has ever known. He was something else again, and he liked to run things with an iron hand. He was never very fond of me because I was way too independent for him. He kind of felt that the Senate should be a part of his domain, which we never were willing to accept. But, nevertheless, he was an awfully capable and bright man, and usually right.

O'Brien was appointed to the House in 1939 to fill a vacant seat. He went on to serve longer than any other legislator. He was in the House for half the time that Washington had been a state, according to a resolution passed to honor him in 1993.

O'Brien served four terms as speaker, and also was elected at times majority and minority leader. He was known as a "practiced parliamentarian." The Legislature honored him by saying:

He is the epitome of the dignified, elder statesman and is the most outstanding parliamentarian this body has ever produced.

Rep. Helen Sommers served with O'Brien after his run as speaker. When she was elected in 1972, O'Briend was Speaker Pro Tem, but no less a player in running the House. Sommers told me:

"He was very skilled and experienced at presiding. He ran a tight ship. He had the rules and procedures and he really followed them."

Sommers said that at that point in his career O'Brien was not involved in major legislation, but focused on being the House parliamentarian and strategist.

O'Brien died this morning, the beginning of the final day of the 2007 legislative session.

O'Brien was born in 1911.

Here's a 1992 Times story by Robert T. Nelson about O'Brien's defeat in that year's primary.

MORE: State Democratic Party Chairman Dwight Pelz ran against O'Brien in 1988. Pelz lost. Pelz won a Senate seat two years later and the 37th District was represented by O'Brien, Pelz and Gary Locke.

Pelz released a statement about O'Brien tonight:

"John O'Brien was always the hero of the Rainier Valley", said Pelz. "He lived through many changes in the Valley, as it grew from an Irish and Italian community, to one that successfully embraced the arrival of Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, African American, Orthodox Jewish, Vietnamese, East African, and Hispanic citizens." "John welcomed everyone of these groups into the Rainier Valley."

House Republicans took their big stand of the Legislative session last night when they opposed a prison reform bill. They stood and spoke against the bill, saying it put felons before families. And that just happens to be the House GOP theme of the year. As the Republican's deputy leader, Doug Ericksen, said during debate:

"From the first day of session we said, Mr. Speaker, we need to put families in Washington State before those people who have committed crimes against our families."

But the House Republican stand against what's referred to as the offender re-entry bill came off sounding more like a prelude to a political campaign than a substantive debate about prison policy. It fell short as an attack that the measure is any sign that Democrats are soft on crime.

(Democrats have been worried about House Republicans using the bill as campaign fodder.)

Some criticisms of the by House Republicans were refuted by Ericksen himself last night. Rep. Kirk Pearson, the ranking Republican on the Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Committee, opened the Republican attack on the bill last night by saying it would be a "tremendous shift of policy in the state of Washington." He said the bill would mean that the state would be moving from sending people to prison to "more people out in community custody."

After Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson, D-Seattle, refuted that claim, Ericksen said:

"I think is important to be clear about the underlying bill, which may not actually, totally, result in more people being released out in our communities, but it maintains status quo."

In fact, the bill does not change sentencing laws at all. It doesn't shorten any sentences or increase good time. It creates a program to give prisoners a "re-entry plan" of job training and education and in some cases assistance in finding a place to live when they do get out of prison.

Rep. Mike Armstrong, R-Wenatchee, said last night that he had gotten a call from a constituent whose 13-year-old daughter had been raped and was worried about the pending release of the rapist. Armstrong said the woman had heard about the "legislation for criminals" the Legislature was considering.

"Her daughter still has nightmares and to think that this state was going to help these people that get out early find housing, find jobs, live in our communities, and make it easier to re-offend other 13 year old girls was very troublesome to this mother."

Is there, in fact, anything in the bill that would make it easier, or more likely, someone would reoffend?

"No, it wouldn't," Ericksen told me after the vote last night.

House Republicans are particularly hurt in their attempts to paint the bill as good for criminals because nearly ever Republican in the Senate voted for it. In fact, Sen. Mike Carrell, a conservative Republican from Lakewood, led the effort to pass the bill with Sen. Debbie Regala, D-Tacoma. Some of the Republicans most known for being tough on crime, such as Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, voted for the bill.

By today, House Minority Leader Richard Debolt said that not only would the bill do no harm, he conceded "it will have an impact in the future" on reducing crime. He said that his caucus opposed the bill because they wanted to vote on legislation that would clamp down on early release programs and good-time provisions. The vote last night was a protest, he said, that Democrats were not willing to deal with those other issues.

