Social Housing PART II: The Real Reason the Chamber Opposes Seattle’s Social Housing Developer

Hint: It rhymes with “brogressive axes.”

I mentioned in a post last week that the funding initiative has come out for Seattle’s social housing developer. Friendly reminder, if you haven’t yet, please consider donating and volunteering to make sure the initiative succeeds!

Huffing and Puffing to Blow the Housing Bill Down

Shortly after the initiative was announced, the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce fired off a set of divisive and misleading PR statements aimed at slowing momentum for the funding measure. 

And, as usual, they hid the ball when it comes to the actual reason they oppose it–which is that it is funded by progressive taxes. 

The Inside Story

You see, once upon a time, when I was a startup CEO, I was on the Policy Leadership Group for the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce. I’ve been inside. I fought alongside some other intrepid business progressives to try to get the Chamber to embrace evidence-based economics and thoughtful policy. 

I spent several years learning what is no secret to longtime political insiders–the Chamber and the Downtown Seattle Association are deeply ideological when it comes to opposing any policy that makes them pay their fair share to support a thriving, vibrant city. There is nothing pragmatic or centrist or balanced about it. It’s about dividing up the pie in a way that makes sure their slice is the biggest.

In fact, to my knowledge, the Seattle Metropolitan Chamber has never supported a progressive tax. I don’t know of even a truly flat tax like an income tax that it has supported. The only taxes they support–like property taxes and sales taxes–are regressive. That is, they only consider supporting a tax when teachers pay a larger share of their income than do CEOs.

That is what the Chamber’s objection to House our Neighbors is about. It’s not about housing or business plans or staff or changes or the silly statements in their press releases. 

Well, That’s Awkward

But they know their demand for all taxes to be regressive is not a winning message in any remotely Democratic city. It wouldn’t even work in a purple city! My goodness, nearly every other state in the union has more progressive taxation than we do. 

So they try to brand themselves as centrist Democrats and spend a lot of time telling people about all the taxes they do like – which, again, are only taxes that hit your monthly budget harder than their theirs. 

They just never mention that these are all regressive. 

And when a progressive tax comes up, they make up fake arguments. By fake, I mean mostly meritless arguments that have little or nothing to do with why they actually oppose the bill.

And I get it, that’s politics. You have to persuade people. 

A Malarkey Filled Zone

But it is fair to point out that their attempts at persuasion are a mishmash of what our President politely calls “malarkey.” 

This latest round of “arguments” start with hypocrisy:

In their press release, the folks at the Chamber decry modest changes that tighten up the legal language for the public developer. But if the Chamber doesn’t like changes to legislation, why are they actively in support of directly overturning the will of hundreds of thousands of voters when it comes to Sound Transit Station placement? These are real changes, and they will years of delay, reduce ridership, and increase costs by hundreds of millions of dollars.

Big changes for me, but none for thee, it seems.

In the same release, big biz makes the divisive claim that House our Neighbors engaged in a “bait and switch.” This was because House our Neighbors said the public developer will run housing that serves a mix of income levels from 0%-30% of area median income, up to 120%. Their business model confirms this. But the Chamber notes that the business model doesn’t include very much 0% - 30%. They cannot point to anyone every claiming differently. And anyway social housing famously addresses middle income housing.

Implying that its advocates have engaged in deceit is divisive and disingenuous. 

They then tut about the fact that no executives have yet been hired at the developer–when they have every reason to know the money hasn’t been dispersed and most of it was only recently even added to the budget. 

The Chamber CEO even quips that “voters want more housing, not more housing entities.” This line would be clever if it weren’t patently false. Voters said yes to creating this very housing entity last year by a large margin–57% to 43%. 

In other words, the Chamber’s arguments range from hypocritical to outright deceptions. They are designed to distract from their actual agenda, because it is unpopular. 

Don’t buy the malarkey. 

Help Housing Succeed

Want to help social housing succeed? Please donate and volunteer for the campaign.

Afterward: Business ≠ Chamber

By the way, many business people in this city do not agree with the chamber. The business community is not remotely a monolith, and many of our business people are Democrats that don’t diligently work to undermine core economic pillars of Democratic Party policy. 

The Chamber ≠ Montgomery Burns

Also, there are many folks at the Chamber who believe they are doing the right thing. They are earnestly laboring to serve their community. I don’t want to imply differently. 

But they engage in this labor under false–and, to be frank, self-serving–economic assumptions. Their key assumption here is that taxes have to hit the poor harder than everyone else or businesses will flee.

This belief is of course demonstrably false, with many successful cities and states doing just fine while levying much more progressives taxes than Seattle.