The editor of The Columbian had a column over the weekend showing readers what it can be like to deal with the governor's press office. Lou Brancaccio wrote that his reporters were looking to get a comment from Gregoire about an investigation they had done into problems with local child care providers. In a column written as a letter to Gregoire, Brancaccio writes:

Erin Middlewood and Stephanie Rice -- our reporters who labored over this excellent series -- tried three times to get in touch with you.

At one point we received this e-mail from your press secretary, Lars Erickson:

"We've completely scheduled all of the governor's media interview time for the next month."

That was before the package of investigative stories, dubbed "Daycare Nightmare," was published. After publication, Brancaccio tried himself, talking with Interim Communications Director Lloyd Brown. He says Brown "wasn't all that happy with our quoting him. Especially after he said you wouldn't talk because our investigation would make you look like you have been 'asleep at the wheel.'"

The Columbian got to talk to Gregoire, just hours after the editor told Brown to let the governor know he would "bring the hammer down" on her for refusing to talk.

(But Lou, you're not really surprised that a "statement from the governor" wasn't really written by the governor, are you?)

You can see The Columbian's reporting project here.

There are many more reasons for the governor to talk to The Columbian than to not. Here's just one: Dino Rossi talked to the paper about the child care investigation and got his name into a headline.
And he issued a press release knocking Gregoire -- not just for what's happening with child care, but for not talking to the paper.

"This story also repeats a pattern of the incumbent â€" she takes credit for good things even if she had no part in them but hides herself from public view when problems are revealed within her government agencies," said Rossi.

I wrote recently about Rossi's refusal to be interviewed about a subject because it wasn't one of his chosen campaign themes. I said that at least Gregoire faces the press regularly at her media availabilities. But The Columbian's investigation is not the sort of thing a reporter wants to ask about in that setting. You don't want to give away an exclusive.

Sen. Craig Pridemore, D-Vancouver, told me last week that when the Legislature convenes Thursday he would be a certain no vote against reinstating a 1 percent property tax cap.

But he told fellow Democratic senators in an e-mail last night that he's now not sure what to do. His constituents want Initiative 747 codified in law, and Pridemore thinks his vote could decide his political future. The e-mail describes what seems like some uncomfortable political realities facing Democrats in this week's special session.

Fellow Senators: I know a lot of you were interested in finding an alternative to simply reinstating I-747 on Thursday and I had hoped to provide you with one. After profound review and after the past few days of getting hammered (including by close friends and family), it's immensely clear to me that I don't have the political support in my own district to carry out a fight like this. I know I could have survived it under normal crcumstances, but I can't when I'm standing against a Democratic Governor AND against Democratic Senate and House leadership. It's hard to tell people this is bad for local governments when so many Democrats are smiling and saying it's no big deal. :-)

I'm not sure how I'll vote yet. If I vote No to reinstating it, I know my political future will be over after this term (next year). If I vote Yes, I'm not sure I really want to do this any more anyway. I obviously have a lot of soul-searching to do... again. I sincerely just want to get through it without buying a pack of smokes! :-)

For those of you who know this is bad public policy and do vote your conscience, you have my sincere respect always.

Craig

I did not get the e-mail from Pridemore himself. But he told me this morning that he's gotten responses from four colleagues.

One expressed extreme disappointment with me for not standing by sound public policy; the other three expressed sympathy for the situation we've all been placed in.

While Pridemore says that opposing the 1 percent limit means he has to stand against Gov. Chris Gregoire and legislative leadership, he said that Senate leadership has not lobbied him -- or anyone else that he's heard -- to vote for the cap.

MORE: Gov. Chris Gregoire talked with reporters this morning about the upcoming special session. I asked her about Pridemore's perspective and she didn't disagree that there are other lawmakers who feel the same way. And the governor said she knows what they're going through:

"I understand the dilemma. I'm acutely aware of it. I had to go through that mental exercise myself. But I will tell you that I shared with the majority leader and the Speaker of the House last legislative session that I felt that we were going to need to reinstate the 1 percent cap if the state Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional. So, I'd already gone through that mentally myself.

"The fact of the matter is, to those who feel that way, I would say to them, "Come with me to town hall meetings across the state.' You can feel the nervousness of people because of the escalating costs of their homes, yet their income doesn't change at all, that they are literally .. going to be run out of their homes, which is to them the American dream."

(Senate Majority Lisa Brown told me this morning that she doesn't recall Gregoire telling her that the 1 percent cap would have to be reinstituted in the court threw out 747. She said there was a more general discussion during the legislative session, but that she didn't remember Gregoire stating her support for a 1 percent lid.)

Gregoire said that before she called the special session she asked Democratic leaders in the House and Senate to poll members on how they'd vote on a 1 percent cap. But the "tipping point" she said that convinced her to call the Legislature into session was a handful of local governments that said they planned to take advantage of the Supreme Court decision and raise taxes above the 1 percent cap.

I asked Gregoire if she was imposing her political judgment for local officials, who in some cases said they felt comfortable that their voters would support a larger increase. She said:

"The fact of the matter is the people spoke. It isn't me. It isn't me. The initiative was voted on by the people of the state of Washington and it passed pretty overwhelmingly. So I think the people of the state of Washington made their point. They passed the one with 2 percent. They passed the one with 1 percent. Now it's up to us to do it right so it withstands constitutional challenge.

"I'm not putting my opinion instead of the local governments'. I'm just saying the will of the voters has to be carried out."

Brown said she thinks Pridemore may be overstating the political dilemma created by the tax cap vote.

"There's no doubt that property taxes are an issue in every district. ... However, as a legislator you have the ability to communicate with your constituents about what you're doing and why."

Brown said she told Gregoire there was not a lot of support for the 1 percent cap among Senate Democrats. In general, the Senate doesn't like to be rushed. Senate Democrats considered some property tax measures last session and had planned to do more next year.

The special session "comes at an inopportune time for our perspective," she said. But even with Democratic opposition, she has no doubt that the 1 percent cap will pass the Senate Thursday.

At TIME.com, Eli Sanders -- moonlighting from his job at the Stranger -- has a story about how a local murder has become an issue in the presidential campaign, particularly on the Republican side. The man accused of killing Brian and Beverly Mauck, Daniel Tavares Jr., was released last summer from a Massachusetts prison by a judge appointed by Mitt Romney.

On the campaign trail former New York mayor Giuliani has called on Romney to explain his decision to appoint Judge Tuttman.

...

Taylor Glasenapp, a spokesman for the victims' families, told TIME that as a conservative-leaning voter, he'll be watching closely to see how Romney and other Republicans handle the law-and-order politics surrounding the tragedy. "This is now a huge issue for me in the presidential election," said Glasenapp. "Something has to be done about this."