The collapsed section of the bridge that carries I-5 over the Skagit River (Photo via Northwest Cable News)

The Seattle Times has an even more remarkable photo.

The structural failure occurred just before 7 PM, the State Patrol said. The Skagit County Sheriff said at least three people had been rescued from the water.

The collapse affected a structure that carries Interstate 5 over the Skagit River just north of downtown Mount Vernon

The disaster has affected both north and southbound lanes of travel and made I-5 completely impassable between Seattle and Vancouver, British Columbia. Traffic is now being rerouted by the State Patrol; there have been huge traffic backups in both directions. Traffic is being detoured to Highway 9 to the east.

A Patrol spokesman says that Governor Inslee and Transportation Secretary Peters have been notified; the spokesman indicated they were both enroute to the area.

(UPDATE: The governor’s office has now confirmed to NPI and other media that Governor Inslee is headed to Skagit County with Secretary Peterson).

Another view of the I-5 bridge collapse (Photo: Gina Cole)

Every major Seattle television station has broken into its regular programming to carry live feeds. KOMO has a helicopter on scene already and KIRO and KING are expected to have their own choppers over the scene shortly.

A 2008 report categorized the bridge as “structurally sound and safe”. Obviously, the bridge’s failure makes it painfully apparent this was not the case.

The bridge has also been classified as obsolete, but it had not been listed by the state as structurally deficient, contrary to what some people have said on Twitter.

Photos and videos show that several other sections of the bridge remain standing – the collapse only brought down one section. It is one of last sections over the water.

Rescuers have been working to pull affected motorists out of the water. Police, fire, and paramedics are all on the scene, and a medical helicopter has evidently been employed to ferry injured people to hospitals.

I’ve traveled over this bridge a number of times, most recently on May 12th, when I returned from Vancouver, B.C. It’s scary to see a section of highway I’ve regularly traversed in pieces in the river below.

UPDATE, 9:21 PM: Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) has halted train traffic over the Skagit River while it inspects its own bridge.

WSDOT’s Travis Phelps has confirmed eyewitness speculation that an overheight vehicle is believed to have triggered the bridge collapse; it apparently struck a girder as it traversed the highway over the Skagit River. The bridge clearance is listed by the State Department of Transportation as fifteen point four (15.4) feet.

No fatalities have been confirmed thus far. Injured individuals have been taken to the Skagit Valley Hospital to be treated.

The news that this bridge collapse was likely caused by an overheight vehicle brings to mind the incident that damaged an overpass near Roslyn a few years ago, as well as this incident from 2011, in which an overheight vehicle damaged the girders that carry Interstate 90 over Highway 18 near North Bend.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is gearing up already to help with the investigation. The agency announced on its Twitter feed that personnel are preparing to depart for the Evergreen State immediately.

NTSB will be sending full go-team to investigate the I-5 Skagik [sic] River bridge collapse in Washington. More details soon.

— NTSB (@NTSB) May 24, 2013

King County Executive Dow Constantine has released a statement offering the resources of the state’s largest county to help with the response.

Washington Governor Jay Inslee, Transportation Secretary Lynn Peterson and their entourage have arrived in Skagit County to respond. The governor is expected to address the news media shortly at a site not far from the interstate.

Congressman Rick Larsen, who represents western Skagit County, was among the first elected leaders to respond, with a statement issued at 8:27 PM.

“I am monitoring the bridge collapse in Skagit County,” he said. “My office stands ready to assist emergency responders and local and state officials. I encourage people to follow police instructions and stay away from the site of the collapse to let first responders address the situation safely.”

Senator Maria Cantwell sounded similar notes in a statement released just a bit ago.

“My thoughts and prayers go out to the families affected by this collapse and to the emergency responders on the scene,” Cantwell said.

“My office is closely monitoring this situation in coordination with federal, state and local officials. We stand ready to help the community in Skagit County and to support the ongoing emergency response efforts. I encourage people in the area to avoid I-5 and to follow the directions of local officials.”

Congresswoman Suzan DelBene, who represents eastern Skagit County (as well as NPI’s hometown of Redmond) likewise indicated she stands ready to help.

“I’m closely monitoring the bridge collapse in Skagit County this evening. I am deeply relieved at the early reports of no known fatalities from the bridge failure. As emergency response efforts continue and inspection crews investigate the cause of the shocking collapse of this bridge, I stand ready to assist in any way I can.”

“This evening, as I am urgently traveling to the scene from Washington, DC, my staff is currently at the Skagit County Emergency Operations Center to help in coordination with federal, state and local officials. My staff and I are also in communication with the NTSB as they send a team to investigate and assist.

“I encourage the public to avoid the scene and follow the directions of local officials and all suggested detours in the area.”

Patty Murray announced an hour and a half ago on Twitter that she is following developments as well, with a tweet signed “PM”.

Closely monitoring #SkagitBridge & my staff is working w/ @GovInslee, @wsdot, & local officials to assist in any way possible. -PM

—  @PattyMurray, 9:09 PM

“My thoughts are with the injured and their families, and I am thankful there appear to be no fatalities. King County stands ready to assist in the response to the I-5 bridge collapse,” King County Executive Dow Constantine added on Facebook.

Here’s some reaction from state lawmakers:

“Thinking of those affected by tonight’s events in Skagit County. I’m especially thankful for the dedicated WSDOT crews that are working hard tonight.”

— State Representative Marko Liias

“What a terrifying experience for the people thrust into the nightmare of a collapsed bridge. We’ve all taken this route a million times…sending prayers to those families directly effected.”

— State Representative Reuven Carlyle

“We need to invest in our transportation infrastructure not just for our economy but for our safety!”

