It's not exactly the McCaw mansion in Hunts Point but the Ravenna home of Seattle teacher and Green Party stalwart Joe Szwaja and his talented partner, Deb Morrison, is pretty darned nice and that'll do just fine for Eat the State!'s fabulous 2,000 cents per plate fundraiser dinner and evening celebrating seven years, and counting, of the labor of love you're now reading. It'll be this Sunday evening, Sep. 28, 5-8 PM (or so) at 2021 NE 75th St. There'll be dinner (natch), music, a chance to meet ETS! editors and volunteers, and to bask in the general glow of journalism without money. But it does cost money, of course, especially for the printing bills, hence the dinner works out to $20.00 per person if you don't want to bring your penny jars.

RSVP by Saturday morning, so that we know how much food to have and bring some of your own if you're inclined. Or, if you can't come, be an honorary diner and send us $20 anyway (we could use it!). Think of us as your friendly local food bank for state-eating, proudly serving Western Washington, on a plate, since 1996.--Geov Parrish

It takes no rocket scientist to deduce the strong anti-incumbent flavor to last week's primary election. That trend resulted in some of the most exciting local electoral results in ages, especially in Seattle's school board races. All four of them feature strong progressive reformers advancing to November's general election; in three of the four, the reformers were the leading vote-getters last Tuesday, and two of those three Brita Butler-Wall and Darlene Flynn--beat incumbents handily. While a few good candidates didn't survive the primary, notably Christopher Cain in the Port of Seattle and Brett McMillan for Monorail Board, November will offer some exciting opportunities to inject accountability and more progressive sensibilities into local elected bodies.

That said, it'll be a lot harder for challengers to do well in November, especially against established incumbents. Particularly with the Seattle City Council, where all the seats are (for the moment) at-large; incumbents who thought they would coast to reelection will now redouble their efforts to buy their way into another term. And the two most execrable council members up for reelection--Jim Compton and Margaret Pageler--face the worst challengers. Compton, in particular, will be on the ballot against John Manning, an ex-cop who resigned in 1996 after less than a year on council when his third (!) domestic violence complaint hit the papers. Manning still doesn't get it that domestic violence was a bad thing. He claims to this day that slamming his wife around was no big deal, just a misunderstanding. Just the kind of guy you don't need to hold Compton's feet to the fire on his corruption and coddling of the Seattle Police Department. If ever there were a race for a well-organized progressive write-in campaign, this would be it. Meanwhile, supporters will need to redouble their efforts to get folks like Butler-Wall and Flynn into office, and hopefully the losing candidates, particularly McMillan, will consider running again in the future. --G.P.

One of the reasons a venal windbag like Jim Compton can do so much damage is the way city council is structured. With all council members elected at large, each derives their identity and constituency by getting their own fiefdom, i.e. a committee they chair. Compton, for example, chairs the Public Safety Committee, which purportedly oversees the Seattle Police. In practice, this means only one council member deals with and oversees an entire branch of city government: Compton the police, Pageler the public utilities, Nick Licata Parks & Neighborhoods, and so on.

The councilperson winds up becoming an advocate for that department, not a check on it and other council members defer to the committee chair when policy matters come up for question. It becomes a massive circle of back-scratching and unaccountability, as well as a prime setup for the sort of corrupt practices in recent headlines. When Charlie Chong was on council briefly in the mid-90s, one reason he was loved by constituents but loathed by other council members is that his office (including staff aids Matt Fox and Jay Sauceda) would follow up on complaints about police, parks, etc. themselves rather than shuffling citizens off to the relevant (and usually unsympathetic or uncaring) committee head.

But that could change. In a development last week that didn't get nearly the headlines it should have, an initiative previously thought not to have qualified was ruled eligible for the November ballot. It would change all city council seats to districted, rather than at-large, seats, and give the city a year to draw up nine districts and then re-elect its entire council.

That election would surely district some sitting council members out of a job. It would also surely lead to greater representation, particularly for minorities and for South Seattle. The idea is that council members would then be accountable to neighborhood concerns. A year ago, when Sauceda and others launched their signature drive to get this on the ballot, the prevailing civic response was dismissive: city council ain't broke, so why fix it? But the pendulum has swung, again, and given last week's primary results, disgust with city council corruption may make Sauceda's timing perfect.

The change, if it happens, might or might not help neighborhoods, but it could have one other hidden benefit: of forcing a change in the committee structure that allows people like Compton to block, for example, any serious challenge to abusive police. In a district system, the police or the utilities, or parks would become every legislator's business, not the province of only one. A Charlie Chong would be the norm, not an anachronism. And that could only be good. --G.P.

One last election note: besides Butler-Wall and Flynn, the third reform school board candidate to make the November ballot opposite an incumbent is North Seattle resident Sally Soriano. It was sweet, sweet justice that the same week Soriano made such a good electoral showing (after a much better campaign than the one she waged two years ago), the WTO collapsed in Cancun. It was Soriano, more than any other local activist, who got the ball rolling on 1999's historic anti-WTO demonstrations. Although her background is in education, she has worked tirelessly and often alone for over a decade on fair trade issues, and her organizing and public education work in the months leading up to the WTO meetings made those demonstrations possible. Sometimes, heroines get the last laugh after all. --G.P.

Three Soundbites, all concerning the US House Of Reps' recent vote to allow American tourists to travel to Cuba. Supporters "said the proposal would advance freedom in the communist nation." Opponents "said it would only bolster Fidel Castro's dictatorship." The American people say it's none of Congress' motherfucking business what Americans do on their holidays, or in their free time generally. Until you can get your minds around that concept, fuck off with your regal proclamations of "liberty" and "freedom," assholes. Fuck off. Fuck off. Fuck off. Please, do us all a favor and fuck off.----Eddie Tews

"Disappeared": Donald H. Rumsfeld, in explaining why the Guantanamo inmates will be held, without trial, for the duration of the "War On Terror", says that "Our interest is in not trying them and letting them out. Our interest is in--during this global war on terror [sic]--keeping them off the streets, and so that's what's taking place." If Rumsfeld expects them to be "let out" at the conclusion of trial, in other words, then he apparently expects them to be found innocent of charges brought. Oh, well, that assuages concerns about the prosecution of the "War On Terror". If the worst accusation that can be offered is something as innocuous as innocent non-US citizens taken from their countries and indefinitely imprisoned without trial (in conditions which have induced at least 29 suicide attempts to-date), there's really nothing to worry about, is there? Thanks for clearing that up, Donald H.!--ET

Up is down. A common response to criticisms of Bush Administration policies goes something like this: "I promise you that if you go to Saudi Arabia or Jordan or the Sudan or Zimbabwe & spout anti-government crap against any of those countries your ass would vanish from the face of this earth!!! The somewhat illogical implication, of course, being that since Americans can dissent without fear of violent state reprisal, then they should refrain from doing so. One Middle Eastern journalist, during a recent visit, offered a slightly more nuanced analysis: "Americans seem very cavalier about politics. Perhaps if they lived without free speech for a few years they would use it more often."--ET