Spokane, Washington

Dave is running for Spokane County Prosecutor to ensure our communities are kept safe and to hold all criminals accountable for their actions. Dave’s record as Deputy Prosecutor demonstrates his passion for justice and his unwavering integrity. As Prosecutor, Dave will carry a caseload and not just be a full time administrator. Under his leadership, the Office of Prosecuting Attorney will once again be representative of open and honest government. According to Dave Stevens, “the significant amount of support and enthusiasm surrounding the campaign this early on is really exciting, and we’re just getting off the ground.”

Dave has received the endorsement of the Spokane County Republican Party and has already seen an early wave of support from individual law enforcement officers and deputy prosecutors.

Dave began his career as an Assistant City Prosecutor and then cross-deputized as a Spokane County Deputy Prosecutor in 2001. He began his work in the Domestic Violence Unit and currently works in the Property Unit. He specializes in prosecuting career criminals. As a prosecuting attorney, Dave has completed more than one hundred criminal jury trials, argued hundreds of motion hearings, and prosecuted thousands of cases. Dave has prosecuted a range of cases, including DUIs, domestic assaults, meth labs, and drive-by shootings. In the past, Dave has regularly argued cases before the Washington State Court of Appeals.

For more information on Dave Stevens and to keep up to date with the campaign, please visit his website at www.electdavestevens.com and follow the campaign on Facebook and Twitter.

Today let’s take a closer look at two recent lone dissents by Justice Sanders. He believes the court is there to protect people’s legal rights and will stand for them, even if he stands alone. He sees a dissent as an epitaph on a tombstone for a legal right violated. Although dissents have no immediate effect on the rights of the parties, hopefully they will stimulate further thought and perhaps reconsideration in future decisions. After all, Plessey v. Ferguson (separate but equal), was ultimately replaced by Brown v. Board of Education (separate is not equal) — but it took a while.

Justice Sanders was most gratified when he visited Seattle’s new city attorney-elect in December to see that Peter Holmes had a quotation on his computer from Justice Sanders’ lone dissent in Seeley v. State, 132 Wn.2d 776 (1997). That decision denied a dying man his right to use medical marijuana in his final illness. Perhaps this was to remind Mr. Holmes of the potential consequences of misused government power. Justice Sanders believes the people of Seattle have a very fine public servant in Peter Holmes. That dissent was also reprinted almost verbatim in the Seattle PI as well, and may have laid some of the groundwork for the medial marijuana initiative later passed by the people. Ironically the most recent lone dissent deals with the same subject. But some things need to be said repeatedly before people are able to hear the truth.

State v. Fry, 2010 WL 185857 (2010)

Stevens County sheriff deputies went to the Fry residence to check out a marijuana growing operation. Tina Fry met the officers at the door and told the officers her husband Jason had a legal prescription for medical marijuana. Nevertheless the officers obtained a search warrant based on the smell of marijuana despite the statute’s injunction that medical marijuana users “shall not be penalized in any manner, or denied any right or privilege,for such actions.”

Fry moved to suppress the evidence obtained arguing that there was no probable cause to issue the warrant since he presented evidence of the legal prescription to the police indicating he had a right to smoke before they sought the warrant. Justice Jim Johnson upheld the search in his majority opinion; Justice Tom Chambers concurred in result while Justice Sanders wrote a lone dissent.

After the opinion was published, the Seattle Times quoted a representative of CannaCare as saying it is “a disaster for us…It basically says that no matter what, they can arrest you at will, prosecute you at will, put you through the system, and cost you thousands in legal fees, even though they know you’re a legal patient. That’s just wrong. We are guilty until we can prove ourselves innocent.” The Olympian also provided a very good explanation of the opinion and dissent. And, Bruce Ramsey of the Seattle Times posted an article siding with Sanders.