- State Representative Dave Upthegrove

“[A Columbian] reporter just called and asked if this bridge collapse changes the debate on the CRC [Columbia River Crossing]. First, I had not heard of the collapse before his call as I had just gotten off work late and went directly to the store. I hope and pray everyone is alright – that would be a miracle! However, I believe this collapse only intensifies the debate in Olympia on the I-5 bridge’s safety which has always been a primary issue, particularly the much older northbound span. The critics voices will say they want a new bridge – but their actions say they really don’t want a new bridge. They will say we can build a “cheaper” bridge – a total myth. They will point to a number of what they consider “problems” but never address the core issues with a VIABLE alternatives that have not already been explored and discarded by their peers. No, I hope and prey no one was seriously hurt but the need is there even more now to build that bridge!”

- State Representative Jim Moeller

“Thoughts and prayers for those in Skagit Valley. Very serious situation for victims and first responders.”

- State Representative Chris Reykdal

“Maybe we should increase the size of the proposed transportation package so we can make sure our state’s highways are safe.”

- State Representative Joe Fitzgibbon

UPDATE, 11 PM: The governor is being briefed and his news conference is expected to begin in a few minutes. It will be carried live on all major stations.

UPDATE, 11:59 PM: The governor’s news conference didn’t last too long. Not all the networks carried all of it because they were talking to a survivor at Skagit Valley Hospital. Here is Governor Jay Inslee’s statement:

“I’m thankful there were no fatalities tonight. I want to thank the U.S. Border Patrol, our State Patrol and local fire, police and other emergency personnel who participated in a very successful rescue effort.”

“Our hearts are with those who have been injured and we hope to hear good news soon of their speedy recovery. Witnesses say a truck hit the bridge and caused it to collapse, but an investigation has been launched to confirm that. Any witnesses or people with information should contact the State Patrol.”

“I urge everyone driving through this area to pay close attention to the detour and travel information that our state Department of Transportation and State Patrol will be providing. The National Transportation Safety Board is on their way tomorrow, and I’ve been in touch with our federal partners.”

“We will be involved in a vigorous and diligent effort to get traffic flowing again through the Skagit bridge corridor and I will issue an emergency proclamation tomorrow to make sure we have the resources to do so as quickly as possible. This is an opportunity for us to pull together to show strength of character and patience and good citizenship as we deal with this disruption. “

Nineteen Democrats sided with two hundred and twenty-two Republicans to pass the bill (H.R. 3). No Republicans voted against the bill, but some did not vote.

The Pacific Northwest’s delegation broke down by party lines. The roll call:

Voting Aye: Republicans Doc Hastings, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Dave Reichert (WA), Greg Walden (OR), Raúl Labrador and Mike Simpson (ID), Steve Daines (MT)

Voting Nay: Democrats Suzan DelBene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Jim McDermott, Adam Smith, Denny Heck (WA), Suzanne Bonamici, Peter DeFazio, Earl Blumenauer, Kurt Schrader (OR)

Not Voting: Republicans Jaime Herrera-Beutler (WA), Don Young (AK)

The nineteen Democrats who voted against protecting our environment and for rubber stamping TransCanada’s application to build Keystone XL were:

• John Barrow (GA-12) Blue Dog
• Sanford Bishop (GA-02) Blue Dog
• Cheri Bustos (IL-17)
• Jim Cooper (TN-05) Blue Dog
• Jim Costa (CA-16) Blue Dog
• Henry Cuellar (TX-28) Blue Dog
• William Enyart (IL-12)
• Al Green (TX-09)
• Gene Green (TX-29)
• Ruben Hinojosa (TX-15)
• Sean Maloney (NY-12)
• Sean Matheson (UT-04) Blue Dog
• Mike McIntyre (NC-07) Blue Dog
• Patrick Murphy (FL-18)
• William Owens (NY-21)
• Colin Peterson (MN-07) Blue Dog
• Terri Sewell (AL-07)
• Filemon Vela (TX-34)
• John Yarmuth (KY-03)

(Thanks to Daily Kos for compiling the list).

The bill now moves to the Senate, which has previously indicated its support for allowing the pipeline project to go forward. However, President Barack Obama has threatened to veto the bill – on Tuesday, the White House released a statement making its opposition to H.R. crystal clear.

The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 3, which among other things, would: (1) declare that a Presidential Permit is not required for the Keystone XL crude oil, cross-border pipeline, including the Nebraska reroute evaluated by the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality; (2) deem that the final Environmental Impact Statement issued by the Department of State on August 26, 2011, satisfies all National Environmental Policy Act and National Historic Preservation Act requirements; and (3) deem that Secretary of the Interior actions satisfy Endangered Species Act requirements enabling the needed right-of-way. Further, the bill would require the Secretary of the Army to issue project-related permits pursuant to the Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and prohibit the EPA Administrator from restricting or disallowing any activities or uses of areas authorized by the bill.

H.R. 3 conflicts with longstanding Executive branch procedures regarding the authority of the President, the Secretaries of State, the Interior, and the Army, and the EPA Administrator. In addition, the bill is unnecessary because the Department of State is working diligently to complete the permit decision process for the Keystone XL pipeline. The bill prevents the thorough consideration of complex issues that could have serious security, safety, environmental, and other ramifications.

Because H.R. 3 seeks to circumvent longstanding and proven processes for determining whether cross-border pipelines are in the national interest by removing the Presidential Permitting requirement for the Keystone XL pipeline project, if presented to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto this bill.

Emphasis is theirs.

An override of a presidential veto requires a two-thirds vote of each house. There are four hundred and thirty-five members of the U.S. House and one hundred members of the U.S. Senate. H.R. 3 did not pass with a two-thirds vote; even if the Republicans who did not vote in favor yesterday were to have voted aye, the bill would still not have passed with a veto-proof majority.

Republicans cannot get to a veto-proof majority in the House to pass H.R. 3 unless more Democrats were to flip and cross over. It seems very unlikely that any of the Democrats who voted nay yesterday would be interested in changing their votes in order to override a veto by President Obama.

Given that the president has threatened to veto the bill, it doesn’t seem that Senate Democratic leadership has any incentive to capitulate to Republican demands to give the bill a vote. H.R. 3 may simply die in committee.

