Here is the familiar yellow-and-black slate card, which may already have appeared in your mailbox and in doorbelling literature drops. We encourage you to vote, and then share this card with your like minded neighbors, friends and family, and ask them to do the same.

Below, we list the Whatcom Republicans recommendations, in the order they will appear on your ballot. Be sure to visit the candidates’ websites (click their names) for more information on their platforms. Some of the candidates listed here will not be on your ballot, if you don’t live in their district. Some very local candidates and ballot issues may not appear here.

Please vote as soon as you receive your ballot, but please mail your ballot no later than Monday, November 5.


U.S. Senator Susan Hutchison
U.S. Representative Congressional District 1 Jeffrey Beeler
State Senator Legislative District 42 Doug Ericksen
State Representative Legislative District 42, Position 1 Luanne Van Werven
State Representative Legislative District 42, Position 2 Vincent Buys

State Representative Legislative District 40, Position 1 Michael Petrish

Prosecuting Attorney (No Recommendation)
County Council At-Large Position B Mike Peetoom
State Court of Appeals Division 1 Tom SeGuine


NO on Initiative 1631 — Carbon Emissions Fee
A Tax on Energy and Everything

Supporters of this initiative made a video telling you not to be fooled by ‘Big Oil’ claims that the carbon tax will raise energy prices. Supporters claim that “Big Oil” makes plenty in profits to cover a puny carbon tax. In the background they show ominous plumes emanating from smokestacks against a dark sky.

First thing: that’s steam in fog. Water vapor in water vapor. Don’t be fooled.

Second thing: prices reflect the cost of production. If you increase the cost of something, through taxation or any other means, its price will increase. Don’t be fooled.

Third thing: most of us need fossil fuel to get to work, grow our food, deliver our food, refrigerate our food, power our hospitals, run our internet — practically everything we do or need. If we increase the cost of energy, the price of practically everything we do or need will go up. Except your paycheck. Don’t be fooled.

Alternatives to fossil fuels are marginal at best for meeting our present energy needs. The technology simply isn’t efficient enough. That may change, gradually. But you cannot force innovation and discovery through taxation. That will make everyone less prosperous. That’s the opposite of how it works. Don’t be fooled.

Big oil (and little oil), whomever they are, take in a lot of cash in payment for making a product that we all need and use. What do you suppose that they do with all that money? Pay their workers to make more products to meet the demand, invest in their production and delivery infrastructure, research and development of new resources, including alternatives. Don’t be fooled.

Vilifying someone who is producing a commodity we all need and use is dishonest and stupid. Don’t be fooled.

Vote NO on I-1631 with extreme prejudice. What will the state do with your loss of prosperity?

YES on Initiative 1634 — Prohibit local taxes on groceries

This measure would prohibit local government entities from imposing any new tax, fee, or other assessment on grocery items. It would not prevent the state from imposing taxes on groceries.

This initiative is intended as a response to the Seattle tax on soda pop, because Seattle elites want to discourage us from drinking too much sugary beverage, as if it’s any of their business. They believe it is their business, because if the government is providing health care, then they have a vested interest in keeping us as healthy as oxen. Which gets us into a whole different discussion about losing our freedom when the nanny state is taking care of us like helicopter parents.

Vote YES on I-1634 to stop this pernicious Seattle agenda from spreading.

NO on Initiative 1639 — So-called ‘gun safety initiative’

This initiative has so many constitutional problems that only the Washington State Supreme Court could possibly uphold it.

Whatcom Republicans are just as saddened, outraged and angered as anyone, whenever some deranged bully violates the human rights of innocent victims by shooting up a school or other public place. But we are further outraged because these events invariably trigger the left to curtail everyone else’s rights in a futile attempt to avert these abominations.

There are things that would help prevent or stop an attack, but Initiative 1639 isn’t one of them. I-1639 is touted as a ‘gun safety’ initiative. However, most gun owners are already quite aware of the need for safety, and we use these tools according to best practices, while maintaining the usability and practicality for which we purchased them.

It is obvious that the authors of this initiative are not gun owners and have no idea what they’re talking about. What’s more, they’re not constitutional scholars, either. This initiative should make you so angry that you want to leap on your ballot and vote, the moment it arrives on your doorstep. While you’re at it, elect Republican candidates to help prevent the spread of the illiberal Seattle agenda across the rest of an otherwise red state.

The left keeps protesting that “nobody is coming for your guns”, yet here they come:

  • I-1639 violates the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPA) privacy regulations of anyone who wants to buy a firearm. Under I-1639, data collected during gun sales and transfers could be used to enforce a new state “verification” process to ensure that persons are not in “illegal possession”.
  • I-1639 would require gun owners to lock up their firearms or face criminal charges. This strict mandate renders firearms useless in a self-defense situation by requiring them to be locked up. When seconds count, the police can arrive in minutes. What happens in the meantime is your responsibility. If your weapon is locked up, good luck in an emergency.
  • Currently, adults aged 18-20 are prohibited from exercising their constitutionally protected right of purchasing or receiving a handgun. I-1639 would expand the current infringement on such law-abiding young adults to include purchasing or receiving any semi-automatic rifle.
  • I-1639 classifies any semi-automatic rifle as an ‘assault rifle’. Some of the rifles that fall under this new classification include low power sporting rifles such as the Ruger 10-22 and the Marlin Model 60. Any gun owner knows these plinksters are made for target shooting and very small game. They would make a ridiculous assault weapon. It just goes to show the authors’ lack of knowledge about guns, and the cavalier attitude towards legitimate and responsible firearm users.


They haven’t formally taken our guns yet, but they’re making firearms very difficult to obtain, impractical to use, registering our possession of them (so they can find and take them later), and forcing us to depose our privacy if we want to buy one.