State v. Pugh 2009 WL 5155364 (Dec. 31, 2009)

Bridgette Pugh called 911 to say her husband beat her up and was now walking away from her apartment. The police arrested him for assault; however when he was tried the wife didn’t show up to testify. Over Mr. Pugh’s objections the court allowed the prosecution to play the 911 tape without live testimony to support conviction, and he was convicted based on the tape, which, of course, he could not cross examine. Although the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution provides the right of the accused “to be confronted with the witnesses against him”, Justice Madsen writing for the majority held the right to confront the witness against you was not violated because the tape was not “testimonial.” Justice Sanders countered in the dissent that it was a narrative of past events so of course it was testimonial and therefore a 6th Amendment violation.

But the state constitution provides even more rights than the federal Bill of Rights. One reason Justice Sanders writes so many dissents is that he follows the express language of our state constitution. In this case, the language is very clear: “In criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right…to meet the witnesses against him face to face…”

In his dissent, Sanders wrote “What is there about ‘face to face’ that the majority doesn’t understand? ‘The beginning of wisdom is calling things by their right names.’” [Ancient Chinese Proverb]

In the opinion Justice Sanders explains that the people ratified our state constitution by popular vote in 1889 and we must apply it by its plain language as it would have been understood. Apparently this view is now radical thought, and “thinking outside the box” to say the Constitution means what it says, and says what it means. Unfortunately, only Justice Sanders brings this view to the court. But at least someone reads the text and will apply it as written.

Thanks to the explosion of child pornography, the demand for sex with minors and sexual materials featuring children is skyrocketing. The demand far outweighs the supply.

As a result, children and young teens are being kidnapped and forced to perform for money under threat of death.

As unbelievable as this may sound, this is happening in virtually every country and every state in the union, including at least five cities in Washington.

Buyers will pay hundreds–sometimes thousands–of dollars for a young child or teen. The market is unimaginably lucrative. To criminals, children and teens are expensive products that can be sold repeatedly, yet cost little or nothing to acquire and maintain. That’s the formula for modern day sex slavery.

ANOTHER KIND OF SEX PREDATOR

The youngest children are simply being kidnapped and moved from one part of the country to another. The older ones, generally age 12 to 17, are befriended by a good-looking young man or woman, who acts friendly and gives them expensive gifts.

After a reasonable period, the “friend” suggests a sleepover or weekend trip. The girl is then taken to secret location where the actual pimp takes possession of her. She is then drugged, raped and child sex trafficking.jpgbeaten regularly and forced into prostitution. She is threatened with death if she tries to escape. She is then moved from city to city and sold to an endless stream of strangers.

In an attempt to stem the tide of child sex trafficking in Washington, I have introduced a bill to help rescue these exploited children and severely punish those who take their innocence.

Senate Bill 6476 would dramatically increase penalties for recruiting, selling, transporting or purchasing underage children for sexual purposes.

SEVERE PENALTIES FOR SEX TRAFFICKING

The bill would raise the penalties for commercial sex abuse of a minor (“pimping”) to a Class A felony, carrying a 7- to 26-year prison sentence and a maximum $5,000 fine. Currently it’s a Class B felony, which carries a minimum sentence of just 1.75 years. The bill would elevate commercial sex abuse of a minor (buying) from a Class C felony with a $550 fine to a Class B felony, with a 1.75- to 12-year sentence and an additional $5,000 fine.

In the case of adult prostitution, law enforcement officers are trained to arrest and charge the prostitute, while only marginally addressing the seller and buyer. In the case of minors, or those who were kidnapped or coerced into prostitution as minors, police are dealing with victims.

As children and teens, they had no choice. These kids have been so abused they don’t know who to trust. They have no safe place to go. To treat them as criminals simply adds another bad dream to an already nightmarish existence.

CHILD VICTIMS NEED SAFETY

My bill would provide these exploited children with a safe haven, where they can be helped out of bondage and into a new life. It would also help focus law enforcement attention where it should be: on the recruiters, buyers and sellers.

The bill was heard by the Senate Human Services and Corrections Committee and will likely move on to the full Senate for a vote. I’ll keep you posted on what happens.

Sincerely,

A quick definition of hate: standing up for the truth of God’s word is “hate.”