Republicans really want Keystone XL built, but they’d need the cooperation of some oil-stained Democrats to pass H.R. 3. They’d need even more Democratic help to override a presidential veto… help they are extremely unlikely to get.

A massive tornado roared through Moore and south Oklahoma City on Monday afternoon, grinding up neighborhoods and ravaging at least one elementary school in its path.

Terror quickly spread as the Emergency Medical Services Authority rushed ambulances to Briarwood Elementary School in the Moore School District and to several homes, businesses and intersections in response to reports of multiple injuries.

Parents of children could be seen rushing toward the school, dodging downed power lines and scattered debris.

The tornado, which preliminary data suggests was a Level 4 storm on the Enhanced Fujita (EF) scale, is said to have been two miles wide, with winds stronger than one hundred and seventy miles per hour. As it ripped through Moore and other suburbs of Oklahoma City, it left a wretched trail of massive devastation in its wake.

The monster tornado that ripped through Moore, Oklahoma earlier today (Image shown on KFOR’s live feed and courtesy of KFOR)

In addition to ravaging Briarwood Elementary School, the tornado also shredded apart Plaza Towns Elementary School. At least seventy-five children were inside Plaza Towns at the time it was hit. The building was reduced to rubble.

Thirty-seven people have been confirmed dead by the state medical examiner’s office. The actual number of casualties may rise as more bodies are found. Survivors are still being pulled out of the debris of destroyed buildings.

Those who have lived through horrific events like Hurricane Katrina or Superstorm Sandy and seen their property wiped out can no doubt empathize with the people of Moore, who have sadly seen destructive twisters before. (An equally-fierce tornado hit Moore just over fourteen years ago, in May of 1999).

Devastation as seen from the air (Image courtesy of KFOR’s live feed)

The White House said that President Barack Obama had placed a call to Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin to assure her that the federal government would provide whatever support the state might need. Here’s a readout of that call:

This evening the President spoke with Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin to express his concern for those who have been affected by the severe weather beginning last night and continuing today. While information is still coming in, the President made clear that his Administration, through FEMA, stands ready to provide all available assistance as the Governor’s team responds to the storm and that he has directed his team to ensure that they are providing available resources as the response unfolds. FEMA has deployed an Incident Management Assistance Team to the state emergency operations center in Oklahoma City to support state and local officials on the ground and additional personnel and resources stand ready to be dispatched as necessary. The President told Governor Fallin that the people of Oklahoma are in his and the First Lady’s thoughts and prayers and, while his team will continue to keep him updated, he urged her to be in touch directly if there were additional resources the Administration could provide.

The Red Cross has activated its “Safe & Well” website to help friends and relatives connect with individuals and families who are/were in the affected area. If someone is registered, you’ll be able to find him or her by doing a search.

UPDATE, 6:02 PM: The death toll is now at fifty-one. More than a hundred and twenty people are being treated for critical injuries as a result of the tornado.

Smiling broadly, Clark declared that her party had won a clear mandate to govern and would move forward with its plans to help oil companies drill more wells and build more pipelines to increase the province’s fossil fuel exports.

Less than an hour and a half earlier, the NDP’s Adrian Dix conceded defeat in front of a subdued crowd of activists who had hoped to be celebrating the end of Liberal rule but instead found themselves shellshocked at the margin of their defeat.

“Sometimes you win, and sometimes you lose, and in British Columbia it often rains,” Dix told supporters as he acknowledged the defeat with dignity.

“Tonight, we are disappointed, but we are unbowed,” he added.

“We’ve elected a very strong team that is going to hold the Government accountable… This party’s determination to bring change will continue.”

Perhaps, but the NDP is now in a much weaker position than it was before the election. That’s not the result Dix wanted, hoped for, or expected.

Dix himself will return to Victoria as the MLA for Vancouver – Kingsway. But he will return with less clout and less credibility than he had when he left to campaign as the public face of the New Democratic Party.

And whether he will remain the party’s leader is an open question. The NDP performed worse with him at the helm than it did with Carole James in 2009. (James, incidentally, won reelection in her own riding and will also return to Victoria).

Speaking with reporters after her victory speech, Clark lavished praise on her party’s volunteers and basked in the glow of victory.

“Oh my gosh, you guys, I’m feeling really honored,” she exclaimed when asked about her reaction to the unexpectedly great results for her party.

Naturally, she was also asked about the polls.

“If there’s any lesson in this, it’s that pollsters and prognosticators do not choose the government,” she replied.

That’s certainly true: we at NPI are fond of saying that the only real poll happens on Election Day (south of the border, here in Washington and Oregon, it’s more like Election Month, but the same principle applies).

However, it appears that the voters in Clark’s own riding are on the verge of choosing someone else to represent them in Victoria. The NDP may well come out of this election with at least the satisfaction of having knocked out Clark in Vancouver – Point Grey with a stellar candidate, David Eby, who used to serve as executive director of the B.C . Civil Liberties Association.

(I profiled Eby on Saturday and came away very impressed).

Eby, who has traded the lead with Clark a couple of times during the course of the night, is presently ahead by several hundred votes, which is rather remarkable. With one hundred and seventy-three of one hundred and seventy-three ballot boxes reported, Eby has a three hundred and sixty vote lead over Clark.

Advance polls (early votes, as we’d say in the U.S.) still need to be counted, but the NDP made a big effort to get British Columbians to vote early, and it seems unlikely that the advance polls will favor Clark.

If Eby ekes out a victory, it will be bittersweet for him, but very satisfying for the NDP… a bright spot on an otherwise very grim electoral map.

Clark would then find herself in the embarrassing position of having to ask one of her own victorious Liberal candidates to step aside so she can hold a seat in the B.C. Legislative Assembly. (As I’ve previously noted, in British Columbia, an MLA does not have to reside in the riding that he or she represents).

As of 11:40 PM, these were the results in Vancouver – Point Grey:

Despite having undoubtedly lost some progressive voters to Françoise Raunet of the Green Party, Eby is still ahead, and leads by a slightly more comfortable margin at present than he did earlier. It’s looking pretty good for him.