Republicans have tired before to make crime an issue in campaigns. It clearly wasn't much of a help last year against a Democratic onslaught.

The Senate just voted 26-21 in favor of a paid family leave bill. It now goes to Gov. Chris Gregoire for her signature.

Last night, Senate Democrats said they were tired of the House dictating the outcome of legislation this year and would insist on their version of family leave -- a bill with a specific funding source. The House version creates a task force to come up with a way to pay for the mandatory leave.

Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, told her colleagues, "I'll admit, I'm profoundly disappointed" that the Senate version didn't prevail. She said the House bill was not as definitive, decisive or inclusive as the Senate version. But she voted for the bill and urged her colleagues to do the same.

After the vote, Brown said that she and most other Senate Democrats decided they did not want to risk adjourning today with no bill.

"In the end to say we're doing it made sense rather than walking away with nothing."

Brown was met by a small group of family leave supporters, some holding babies, who cheered her as she came out of the chambers after the vote.

Republicans tried to play on Democrats' frustrations with the House, saying the Senate was getting pushed around and the bill as written didn't go far enough.

"I am not happy about what we're allowing the other chamber to do to this piece of legislation," said Sen. Don Benton, R-Vancouver.

Benton had been one of the few Senate Republicans to vote for the original bill in the Senate. In the end, six Democrats joined Republicans voting against the bill.

The House passed a prison reform bill tonight. Senate Bill 6157 would create training programs and housing assistance for released felons, along with other "offender re-entry" efforts. It was amended so needs to go back to the Senate, where it is expected to be approved easily.

The bill had strong bipartisan support in the Senate where it passed 43-4. It was pushed by Sens. Debbie Regala, D-Tacoma, and Mike Carrell, R-Lakewood, who served on a task force last year that looked at prison release policies and programs.

In the House, though, Republicans opposed the bill. It passed 64-33 on a mostly party-line vote. Regala and Carrell watched the entire debate from the House chambers. Regala said her colleague was like an expectant father. Carrell, a conservative Republican, found himself agreeing tonight mostly with Democrats as his fellow Republicans criticized the bill.

After the vote, House Speaker Frank Chopp congratulated Regala and Carrell, and thanked Carrell for "being so patient" as the House worked on the bill, a Senate priority.

With about 30 hours to go in the legislative session, Senate Democrats have apparently had enough of the House getting its way on everything.

"There's a meltdown over family leave," Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown just told me.

In a closed door caucus, Senate Democrats told Brown they did not want to accept the family leave bill that the House passed. Senate leaders had agreed to that version, which does not specify a funding source for the mandated leave program.

Brown said that her colleagues made it clear they had grown weary of House Speaker Frank Chopp and his big Democratic majority dictating much of what has happened this session. They want the original Senate version, which would have been funded by an employee payroll tax.

Lobbyists pushing for the family leave bill said they weren't worried, and that there were still the votes in the Senate to pass it. Brown said that's not necessarily the case.

"It didn't go well in my caucus," Brown said. Should the lobbyists be worried? "I think so," Brown said.

MORE: I was just on the Senate floor talking to Democratic senators. They are ticked at the House. Sen. Darlene Fairley, D-Lake Forest Park, and never one to mince words, said that many members were angered by a last-minute, must-pass, bill that Chopp wanted. The Senate passed that earlier this evening. It authorizes "community preservation and development authorities," and creates the first one covering Seattle's International District and Pioneer Square.

Sponsor Sharon Tomiko Santos, D-Seattle, said the bill was ncessary, in part, to try to mitigate effects of the baseball park and football stadium in the area. The bill was a priority of hers, and Chopp included it on a list of must-do items.

Fairley called it "a stupid bill." It went through the Government Operations and Elections Committee she chairs and she said Senators tried "to fix it as much as we could." Said Fairley:

"We were jerked around and we've been jerked around on numerous things."

Fairley and Senate Caucus Chairwoman Harriet Spanel said Chopp is overly concerned about Democrats doing something that could cost a member re-election. They wondered what would happen if all 98 House seats were filled with Democrats.

"Would that be enough for him to not be afraid of losing a member," Fairley said. "We've constantly been drug hither and yon by Frank Chopp."

Family leave, though, is not one of those cases where Chopp has taken a more conservative or centrist route than the Senate is comfortable with. In fact, the opposition in the Senate Democratic caucus to the current family leave bill comes from members who say that business would prefer the earlier version that pays for the program through an employee tax.

MORE: Sen. Karen Keiser, D-Kent, a leader in the push for paid family leave, also described the caucus as "meltdown." She is confident, though, that the bill will pass tomorrow in its current form.