I argued with these pastors and leaders from the Scripture. They, in turned, argued back that I was narrow-minded and old-school and that I could never understand their ways. To them, it did not matter the multiple Scriptures condemning the practice and the participants; it did not matter to them Jesus’ example of praising the prophets for their hateful ways (modern definition) rather than condemning them as narrow-minded; nor did it matter to them these homosexuals were on the road to hell and their method would do nothing to turn them back. And, in the end, I refused to “agree to disagree.”

It is hard for the church – and especially youth pastors – to stand up for the truth because they are more interested in what the church looks like than what the message of the Gospel is. This is ironic, because these are the same people who are supposed to address the problem of peer pressure to our youth, yet they cannot handle the problem themselves.

Molotov Mitchell has a short video out that addresses this issue: What should be the Christian response to the homosexual? [scroll down to "My Gay Friends" - depending on when you read this, it might be a ways down the list.]

[movie deleted because of script conflict]

A WORD ABOUT YOUR PROSPERITY:

Over two thousand years ago, God sent His Son, Jesus Christ to be born like one of us – to die for all of us. He paid the price for our sin. Our sin is in our nature and our nature is to reject God and His authority; and we cannot pay for that, not even with our own blood. But God, Himself, came to earth, became one of us. He willingly left His splendor in Heaven and suffered death at the hands of men – the hands of men He created, in order to bring us back to God. That is why Jesus said, He came to give us life more abundantly (John 10:10).

This is why birthday parties for Jesus really miss the point: Christmas is not a celebration of Jesus’ birthday. We are not celebrating another year older, nor are we celebrating the date of His birth. We are celebrating God’s greatest gift to man, the gift of Himself and His willing sacrifice – we are celebrating Christ’s triumph over sin and death, so we can live with Him forever; and He gives us freedom on earth, no matter our lot in life.

In the days of old, and Bible times included, it was common to celebrate with song, festivities and the giving of gifts whenever a people received a great victory, military or otherwise. So, too, in our giving of gifts to family and friends, we are celebrating the salvation and redemption God has given freely to man. This is why we give – not to fulfill some materialistic lust, though it appears we have devolved into this as a society. When we give our gifts, let us remember the reason for the giving – Jesus has conquered death, and that is our greatest victory.

The best way to celebrate Christmas is to receive the gift God has given to men (read John chapter one). This gift was God who became man, who died for our sin in our place. Everyone who repents of their sin and receives this gift will have everlasting life. This is true prosperity and the greatest prosperity, indeed.

ANOTHER WORD ABOUT GIFT GIVING:

Solomon and the queen of Sheba demonstrated the best template for gift exchanging: when visiting bring a gift from your wealth – gold, silver, costly spices, jewels and such. Your host, in turn displays his wealth and you choose what you will. It was noted in the account the queen of Sheba left with more than she brought. Visiting trumps hosting.

PLEASE ENJOY THIS VIDEO AND SONG:

AT WHAT POINT DO WE GO BANKRUPT?

Frankly, I’m worried for our nation and for the state of Washington.

Within the next 12 months, the United States Treasury must refinance $2 trillion in short-term debt, along with additional deficit spending, estimated at $1.5 trillion.

This is simple economics: The Treasury can’t borrow $3.5 trillion in only one year. That’s nearly 30 percent of our entire Gross Domestic Product! Where will the money come from?

Typically, to minimize its interest burden, the Treasury borrows for short durations and then “rolls over” the loans when they come due. In theory, as long as they can extend the debt, there’s no problem. And that has led to ever greater amounts of debt for ever shorter durations at ever lower interest rates.

PAYDAY IS SOMEDAY

Sooner or later, creditors start asking themselves: What are the chances I will ever actually be repaid? And that’s when the trouble starts. Interest rates soar. Funding costs skyrocket. And bankruptcy is certain.

In fact, economists Alan Greenspan and Pablo Guidotti created a formula to accurately predict when a country will go bankrupt, or “default.” The Greenspan-Guidotti Rule is simple: If a country does not have enough in reserves (savings) to cover all of its foreign short-term debts when they become due, it will default.