It’s been an hour and fifteen minutes since polls closed in British Columbia’s 2013 provincial elections, and the New Democratic Party (NDP) has yet to overtake the Liberals in the count of leading/elected MLAs (Members of the Legislative Assembly). And it looks like they’re not going to.

As the minutes tick on, the NDP’s chances of victory seem increasingly slim. There is no talk of an NDP landslide now on Canadian networks; in fact, one (CTV) has already called the election for the Liberals, projecting they will retain their majority. And on Global (which I’m watching from here in the States), anchors and pundits are already suggesting that Christy Clark will be basking in the glow of victory tomorrow while the NDP does some soul-searching.

UPDATE, 9:47 PM: Global has now called the election for the Liberals as well.

Why are the Liberals ahead? Well, they’re doing much better than expected in many areas of the  province, including Prince George and the Lower Mainland.

Some of the rising stars the NDP was counting on to help carry the party to victory aren’t faring too well. For example, Chris Wilson, whose campaign I covered on Saturday, is trailing in Coquitlam-Burke Mountain.

It appears the Liberals could end up with more seats than they had at the dissolution of the B.C. Legislative Assembly, although ballots are still being counted and the numbers will change. That would be a stunning outcome.

In a bit of good news for the NDP, in Vancouver – Point Grey, the New Democratic Party’s David Eby is now ahead of Christy Clark. As of 9:40 PM:

There will likely be pressure on the NDP’s Adrian Dix to step down as NDP leader, at least from some quarters. Dix’s strategy of trying to run a positive campaign and deflect Liberal attacks – instead of aggressively counterattacking – appears to have backfired, and cost the NDP the election.

The NDP wasn’t apparently able to capitalize on dissatisfaction with the Liberal government, despite all of the public opinion research that suggested voters were unhappy with the B.C. Liberals and ready to turn them out.

The results are so at odds with the polling – like in last year’s provincial election in Alberta – that Canadian media are suggesting it will be a watershed moment (and not in a good way) for pollsters and public opinion research firms.

Instead of it being a history-making night for the NDP, it’s turning out to be a great night for the Liberals and a good night for the Green Party, who have apparently managed to elect their very first MLA (Andrew Weaver) to the Assembly in the Oak Bay – Gordon Head riding on Vancouver Island.

The Conservatives, meanwhile, are having a pretty bad night as well. They haven’t won any seats or led in any ridings the whole evening.

It appears many of the British Columbians they were wooing decided to support the incumbent Liberals instead of voting Conservative.

The progressive vote, meanwhile, appears to be more split between the NDP and the Green Party. The NDP had repeatedly appealed for progressive voters to vote NDP during the campaign, but many still chose to vote Green.

Some of the ridings that the NDP was thought to stand a very good chance of winning that are currently going Liberal instead include:

• Surrey-Panorama
• Coquitlam-Burke Mountain
• North Vancouver-Lonsdale
• Delta North
• Vancouver – Fairview
• Chilliwack-Hope
• Prince George – Mackenzie
• Cariboo – Chilcotin
• Kamloops – Port Thompson
• Vernon-Monashee
• Port Moody – Coquitlam
• Maple Ridge – Pitt Meadows

The Liberals’ platitude-filled rhetoric about creating economic opportunity and exploiting the province’s natural resources, coupled with a sustained effort to sow fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) about the NDP into the minds of British Columbia voters, appears to have succeeded beyond their wildest expectations.

The results once again offer proof that while voters say they don’t like negative campaigning, it is effective. Dix and the NDP allowed themselves to be defined by the B.C. Liberals, especially towards the end of the campaign, and it resulted in an election night catastrophe of huge proportions. Instead of taking power or at least cutting into the Liberal majority, they have lost ground – and the Liberals will return to Victoria with an even bigger caucus than the one they left with.

The Tyee’s final electoral prediction breaks down as follows:

• NDP: Fifty-seven seats
• Liberals: Twenty-seven seats
• Independents: One seat

The Tyee classifies thirty-four seats as “definitely” NDP, with only thirteen “definitely” Liberal. A further twenty-three seats are considered “Likely” NDP and fourteen “Likely” Liberal. The Tyee no longer has any races classified as tossups.

If the NDP does indeed capture fifty-five plus seats tonight, it will be an electoral victory of mammoth proportions, and Adrian Dix will take over as the province’s next premier with a clear mandate to govern.

Eleventh hour polls indicate the NDP remains comfortably ahead of the Liberals, although polls in other recent provincial elections have been less than reliable.

But there’s no evidence that suggests that the Liberals are going to eke out an upset here at the end. They haven’t conceded defeat, but they lack the energy and the momentum that the NDP is clearly enjoying.

They’ve attempted to scare British Columbians into not voting NDP, and that tactic has certainly worked in the past, but this may be the year it fails spectacularly.

The NDP, under Adrian Dix, has remained cool and collected in the face of Liberal attacks for weeks, and is countering television ad campaigns with people power. The NDP is fielding its best slate of candidates in years and has improved its GOTV (get out the vote) operations to compensate for the Liberals’ money advantage.
I saw this firsthand when I visited the Vancouver area over the weekend.

If the NDP wins tonight, the entire Left Coast – stretching from the U.S.-Mexico border to the Alaskan coast – will have Democratic/New Democratic, progressive chief executives in charge. (Oregon and California elected John Kitzhaber and Jerry Brown in 2010, while Washington elected Jay Inslee just last year).

And British Columbia will have a government committed to job training, economic opportunities, protecting the province’s coasts and addressing the climate crisis.

We will have live coverage of the B.C. provincial election here on The Advocate tonight beginning at 8 PM. Check back for instant analysis as the results roll in and we learn who will be the next Premier of British Columbia.

Sunset on Sunday, May 12th, as seen from Tsawwassen in southern British Columbia (Photo: Andrew Villeneuve/NPI)

I hadn’t expected there to be much of a sunset on Sunday, especially considering the low-visibility rainstorms I’d been driving through.