She wasn't without her own criticisms of the House. "The House used to be known as the people's House," she said. But this session she said the Senate took that title away from the House. And not just on family leave, she said, but on a number of issues. She said Senate Democrats were disappointed and angry tonight.

THE VIEW FROM THE HOUSE: House Majority Leader Lynn Kessler told me that just recently the House looked carefully at how many bills each chamber passed and "it was pretty even." She said the House leadership was prompted to do that by House Democrats who, just like their Senate counterparts, were convinced they have been getting the short end.

"I think in the end it will be fairly balanced," she said.

Right now the House is beginning to debate a major prison reform bill. It is a priority of the Senate, and clearly not of the House leadership. Kessler said:

"We've gone way out of our way to do this for the Senate."

As Kesier said, "This is the time of the session where we're tired and a little overwrought."

The fired U.S. attorneys around the country are becoming popular figures on the lecture circuit. As I wrote earlier, John McKay, the former U.S. Attorney for western Washington will appear next month at the conference of the Mainstream Republicans of Washington.

Now comes word that McKay will appear at Seattle University School of Law - where he now teaches -- next month on a panel with two his former colleagues, New Mexico's David Iglesias and Arizona's Paul Charlton. The event is a public policy forum called U.S. Attorneys: Roles and Responsibilities. There will also be law professors, political scientists and other speakers at the conference. Among sessions listed in the agenda are:

• The 2007 Experience -- Myths and Realities: explanation of the current incidents, with comparison of historical similarities and differences.

• Assessment of Impact on Legal System: is this a quirk or does this indicate a long-term change? .

The event is May 9 from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. You can find more information here.

Rep. John Lovick, D-Mill Creek, says he's considering a run for Snohomish County sheriff. Sheriff Rick Bart, a Republican, is retiring.

Lovick may be one of the best known legislators, at least among TVW watchers. He is Speaker Pro Tempore of the House and wields the gavel most of the time the House is in session.

Lovick was just being interviewed on TVW -- I'm blogging from TVW's ad hoc Capitol studio -- and was asked what his political future may hold. He said he has given "some serious thought" about running for sheriff. He hasn't made a final decision but says, "I'm almost there."

After the session he will meet with friends and advisors and make a decision. Lovick spent 31 years in the State Patrol. He's been in the Legislature since 1998, and has been House Speaker Frank Chopp's fill-in for five years.

Lovick said on TVW that he studies hard for that job. Maybe not as hard as he did when he first was elected Speaker Pro Tem. He said that during church he would draw maps of the House floor and work to memorize the name and district number of every member of the House. At Crosscut, Austin Jenkins wrote this week about Lovick's attempts to keep his fellow Democrats on the straight and narrow.

I'm blogging from the Legislative Building and will be until the session adjourns tomorrow. There still aren't many people — by which I mean lobbyists — around outside the chamber doors.

That tells you that most of what's left to do is settled and just needs to make its way through the process. I can't think of a major issue that will attract a swarm of lobbyists to work the doors.

Clifford Traisman is here. He is the state lobbyist for the Washington Conservation Voters and the Washington Environmental Council. I ran into him in the hall between the House and Senate. You could say he was taking a victory lap of sorts. He told me:

"It was an enormously successful session."

That came with no qualification. You don't hear that often from interest groups. There are always compromise and things left behind or damage done from the other side to moderate that sort of exhortation. But environmentalists, at least through the biggest organization that represents them in Olympia, got the Legislature to do everything on their priority list.

It was a short list; four items. But that's been WCV's strategy for the past five years. This is the first time that all four can be checked off. Certainly that has to do with the big Democratic majorities. House Speaker Frank Chopp was intently focused on the four priorities. Any time he was asked about any other environmental issue, his answer would be that it wasn't on the list of four.

But what's most interesting about the environmentalists' success this year is that rather than rely solely on those Democratic majorities, they pushed for what Traisman referred to as an "environmental majority."

The four bills on the list all got bipartisan support. Traisman said the number of Republican votes on environmental bills was a record. One of the four issues was to get $100 million in the capital budget for the Washington Wildlife and Recreation Program. There's no single legislative vote count on that. But on the others:

The bill that could lead to a ban on a chemical fire retardant passed the House 71-24 and 41-8 in the Senate. It was the third year for the bill.

The Puget Sound Partnership bill passed 41-5 in the Senate and 86-12 in the House.

A clean fuel bill passed the Senate 44-4 and passed the House 79-19.