When this happens, we become a terrible credit risk, and speculators target our bonds and currency, making it impossible to refinance the debt. Then default is certain. Using this scale, the U.S. has reached guaranteed default.

BIG DEBT, LITTLE SAVINGS

The U.S. holds 8,133.5 metric tons of gold worth about $300 billion, 725 million barrels of oil reserves worth roughly $58 billion, and $136 billion in foreign currency reserves. Altogether that’s about $500 billion of reserves.

Foreigners own 44 percent of our debts, which means we will owe them at least $880 billion in the next 12 months – an amount far larger than our reserves. With $1.5 trillion more of deficit spending slated for this year, our total funding requirements will top $3.5 trillion.

As the United States continues to move closer to defaulting, creditors hesitate to buy our bonds knowing the value of the payback is uncertain. If the U.S. defaults, our state’s ability to borrow and our businesses’ ability to borrow and grow local economies will also be at risk.

We will only become solvent again when the government stops spending – both at the state and federal level.

Sincerely,

Are the homosexuals finally going to take control of our culture and push their depraved lifestyle on our children and families?

Ballots were mailed last week to over 3 million voters in Washington State asking them to either approve or reject Senate Bill 5688. Passed last spring in the legislature, SB5688 would strip away the protections of traditional marriage that were ensured with the passage of DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) just a few short years ago.

What kept SB5688 from being signed into law by a very willing governor were a few courageous people who came together to file a referendum to allow the voters to make the final decision – to REJECT this bill.

Frankly, it was nothing short of a miracle that R-71 qualified for the ballot.

Amidst harassment and even death threats by the homosexual radicals pushing this into our faces, just enough signatures were gathered to give you the final say on the upcoming ballot.

And now, we need one more miracle to stay the course and ward off – what could be – the final assault on our families and American culture by the homosexuals.

You may just be that miracle…

Do you realize what is going on here? Consider the following:

- In 1970, (on the heels of a “free love” 60’s radical culture) sodomy laws were repealed in Washington State, with government turning a blind eye to a behavior commonly considered perversion – and still the case with a majority of Americans.

- Organizations, such as NAMBLA, (North American Man Boy Love Association) appeared on the horizon seeking to repeal “age of consent” laws (NAMBLA is still in business today).

- Various pro-homosexual websites (most now taken down) have shown that homosexuals’ real intent is to “normalize” homosexuality – which means pushing the lifestyle through public schools, beginning with elementary school-aged children. They will settle for nothing less than your full-scale acceptance – whether you like it or not!

- After 27 years of relentless pursuit, homosexuals finally received protected class status from the Washington State Legislature in 2006, making it illegal for you to refuse to rent them a house, or hire them on account of their homosexuality.

- Canada already has laws making it illegal to speak against homosexuality on the streets. Bills exist presently in the U.S. Congress to do the same. In the last few weeks a Canadian church pastor was arrested for speaking against homosexuality.

Now do you see what’s happening? Like the proverbial frog who ends up paralyzed and unable to get out of the water as he waits too long and the temperature reaches boiling – the homosexuals have been winning incrementally, taking their time, while we’ve been asleep at the wheel.

But it’s still not too late … and I want this to be a wake up call.

And I hope you will put up a clarion call to your friends and family and let them know that we are on the verge of losing the battle of our lifetimes if we don’t stand up now!

Or … if we do stand up now … we’re on the verge of victory. It’s up to us.

This is a fight we cannot afford to lose – but one we can win now. And the only thing standing in the way of an easy victory on November 3rd is a few miserable dollars to reach the voters with the truth – that silent majority of people who, for whatever reason, won’t stand and fight.

To date (you can look it up your self on the Public Disclosure Commission website) the homosexuals have amassed over $1 million to sell this re-invention of marriage to an unwitting population.

That $1 million is in stark contrast to the paltry $60,000 we have raised.

Meanwhile, if we lose on November 3rd, people will approach me on the street and ask me how it happened!?