But as dusk approached, I noticed the sky was getting rosier, and that indicated to me that a truly great sunset was getting under way.

Fortunately, I was on a road that allowed me to pull over with no difficulty once the horizon came into clear view, and get the shot you see above.

It’s easily one of my favorite photos of the trip.

At the moment the picture was taken, the sky was filled with some pretty spectacular sunbeams, or crepuscular rays. These only lasted for a few minutes, and I’m very glad I didn’t miss them. They add a lot of warmth to the image.

Any readers who have ever taken a ferry to Swartz Bay/Victoria have probably been through Tsawwassen. It’s part of the Delta South riding, which is currently held by an independent, Vicki Huntington. She’s expected to retain her seat tomorrow.

Premier Christy Clark hasn’t made as many stops, but she is out and about – just not in her own riding.

At 9 AM she paid a visit to Sealand Aviation in Campbell River, then trekked to Abbotsford to promote Darryl Plecas’ candidacy at his campaign office.

A little while later she showed up at Peter Fassbender’s campaign office in fast-growing Surrey to do the same thing.

And this evening, she and the B.C. Liberals are holding a province-wide telephone town hall so that supporters can connect with her and ask (prescreened) questions.

I’ve been listening in to the tele-town hall for around a half hour; it’s just wrapping up. I was kind of hoping to hear Clark articulate some specific policy directions from the platform, but most of what I’ve heard is boilerplate.

Consequently, I haven’t learned much except that Clark and the Liberals really like LNG (liquefied natural gas) and are eager to help big oil companies drill like there’s no tomorrow. Clark even answered a question about education and school funding by pivoting to LNG. (She claimed the development of LNG would allow schools to be amply funded without needing to raise taxes).

The B.C. Liberals’ platform talks about exploiting LNG as if it was a renewable resource that will provide jobs indefinitely. But this isn’t true.

Natural gas does burn more cleanly than coal or oil, but it’s still an exhaustible fossil fuel. Burning it produces emissions and it cannot be extracted without harming the environment – contrary to what the Liberals say in their LNG platform plank:

LNG: Jobs and prosperity

Under our feet lies as much energy as Alberta has in its oil patch. It is in the form of natural gas, a cleaner alternative to oil or coal, in the Northeast corner of British Columbia.

Today, our market for natural gas is in North America, where we only ship it via pipeline.

Tomorrow, our goal is to have a Liquefied Natural Gas industry that will add value to our abundant natural gas resource by shipping it by sea to Asia where it currently sells for over five times the North American price. By realizing this vision we can deliver jobs, opportunity, and a legacy for future generations.

What we are doing about it

LNG facilities are currently proposed by business groups that include some of the world’s biggest energy companies – Shell, Imperial, Chevron, British Gas, Petronas, SK & ES of South Korea, Inpex and the Chinese National Offshore Oil Corporation, to name some of the major players. It’s no fantasy.

The projects means 39,000 jobs to British Columbia during construction with another 75,000 full time jobs once in operation. We can create $1 trillion in economic activity and create the BC Prosperity Fund with $100 billion over 30 years.

An opportunity this good faces lots of global competition. Premier Christy Clark and Today’s BC Liberals have worked diligently to enable LNG as an economic generator for decades to come.

It’s hard to imagine a rosier pitch for LNG. This plank reads like it was written by lobbyists for big oil companies. (And perhaps they did help write it – who knows).

We agree that LNG facilities are no fantasy. And that should be of great concern to all of us here in the Pacific Northwest. If we let oil companies build all the wells, pipelines, and terminals they want, we’ll be sanctioning massive environmental destruction and permitting the release of billions more tons of carbon dioxide and other climate crisis-causing pollutants into the atmosphere.

Is that really the “legacy” we want to leave for future generations?

Our ancestors mined western North America in the 1800s and early 1900s without regard to the cost or consequences. Environmental science wasn’t a science back then. They didn’t know what we know about the environmental ramifications of blowing up mountains or injecting a brew of toxic chemicals into the ground.

Reading the B.C. Liberals’ platform, you’d think they don’t know, either. What century are they living in? They call themselves “Today’s B.C. Liberals”… apparently because they’re too embarrassed to run on their record. No doubt they’d like British Columbians to forget about the scandals of Gordon Campbell’s government (we in America would say administration). But many are determined not to forget.

Clark and her party have spent more time and money campaigning over the last few years than governing, the NDP’s candidates like to say.

Judging by what I’ve seen and heard, plenty of British Columbians share that view and are ready for a change. The NDP has worked hard to capitalize on this sentiment by making “Change for the Better” its official campaign slogan.

Clark, meanwhile, hasn’t done herself any favors. She’s been so ineffective at governing that it was perhaps fitting she spoiled her own ballot by voting for herself instead of the Liberal running to represent her riding. (In British Columbia, a candidate does not have to live in the riding he or she represents – and Clark doesn’t. She lives just outside the border of Vancouver – Point Grey).

Considering how much money Clark’s government has spent campaigning, I was surprised when I joined the call to hear Clark answering questions from a speakerphone. The prescreened callers (many of whom sounded like undecided voters up until they said “You’ve got my vote”) were coming in more clearly than Clark and her facilitator, who interposed lavish praise of Clark in between Clark’s boilerplate-filled answers and questions from callers.

Most of the callers chosen to participate in the tele-town hall were women; it seems Clark and her party feel that they need to shore up their support among women. Recent polling – including a poll released today by AngusReid Public Opinion – shows that women prefer the NDP to the Liberals.

The BC Liberals have not released a campaign schedule for tomorrow but there’s no chance Christy Clark won’t be out and about. The NDP, for its part, has announced a big afternoon rally at the Vancouver Film Studios in the city’s film district. I’ll be at the rally, which will feature NDP leader Adrian Dix and other NDP candidates.

Look for more coverage of the B.C. elections here on The Advocate tomorrow.