So how do environmentalists get Republican support? In part by bringing back issues that the Legislature is familiar with. That helps build support on both sides of the aisle. But Traisman pointed out something even more important:

"None of these issues pitted the environment against the economy."

Traisman said business lobbyists did not oppose any of the four priority bills. Another important bill, but one that didn't make the top four, was a bill to restrict gravel mining on Maury Island. That had business opposition, and the environmentalists lost.

In a year when some people have questioned whether the Democratic majorities have been aggressive — or progressive enough — Traisman said environmentalists have been well served by a focused, restrained, agenda.

"This is a long-term strategy. These are not one-year, feel-good issues. We're not trying to go for that one 50-homer season. ... It may not make the far left run to their mailbox and send our group money. But people who are watching know what's been done.

"We're not here to make a political statement, as some would like us to do."

House Appropriations Chairwoman Helen Sommers doesn't usually say much during floor debates. She saves her comments for the budget she writes, and even then she remains a woman of few words.

But tonight, in her quiet, methodical way, Sommers unleashed an unflinching attack on a proposed constitutionally-protected budget reserve fund.

She said, "I stand in strong opposition to this proposal." And that was an understatement.

"It is unbelievable to me that the Legislature ... would restrict it's own authority. ... I think it is foolish, thoughtless, highly political and a huge mistake."

That last line led House Speaker Pro Tem John Lovick to gavel Sommers down. I don't recall ever seeing that happen in my 14 years. He told her to confine her remarks to the bill "and not speculate on motive." Apparently, saying something is political speaks to motive.

Sommers responded, "Our rationale, it seems to me, is always important."

She said that legislative leaders spoke "very strongly" against her attempt to amend the proposal in committee.

"So, to me, what we have done, or what we are doing with this piece of legislation, is tying our hands and failing to look forward to the contingencies that we might face which would drive the need to use these funds for purposes that are not yet contemplated.

"I think it is is one of the worst pieces of legislation I have ever seen and I regret deeply that it appears to be ready to be passed this House tonight."

She's seen a lot of legislation. She was first elected in 1972 and today is the most senior member of the Legislature. To tell you how long ago that was, her seatmate from her Seattle district that year was Ken Eikenberry, later to be Republican attorney general, GOP gubernatorial nominee and state GOP chairman.

The measure just passed 74-23.

UPDATE: Here's the statement Gov. Christine Gregoire just released:

"Tonight the Legislature has given the people of Washington an opportunity to create a Rainy Day Fund to help stabilize our economy. ... By setting aside money when times are good, we will ensure that we are always prepared to keep our commitments to Washington families."

The 2007 Legislature is set to adjourn in a little over 48 hours from now. I would have thought it'd be a little more exciting right about now. The Legislative Building is quiet. Hardly a lobbyist in sight. I'm starting to miss them.

We're not completely without news, though.

• Liberal House Democrats remain unhappy about Gov. Chris Gregoire's demands for a constitutionally-protected budget reserve fund. There was a caucus meeting today and there were members speaking up against the measure, said Rep. Eileen Cody, D-Seattle, who opposes the proposal.

  Some senators were worried tonight that the unhappy House Dems would stop the bill. Cody says that won't happen. There is plenty of opposition, but, she said, "I don't think there is a lot of delusion."

  "We can whine but there are enough votes in the Republican caucus to pass it."

  The measure needs a two-thirds vote in the House and in the Senate to put the proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot.

  The rainy day fund, as they like to call it, was proposed by Republican Sen. Joe Zarelli and Republicans have spoken often this session about the need for a protected fund. That makes it unlikely that the House Republicans would withhold the votes necessary to pass the measure.

  The House just began debate on the measure.

• Talks continue about the WASL. This has been one of the late-breaking controversies of the session. Only in the past few days has it seemed that there were serious attempts to delay not just the agreed-upon math and science portions of the test, but reading and writing, too.

  The talk has led Gregoire to declare publicly that she would veto any attempt to delay the language portions of the test. I think it's the only time she has ever said anything close to promising a veto.

  But the chairs of the legislative education committees, Rosemary McAuliffe in the Senate and Dave Quall in the House, have kept the talk alive.

  Today, House Speaker Frank Chopp and Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown met with McAuliffe, Quall, Sen. Rodney Tom and Rep. Pat Sullivan, Brown told me. She said the legislative leaders wanted to hear first-hand from lawmakers pushing for more delays.