My reply? “How big was the check you wrote?” (Most will have given nothing… )

We don’t have to lose. Every piece of research says that a large majority of people want to see our traditional definition of marriage remain intact. If the election were held before the media began, the homosexuals would lose by 7 to 8 points. That’s why they are raising so much money to sell this as something it is not and overcome the deficit.

That’s also why it is so very important that we raise enough money to reach voters with the real story and to combat the following:

- Ads cloaking this as a “fairness” bill – not being about marriage. (Senator Murray, one of the bill’s homosexual sponsors said marriage is the end game. It is a Trojan horse from homosexuals who seek to overturn thousands of years of sacred family tradition).

- Ads showing homosexual couples with children trying to appear as normal American families. (The sociological effects of fatherless homes are clear from every study, and from experience as we see the devastation in Scandinavian countries where this is rampant. It also continues the objective of the feminization of the male in our society).

- Ads showing older couples in support of SB5688. (Citizens aged 62 and older were included in the bill only to help the homosexual community garner their support. Yet, there is little of consequence in SB-5688 that heterosexual domestic partners 62+ cannot get now from a simple power of attorney. Seniors are being used.)

WILL YOU STAND UP NOW AND COME TO THE AID OF MARRIAGE?

Larry Stickney, who is leading our effort, has put his life on hold to fight this fight on our behalf. His household bills have at times gone unpaid, while he has remained faithful to this cause. Now it’s our turn.

As a long time sitting State Senator, I’m asking you to join this fight – a fight easily winnable if we can just reach more people with the message you’re reading now. So far, we cannot even afford to buy TV ads at all.

Perhaps you’re a miracle person who can give many thousands of dollars for our TV ad campaign. Or, if you’re like a lot of us, you can only afford to give $1,000, $500 or less. No matter where you are, or what you can give, every amount large and small will help us save the sacred institution of marriage we hold so dear.

We have faced several defeats on this front in recent years. This is one we can win and set the homosexual agenda back. Will you help us?

Sincerely,

Val Stevens, State Senator

P.S. With just two weeks until Election Day, time is running out. Can you stop right now and send your most generous contribution? When you’re finished, will you commit to calling at least two friends and asking them to help? The homosexuals are betting you won’t. I’m hoping you will. Thank you!

Protect Marriage Washington PAC
PO Box 501
Arlington, WA 98223
http://www.protectmarriagewa.com/index.php/donate-online

Since January, the federal government has taken over America’s largest banks and financial houses, our automobile industry, and now it seems determined to get control of our health care system. I am concerned about Washington state citizens’ loss of freedom. Our best hope is the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It says that the states are entitled to all rights not specifically delegated to the federal government.

Already, more than 30 states are studying the Arizona Health Care Nullification Bill that prohibits the federal government from forcing its version of health care on the residents of Arizona. The bill declares that Arizona citizens are free to choose any form of health care they desire.

WHY A HEALTH CARE NULLIFICATION BILL?

Constitutional Law professor Michael Connelly recently reviewed the entire text of President Obama’s proposed “public option” bill, The Affordable Health Care Choices Act of 2009. He says the bill is far worse than he imagined. Not only does it indeed provide for rationing of health care, free health care for illegal immigrants and free abortion services, the bill will also eventually force private insurance companies out of business and put everyone into a government-run system.

He says the bill eventually results in all decisions about personal health care being made by federal bureaucrats, most of whom will not be health care professionals. In addition, hospital admissions, payments to physicians, and allocations of necessary medical devices will be strictly controlled.

BUT THAT’S NOT THE WORST OF IT -

As bad as that sounds, it gets much worse. According to Connelly, “This legislation really has no intention of providing affordable health care choices. Instead, it is a convenient cover for the most massive transfer of power to the Executive Branch of government that has ever occurred, or even been contemplated. If this law or a similar one is adopted, major portions of the Constitution of the United States will effectively have been destroyed.”

In effect, he says, the Congress will be transferring to the Obama Administration authority in a number of different areas over the lives of the American people and the businesses they own. The irony is the Constitution does not grant members of Congress the authority to regulate health care or businesses.