Vote NO on I-1639. What part of ‘infringe’ don’t they understand?

NO on Initiative 940 — Police Training and Criminal Liability in Cases of Deadly Force

Whatcom Republicans believe police avoid deadly force whenever possible, and use it only when they feel that their own lives are in danger. The narrative that police are malicious racist bigots is deeply offensive to us. Police departments already have policies and all sorts of sensitivity training and situational awareness training to avoid the need for deadly force. They just want to get home safely to their families after each shift. We feel that this measure would actually increase tensions and resentment towards cops, and compliance would be redundant and expensive.

NO on City of Bellingham Proposition 2018-5

The City of Bellingham has introduced Proposition 2018-5, a $400 million replacement of the voter-approved 2012 affordable housing levy that would cost the average homeowner $108 per year.

The Whatcom Republicans are not in favor of wealth-redistribution schemes that require one person to involuntarily work for another person. That is the definition of slavery, and slavery has been deemed to be immoral. A majority of people voting for an immoral thing doesn’t make it moral, even if laundered through taxation.

Discussion - 14 Comments
  1. Susanna Schreiber

    Oct 01, 2018  at 5:07 pm

    Thanks for your help. Am new to the area and need this kind of help.


  2. Alan Fox

    Oct 06, 2018  at 5:07 pm

    Do you have any meet and greet get togethers planned? To meet cantidates and plan strategy to create a red wave! Alan Fox


    • Karl Uppiano

      Oct 06, 2018  at 5:07 pm

      Doug Ericksen just completed a series of town halls over the last several weeks. We have been publicizing them on social media and email. Michael Petrish (Candidate for State Senate from the 40th District) is having a Town Hall tonight, at 7:00 pm Oct. 6 in Bloedell Donovan Park, Bellingham.

      The 40th District candidates had a Super Saturday doorbelling campaign today in Blaine (and more planned, TBA). We have continuous phone banking and doorbelling literature preparation going on at the GOP office in Bellingham. Volunteers appreciated. Call 360-734-5215 or stop by 2321 E. Bakerview Road Suite B, Bellingham. Call for office hours (they vary by day and activity).


  3. Brett

    Oct 09, 2018  at 5:07 pm

    It was reassuring to see that many of my choices on the initiatives matched up with these recommendations. This is a great resource.

    However, it’s frustrating that many of the candidates don’t state their stance on guns on their websites. Susan Hutchison was the only one to state she supported the 2nd Amendment on her website, and Jeffrey Beeler was the only one to reply to my email and stated his 2A support.

    I’d love to vote Republican, but I can’t bring myself to do it if I don’t know the candidates stance on guns.


    • Karl Uppiano

      Oct 17, 2018  at 5:07 pm

      We can speculate that most Republicans are pro-Second Amendment, and many Democrats would be comfortable with narrowing its scope (this is called ‘infringement’). But that’s a generalization; each candidate would have to answer personally.

      Each candidate’s website should have a ‘contact me’ link, or some similar way of reaching them via email or comments on their website, asking for that information.

      Obviously, each voter may have their own hot-button issues, and it isn’t practical to think of each one and answer the question preemptively.


  4. Kevin S

    Oct 12, 2018  at 5:07 pm

    I was wondering where I could get some “no on I-1639” yard signs.


    • Karl Uppiano

      Oct 12, 2018  at 5:07 pm

      You can pick them up while supplies last, at the Whatcom Republicans office, 2321 E. Bakerview Road.


  5. Steve G

    Oct 17, 2018  at 5:07 pm

    So are ALL property taxes slavery or only this one?


    • Karl Uppiano

      Oct 17, 2018  at 5:07 pm

      Only the ones involving wealth redistribution.


  6. Craig

    Oct 19, 2018  at 5:07 pm

    Regarding “gun control”, to me it isn’t that complicated. People with guns make poor slaves.

    Thanks for your work with the voting recommendations.


  7. Robert Shields

    Oct 21, 2018  at 5:07 pm

    Why are there no recommendations on Judicial races? The Whatcom GOP should know that they matter, yet never research or recommend candidates in these races.


    • Robert Shields

      Oct 21, 2018  at 5:07 pm

      Except Tom SeGuine I mean.


    • Karl Uppiano

      Oct 26, 2018  at 5:07 pm

      GOP volunteers have been so overwhelmingly busy just trying to support and get out the vote for our endorsed candidates, that we haven’t had the resources to research every race. (And wouldn’t you know it, the GOP body isn’t in perfect agreement on all the judicial candidates.)

      This is where our readers could help: Readers should feel free (and are encouraged) to post their preferences here. A good discussion of these non-partisan races would be very enlightening.


  8. Jeff Reppun

    Oct 25, 2018  at 5:07 pm

    Under a Bellingham City Council with Pinky Vargas as a member:

    Violence in Bellingham
    Recently, a friend told me that 2 persons she works with have suffered injuries in assaults, in separate incidences, while walking in Bellingham. In both cases, their injuries required time away from work.
    Curious, I looked at the Bellingham Police crime statistics to see how the city is faring on citizen safety.

    It was disappointing to see that from 2014 thru 2017:
    • Felony Assaults +24%
    • Misdemeanor Assaults +22%
    • Crimes Against Persons +11%
    This is despite an overall reduction in all crimes at -12%.

    For the first 9 months of 2014 thru 2018:
    • Felony Assaults +38%
    • Misdemeanor Assaults +29%
    • Crimes Against Persons +36%
    and an overall crime rate reduction at -4%.

    Sadly, Bellingham has become a place of increased violent crime.


Leave a Comment