One of the party’s best prospects, civil rights activist David Eby, is running in Vancouver – Point Grey, a riding that encompasses the University of British Columbia and is represented by Christy Clark… the premier of the province.

Prior to 2011, Vancouver – Point Grey was represented by Gordon Campbell, the province’s former premier, who now holds the plum post of High Commissioner to the United Kingdom.

(The High Commissioner heads Canada’s diplomatic mission to Britain).

Campbell won the riding in four consecutive elections, but except for in 2001, his margin of victory was never that great. In 2011, the NDP realized that the riding was ripe for the taking when Eby came up short against Campbell’s successor (and now Premier) Christy Clark by only five hundred and sixty-four votes.

Eby decided in December 2012 to seek a rematch, and is now running against Clark for a second time, having been enthusiastically nominated by the NDP. He’s widely considered one of their rising stars. The Tyee considers him the favorite to win on Tuesday, given his energy-infused candidacy and Clark’s growing unpopularity.

Tyee call: Likely BC New Democratic Party. Premier Christy Clark is running against prominent Vancouver civil rights advocate and lawyer David Eby. It’s going to be a tight race, but with Clark’s approval ratings tanking, it’s looking like Eby will eke out a win.

As Election Day approaches, he and his team are working hard to get out the vote and turn the riding orange. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer‘s Joel Connelly and I stopped by his bustling office on West Broadway in the Kitsilano neighborhood (known to locals as “Kits”) to get a sense of how his campaign is going.

David Eby’s campaign office in Kitsilano. A big, colorful blue and orange sign out front makes it plainly clear that this is the NDP’s home base in the area. (Photo: Andrew Villeneuve/NPI)

Eby, the former director of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, is an impressive and charismatic candidate with a calm and cheery demeanor. He currently serves as an adjunct professor in the Faculty of Law at the University of British Columbia and has been recognized by human rights groups for his contributions to the cause. He is also the President of the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network.

Eby believes in people-powered politics; he has spent a lot of time knocking on doors and calling voters (which is what a good candidate does).

His supporters are taking advantage of decent weather this afternoon to go out canvassing throughout the riding in team, carrying clipboards and stacks of Vote NDP/Eby flyers. Among them are University of Saskatoon students Mitch & Mitch, who’ve come all the way from Saskatchewan to help the Eby campaign.

David Eby speaks with supporters preparing to go canvassing in the province’s best-educated riding (Photo: Andrew Villeneuve/NPI)

Eby’s 2013 campaign has been drawing attention. He’s been profiled by the Globe & Mail, Canada’s newspaper of record, and MetroNews.

Environmental protection is one of the values at the heart of Eby’s campaign. In an interview, he explained why he’s not afraid of having a strong, principled position opposing an increase in fossil fuel exports – unlike his opponent, Christy Clark.

“It gives me a couple of advantages,” he said. “One is, it makes it very easy to talk about the issue with people. They understand where we stand.”

“And the second is, it makes it easier for people who hear that position to make a decision on how to vote. If they think that Vancouver should be a major oil export port and there should be four hundred tankers every year passing their front door, then they should vote Liberal. And if they don’t think that, they should vote NDP.”

He also asserted that the next government shouldn’t be oriented towards developing a twentieth-century energy sector.

“If you look at the Liberal campaign platform, you’d think that the only way that we could grow our economy is through natural gas… that everything else is destined to not work out.” Citing the film and tourism industries, he added, “I think we’re more than just a province that mines or moves resources around.”

He described the rematch against Clark “really weird”, explaining that Clark hasn’t shown up to all-candidates meetings or community events and hasn’t been visible until very recently. “It’s like campaigning against a ghost,” he said.

“For the first half of the campaign, during the writ period, they didn’t even drop a flyer in the riding… More recently they’ve dropped a couple now. But it was so strange. There were hardly any signs for the longest time.”

Clark has supporters running phone banks, but there is scant evidence that she’s making an effort to personally connect with her own constituents, Eby added.

“I think that people recognize that she doesn’t live here, in the riding, that she hasn’t come to the meetings, that she hasn’t been in the community.”

“I would say she’s abandoned the riding, but she would have had to have been here in the first place to have abandoned it,” he concluded.

Six other candidates are also challenging Clark in the 2013 election: Independent William Gibbens, Hollis Linschoten of the “Work Less Party”, Conservative Duane Nickull, Libertarian Marisa Palmer, Green Francoise Raunet and Bernard Yankson of the “Platinum Party”. Each is sure to draw votes, but the race is principally between Eby and Clark, with Eby standing a good chance of defeating Clark.

As we announced earlier this week, I am visiting our northern neighbors this weekend to cover the 2013 British Columbia provincial elections, which will conclude this Tuesday, May 14th. Whichever party wins will most likely form B.C.’s next government and run the province for the next few years… so the outcome has important ramifications both here and for us in the United States.

That’s why I’m here.

Over the last few weeks and months, I’ve tried to immerse myself in British Columbia politics (well, at least to the extent I could without being there).

Though Washington and Idaho share a border with B.C., and though B.C. shares an ecoregion with us, its politics are in many ways more similar to the United Kingdom’s than ours, owing to the province’s British heritage. (There’s a reason it’s called British Columbia!)

In B.C., the two major political parties are the B.C. Liberals and the B.C. New Democratic Party, or BCNDP for short. The Liberals, despite their name, are actually the province’s major conservative party; the NDP is the province’s progressive political party. (Up here, the words liberal and progressive would not be equated as referring to the same worldview and values system as in the United States).

The B.C. NDP is affiliated with the Canadian federal NDP (which became the opposition party in Ottawa for the first time in the last election) but the B.C. Liberals have no formal affiliation with the national Liberal Party, now led by the young and charismatic Justin Trudeau. As this is a provincial election, the B.C. Liberals and the B.C. NDP are squarely focused on regional and local issues; with national issues being viewed through a West Coast lens.