The Obama bill would give his administration access to your personal healthcare information, your personal financial information, and the information of your employer, physician and hospital. This is a direct violation of the specific provisions of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution protecting against unreasonable searches and seizures. Your right to privacy will be nullified regardless of what the Third and Fourth Amendments may provide.

Finally, if your private health insurance is not deemed “acceptable” to the “Health Choices Administrator” appointed by President Obama, you will be taxed. They’re calling it a “tax” instead of a fine because they want to avoid the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. However, that won’t work because since nothing in the law allows you to contest or appeal the imposition of a tax, it definitely deprives you of property without the “due process of law.”

LAST RITES FOR YOUR RIGHTS?

The 10th Amendment reads: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are preserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Under Obama’s health care bill, neither the people nor the states are going to have any rights or powers at all in many areas that once were theirs to control.

Clearly this is a federal government takeover – not a reform. It is a way to seize almost 20 percent of the economy and the final ownership of your body. The bill mentions no real cost-cutting measures, such as lawsuit reform. There’s nothing about stopping the tens of billions of waste, fraud and abuse of Medicare and Medicaid.

Decades ago, Ronald Reagan warned us how socialized medicine was a carefully calculated path to socialism, which is the ruling of a country by a few powerful elites. Reagan’s exceptional speech is well worth your time, and it’s a real wake-up call for us today.

I plan to demand enforcement of the 10th Amendment – State’s Rights. In 1997 I introduced Senate Joint Memorial 8002 – a letter from the State of Washington to the President of the United States and the U.S. Congress claiming sovereignty under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The memorial reads, “Let this serve as a notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers.”

While it did not pass, we are introducing it again in January. Rep. Matt Shea, R-Mead, will introduce House Joint Memorial 4009, and I will support it. You can follow this bill – and its progress at www.states-rights.org. Most importantly, we need you to write your state senator and representatives and tell them to support this legislation. With strong state’s rights enforcement, we can keep our freedom to control our lives – and your health care – exactly the way we want.

Sincerely, Val Stevens

Instead, I want to talk to Christians who are inclined to vote to give marriage benefits to same-sex partners despite moral concerns about homosexuality. You know who you are.

You believe in grace, redemption, forgiveness and the need to love your neighbor as yourself. You believe that homosexuality is sin, but you have a hard time opposing homosexual rights measures because you feel it would be forcing people to abide by your personal moral code. You do not dislike gay people. In fact, you like your gay friends more than some Christians you know.

You are inclined to vote in favor of benefits for homosexuals simply to avoid association attitudes you have seen from fellow Christians. After all, you believe fervently in the command to love your neighbor.

However, you may fail to recognize the distinction between loving your neighbor and being liked. Many people make this mistake. In fact many believe the test of whether or not you love your neighbor is whether or not they like you. Therefore, in an effort to prove their love by being liked, they purge their lives of all controversy.

When a choice is to be made, they spend far more time pondering what other people are going to think than they do wondering whether or not it is right. Individuals will bite their tongue. Churches will avoid certain passages of scripture for decades at a time-all in the name of love.

The idea that Christians should try to be well liked is somewhat ironic when you consider the fact that Jesus was murdered. Moreover, He promised his disciples that they would be hated for obedience to him. (John 15:18; Matt 10:21-23). So where did we get the idea that being like Jesus means everybody is going to like us?

Christian charity is frequently looked upon favorably. Christian holiness, however, is not. Still, the goal for the Christian is not to be like or hated, political or apolitical, popular or unpopular. The goal is to be biblical.

Referendum 71 presents a dilemma for many Christians. They understand that God does not believe homosexual relationships are the equivalent of heterosexual marriages. They certainly don’t want their children being taught in school that they are morally the same. But is it kind if it will make someone angry?

It presents an even bigger dilemma for pastors. They have a tremendous opportunity for influence. But should they risk the potential fallout of addressing the biblical perspective on this issue?

While I have opinions, I cannot answer these questions for you. I will simply say that whatever decision is made, I hope it comes more from a desire to be faithful and less from a need to be liked.

Joseph Backholm
http://fpiw.org/mondayminute