  Brown said she does not think there will be a continued, concerted, effort for those delays. But she said that she and Chopp said they are willing to consider some additional language that the lawmakers would like added to the bill delaying the math and science WASLs. She said the changes would not interfere with Gregoire's firm stance that math and science be delayed, and only those subjects.

• Senate Ways and Means Chairwoman Margarita Prentice says the plan is to unveil the conference committee report on the proposed 2007-2009 operating budget at noon tomorrow.

  Legislative rules say the report has to be available for 24 hours before it can be voted on.

• Prentice also told me that she met with Gregoire yesterday to talk about the Sonics. She says the governor is "really revved up about what happens next."

  Prentice said that after the session Gregoire will be working with Renton officials and lawmakers to try to find a financing plan that could win approval.

  Gregoire's press secretary, Holly Armstrong, said she doesn't think the governor mean to signal any change in her position. But, she esaid, "I think she is interested in seeing what we can make happen."
  
  Armstrong said Gregoire was enthused by lawmakers talk Monday - the day the plug was pulled on the proposal - about how the Renton facility was about more than basketball. I wrote about this here and here.

  "I think it was born out of that conversation when they started talking about a world-class events center and what it could mean to attract major events."

  Armstrong said that lawmakers said that the facility could be a place to hold events like national political conventions.

I just taped a segment for KING 5's Up Front with Robert Mak. It focused on the performance of Speaker Frank Chopp and Gov. Christine Gregoire this session.

I was on with former GOP Chairman Chris Vance and the Stranger's Josh Feit. It was the first time Josh and I had spoken since I wrote about him and he wrote about me writing about him. (Yes, I know, bloggers writing about bloggers ...) There's no personal animosity over our disagreement about his story on Chopp. On the show, we do get a few minutes to talk about our differing views, though. The show airs Sunday at 9:30 a.m. on KING and on Northwest Cable News at 8 p.m.

On the TVW show I host, Olympia On Call, the guests this week are Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown and Minority Leader Mike Hewitt. It's a pretty good discussion, assisted by John Hughes, editor and publisher of the Daily World in Aberdeen, Rick Eskil, the editorial page editor of the Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, and Deirdre Gregg, a writer at the Puget Sound Business Journal.

It's the last show of the year for On Call, which runs only during the Legislative session. It should air at 9 tonight and repeat through the weekend, though it will no doubt be shifted about for live coverage of the last few days of the session.

On a personal note, I want to thank the crew at TVW who do a great job every week getting the show on the air, making the guests feel comfortable, and even at times making it look like I know what I'm doing in front of a camera. Thanks to audio techs Will Mader and Patrick Maxwell, camera operator Nate Shaw, director (and the voice in my head) Aaron Qualls and producer Mike Bay, who does more than anyone to make the show work. Thanks guys.

When the Sonics financing package collapsed this week there was plenty of credit and/or blame to go around. Some pointed to House Speaker Frank Chopp, others at Gov. Christine Gregoire. Some at the team. And if you read Adam Wilson's blog in The Olympian, you'll see a couple of lawmakers blaming the Sonics' lobbyists.

"They never even came to my office to lobby me," said Rep. Dawn Morrell, D-Puyallup. "It hasn't even been on my radar."

And this from Rep. Sam Hunt, D-Olympia:

"I never got anything from them," he volunteered. "I don't think they did any lobbying. I don't think they put out any information for members. I think they took the money and ran."

"Took the money and ran" was a phrase you could have heard 100 times in the Capitol today. Hunt's comments really did create a buzz. It's unusual for lawmakers to speak so bluntly about lobbyists. The lobbyists were insulted by the comments, and particularly that one which almost had the ring of alleged wrongdoing.

Linda Hull, one of the lobbyists, told my colleague Ralph Thomas:

"I was just stunned. I have a really thick skin but I was just stunned by that."

Hunt told me that Hull and the other lobbyists spoke to him today and let him know how angry they were. He said they made that pretty clear. And he said he apologized.

"It was sort of a heated comment in the heat of the moment. They weren't any happier than I was at having said it, probably."

Hunt told me that when he looked up who was lobbying the Sonics he saw the name of one consultant, who he hadn't seen in Olympia all session. But there was a team of lobbyists working for the Sonics who were hard to miss during the past few weeks.

Hull said that the four Sonics lobbyists met with 130 of 147 legislators, and tried to set up appointments with all of them. They tried to meet with Hunt but couldn't arrange a private meeting with him. Hull said that Hunt did attend one briefing they held. It was on the economic study, and lunch was served.

UPDATE: In the comments, Rep. Chris Strow says no Sonics lobbyist ever tried to reach him or his legislative assistant.