There is a Conservative Party up here, by the way, but it holds no seats in the B.C. Legislative Assembly and is influential only to the extent that it can be a spoiler in a close election, like the Libertarian Party or the Green Party here in the United States. And speaking of the Green Party, British Columbia has a Green Party too – but it shares a status similar to that of the Conservative Party.

British Columbia, like Canada and other Commonwealth realms, is a parliamentary democracy organized according to the Westminster system. That means the head of government (called the Premier in British Columbia) plus his or her ministers come from the legislative assembly. When voters empower one party to govern as the majority party, that party forms the government that runs the province.

Sometimes, the electorate is so split that no one party wins a majority of seats in an election. When this happens, a coalition government of two or more parties usually forms, and governs jointly through a power-sharing agreement.

At present, with the exception of two independents, only members of the B.C. Liberals and B.C. NDP hold seats in the Legislative Assembly in Victoria, and that is not expected to change on Tuesday when the election concludes.

This election is thus primarily a contest between the B.C. Liberals and the B.C. NDP. The Liberals are currently the majority party in the Assembly, and the NDP is the opposition party. The NDP, led by Adrian Dix, is campaigning hard to turn out the Liberals, led by Christy Clark. Clark presently serves as Premier; if her party is defeated on Tuesday, Dix will become the next Premier.

In Canada and in British Columbia, political parties truly run what we in Washington State would call a “coordinated” campaign. The parties provide all sorts of support and logistics for their candidates – including web hosting, as you can see from browsing around the B.C. NDP’s clean and elegant website.

Because the premiership usually goes to the MLA (Member of the Legislative Assembly) who serves as the leader of the majority party, the party leaders are very much the public faces of their respective parties. Their photos are everywhere.

The premiership is a fairly powerful position. Think of it as equivalent to Jay Inslee and Frank Chopp’s positions in Washington State (governor and speaker).

The person serving as premier is essentially the executive of the province, but is indirectly elected, unlike Jay Inslee, Butch Otter, or John Kitzhaber.

A B.C. voter wanting to see Adrian Dix as the next premier can’t actually vote for Dix unless he or she lives in Dix’s riding (riding is Canadian for district). Dix’s chances of becoming premier thus rest on the success of the NDP as a whole in the provincial elections, just as Christy Clark’s fate is tied to that of the B.C. Liberals.

(Clark’s own riding, incidentally, is hotly contested – the NDP has a credible candidate running against her and he could be victorious on Tuesday).

As this is the last Saturday and Sunday before the polls close on Tuesday, it’s GOTV weekend up here in British Columbia, and all of the parties are working to turn out their supporters. Early voting (or advance polls) began here last Wednesday, and continues this weekend in all of the province’s eighty-five ridings.

This morning, B.C. NDP leader Adrian Dix is campaigning with MLA hopeful Chris Wilson in the Coquitlam-Burke Mountain riding, which is one of fifteen to twenty swing ridings. The NDP is hosting a pancake breakfast at Wilson’s campaign office just off Highway 7; Dix is expected to address supporters and the press when he arrives in his campaign bus. That’s what I’m here in Coquitlam to cover. It promises to be a good time; I’ll be posting a writeup (with pictures!) after it’s over.

Stay tuned for more perspective and reporting on the B.C. provincial elections.

The bill, H. 3101, seeks to:

… render null and void certain unconstitutional laws enacted by the Congress of the United States taking control over the health insurance industry and mandating that individuals purchase health insurance under threat of penalty; to prohibit certain individuals from enforcing or attempting to enforce such unconstitutional laws; and to establish criminal penalties and civil liability for violating this article.

The prime sponsor of the bill is Republican Bill Chumley. Chumley is either not aware that by attempting to nullify federal law, he is violating the oath of office he swore or affirmed when he became a lawmaker, or he is aware and simply doesn’t care.

The Supreme Court of the United States has repeatedly held that federal law trumps state law and states have no authority to nullify federal laws. In Cooper v. Aaron (1958) the Court unequivocally affirmed that the federal judiciary alone has the power to interpret federal laws and decide their constitutionality. For state officials to assume such power would be a violation of their oaths:

No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it. Chief Justice Marshall spoke for a unanimous Court in saying that: ‘If the legislatures of the several states may, at will, annul the judgments of the courts of the United States, and destroy the rights acquired under those judgments, the Constitution itself becomes a solemn mockery.

A Governor who asserts a power to nullify a federal court order is similarly restrained. If he had such power, said Chief Justice Hughes, in 1932, also for a unanimous Court, ‘it is manifest that the fiat of a state Governor, and not the Constitution of the United States, would be the supreme law of the land; that the restrictions of the Federal Constitution upon the exercise of state power would be but impotent phrases’.

The Supreme Court has found the Patient Protection Act to be constitutional. This decision is binding on South Carolina and its elected officials, including Bill Chumley and his colleagues – whether they like it or not. Thus, ironically, H. 3101 – which attempts to make the Patient Protection Act unenforceable – is itself unenforceable.

Chumley is free to dislike and disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius.

But as an elected leader who swore an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, he must respect the Court’s interpretation of the Constitution.

Similarly, those of us who fervently disagree with the Supreme Court’s Corporations United ruling have to respect that decision, even though we may not like it. We are, of course, at liberty to propose and discuss changing the U.S. Constitution to overturn the decision, and that is what the Move to Amend effort is all about.

As of just before 5:45 PM Pacific, with around one-fourth of precincts reporting, U.S. Representative Ed Markey and former Navy SEAL Gabriel Gomez led their respective challengers for the Democratic and Republican nominations. Each had been considered his party’s frontrunner, so these results aren’t too surprising.

Here are the numbers:

MA-Senate – Democratic Special Primary
April 30, 2013 – Results as of 05:41PM Pacific
56 of 2172 Precincts Reporting – 26%

Ed Markey: 58% (74,623 votes)
Stephen Lynch: 42% (53,766 votes)

MA-Senate – Republican Special Primary
April 30th, 2013 – Results as of 05:42PM Pacific
538 of 2172 Precincts Reporting – 25%

Gabriel Gomez: 52% (26,782 votes)
Mike Sullivan: 35% (18,056 votes)
Dan Winslow: 13% (6,652 votes)

Results are coming in at a steady pace, so it’s likely these numbers will be outdated by the time many NPI Advocate readers see this post.

