A political season could not possibly take more twists and turns than the one playing out in the 31st Legislative District.
The race for the Senate seat offers high-profile incumbent Pam Roach, a populist lawmaker who has been taken to task by her own party, and challenger Matt Richardson, a Sumner city councilman who lands in the news for all the wrong reasons.
Those who follow such things are familiar with the players. Roach has gained a reputation in Olympia for her forceful personality and presently is barred from participating in her own caucus. When Republican senators go behind closed doors to plot policy and strategy, Roach isn’t invited into the room. Richardson’s history includes allegations of sexual misconduct that go back to his teen years and a list of court proceedings that allow him to legally claim he has never been convicted of a sex crime. He’s had short working relationships with school districts that ended badly and, most recently, was guilty of a reckless driving incident in Puyallup that could be viewed as road rage.
The old adage holds that where there’s smoke, there’s fire. There’s more smoke surrounding the Richardson campaign than one finds with a Southern California wildfire.
It all makes for some odd political posturing, indeed.
Topping the list is a letter of support issued by three Democrats on behalf of Roach. Admitting it was “painful and necessary” to do, Chris Hurst, Yvonne Ward and Karen Willard have asked voters to return Roach to Olympia.
Their press release was so graphic, The Courier-Herald has refused to print it. The word from our state newspaper association was the content could be considered “actionable” – meaning it could lead to a lawsuit by the Richardson camp.
Days ago, former Senate candidate Ron Weigelt issued a press release of his own, stating he could not support either Roach or Richardson. A Democrat, Weigelt said he’ll be writing in the name of Peggy Levesque, the South Prairie mayor who ran unsuccessfully for a House seat during the primary election.
The state’s Public Disclosure Commission is now in possession of three complaints filed against the candidates. One, from a citizen, addresses a website that appears to be pro-Richardson but, in fact, was developed by a Roach booster. The second complaint comes from Richardson himself, also aimed at the inflammatory website that carries his name but is simply an electronic attack piece. The third complaint, filed by Roach, alleges improper PDC filings by her opponent.
Lost in the mudslinging and name-calling is any discussion of the overwhelming issues facing the state, issues that will land in the laps of legislators. The Courier-Herald will soon attempt to provide articles about the issues of the day, rather than the verbal bombs lobbed by the candidates.
This is an election unlike any in recent memory, where the candidates’ position on crucial issues has taken a back seat to their personalities, campaign tactics and personal histories. Voters beware: it could be a bumpy ride on the way to election day.