However, it’s always nice to have a snapshot.

Ed Markey’s lead stood at 61% earlier when fewer votes had been tallied and reported. It has since shrunk, but not by that much. Gomez has been in the low fifties for a while. His closest challenger is Mike Sullivan, but he’s pulling in enough votes that third-place finisher Dan Winslow can’t be called a spoiler.

Democrats Ed Markey and Stephen Lynch, as many readers may know, are both members of Massachusetts’ U.S. House delegation. Markey is considered to be more progressive and has a stronger voting record, according to ProgressivePunch.

The Boston Globe reported that turnout for this election was fairly low, with polling places not seeing much activity. Election fatigue may be party to blame – last year’s elections dominated airwaves and mailboxes for a pretty long time.

UPDATE, 6:20 PM: The Associated Press and major news outlets are projecting that Markey and Gomez are the winners of their respective primaries. With more than 70% of ballots now counted, it’s evident that their opponents aren’t going to close the gap. It will be Markey vs. Gomez from now until June 25th.

In a short statement issued a little bit ago, the National Basketball Association revealed that its Relocation Committee has unanimously voted to recommend rejection of the Kings’ application to move to Seattle.

(The Kings are currently owned by the Maloofs, who struck an agreement to sell the team to a group led by Chris Hansen and Steve Ballmer back in January).

The NBA’s full Board of Governors (consisting of the league’s existing owners) will meet on May 13th to consider the matter. The board is expected to adopt the Relocation Committee’s recommendation.

The rejection of the application does not mean that the Maloofs have to sell to the ownership group organized by Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson.

However, if they want to sell the franchise and cash out, they don’t appear to have any other options at this point.

The decision is a defeat for the Maloofs (who tried to sell the team to an ownership group that wanted to move it away out of spite) and for Chris Hansen, whose ambition collided with the determination and persistence of the denizens of Sacramento, led by Mayor Kevin Johnson, himself a former NBA player.

Johnson lauded the recommendation with a series of tweets congratulating Sacramento and applauding the enthusiasm of fans in Seattle:

That’s what I’m talking about SACRAMENTO!!!!! WE DID IT!!!!!

— Kevin Johnson (@KJ_MayorJohnson) April 29, 2013

I’ve never been prouder of this city. I thank the ownership group, city leaders, but most of all the BEST FANS IN THE NBA!!!

— Kevin Johnson (@KJ_MayorJohnson) April 29, 2013

I want to take my hat off to Seattle. You’re a great city,had a great proposal, unbelievable fans & no doubt deserve a team in the future.

— Kevin Johnson (@KJ_MayorJohnson) April 29, 2013

5:00PM @firestonepublic! Be there!

— Kevin Johnson (@KJ_MayorJohnson) April 29, 2013

Kings fans reacted on Sactown Royalty, a leading Sacramento Kings fan blog, with jubilation and contempt for the Maloofs. (And that might be an understatement).

“The second I saw the news go up on Twitter, I started bawling all over my computer,” one fan wrote. “A glorious moment and I’d just like to wave as the Maloofs walk away and contemplate how they failed at failing a city.”

“If anything, in the end, I thank Hansen for taking the Maloofs out of our lives,” said another, contemplating the victory. “In reality, without him, we wouldn’t be where we are today, feeling the way we do today.”

A few self-professed Sonics fans joined in the celebration as well.

“I couldn’t be more thrilled for Sacramento Kings fans,” a fan styling him or her self as UniversalGuru wrote. “You are a testament to true fandom and an example of what every fanbase should strive to achieve.”

“I hope that Kings fans will support Seattle in their effort to rejoin the NBA (hopefully through expansion),” UniversalGuru added.

“Congratulations are not enough to describe how you must feel. I know, because it’s the antithesis of what we went through in 2008. I know that I’ll be rooting for you during the 2013-2014 season.”

That last comment sums up our sentiments.

We at NPI would like to see men’s professional basketball return to Seattle, but only through an expansion franchise. That’s why we’re very glad that Sacramento has succeeded in its efforts to keep the Kings. All of our other pro teams (Mariners, Storm, Sounders, Seahawks) truly can be called hometown teams, because they started play in Seattle and have always belonged to Seattle.

Had Chris Hansen succeeded in his efforts to take Sacramento’s team and bring it here, it would not have meant the return of the SuperSonics. It would have meant the transformation of the Sacramento Kings into the Seattle Kings. It would have meant that Seattle would have stolen another city’s team, just as the Sonics were taken from Seattle five years ago by Clay Bennett and his henchmen.

The NBA would now be wise to award Chris Hansen and Steve Ballmer an expansion franchise. In Hansen and Ballmer and the Nordstroms, the league has an enthusiastic ownership group who are passionate about bringing the NBA back to Seattle and have forged a partnership with Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn and King County Executive Dow Constantine to make it happen.

McGinn and Constantine both depicted their resolve and enthusiasm as unchanged despite the NBA’s recommendation against the relocation.

“I’m proud of how Sonics fans have rallied together to help Seattle get a team,” McGinn said. “We’re going to stay focused on our job: making sure Seattle remains in a position to get a team when the opportunity presents itself.”

Constantine agreed.

“I’m disappointed, but undeterred in our quest to bring NBA basketball back to the Pacific Northwest. Today’s decision doesn’t mean this effort is over. From what I saw at the presentation in New York, Chris Hansen and his team have made the superior offer and the best pure business case for the NBA to return to Seattle.”

“We have a documented fan and business base ready to step forward when the time comes. We are patient, but determined. I look forward to continuing our work with the Hansen group to return NBA basketball to the major media market and loyal fans of Seattle, King County, and Washington State.”