Seattlest Standoff: Two Opinions on Rob McKenna's 911 Calls

Attorney General Rob McKenna is getting a little dusty along the campaign trail. This week, the audio of three 911 calls placed in rapid succession during a recent appearance on his behalf were made public, causing a small firestorm among wonky types, but garnering little media attention. We're pretty sure that's because no newsrooms could come up with a solid angle--was McKenna being overly-sensitive and tying up emergency lines for his own uses? Or was he actually in potential danger with a videographer taped his remarks and became confrontational?

Two of our most esteemed Seattlest news writers, Alex Hudson and Everett Rummage, were at loggerheads about this situation. So, we decided to let them both present their perspectives. Here you are, readers. You decide.

Whineypants McKenna

"Tracker" is the term used for an opposition videographer who follows a political candidate on the campaign trail, hoping to capture a gaffe or another kind of damaging statement on camera. Ever seen a campaign ad with grainy footage of a politician's opponent saying something that's meant to be damning? it was probably taken by a tracker. In the bare-knuckle atmosphere of politics today, even candidates for local office have trackers recording their every move, waiting for a slip-up.

There's no denying that there's a sleazy, vulture-like quality to the tracker phenomenon, but it ultimately serves the public good. Trackers rob politicians of their ability to talk out of both sides of their mouths, promising one thing to one group, and another thing to another. Anything that makes politicians accountable for their statements, even if it's a Murdoch-like tactic employed by their political opponents, is ultimately a positive thing.

The man who Rob McKenna's compatriots sicced the police on was almost certainly a tracker. Unless the McKenna campaign is being run by rank incompetents, they must have known that the Democrats, the Inslee campaign, or their sympathizers would be employing this tactic. If they knew what he was doing, and that it's a normal part of the modern political process (which I maintain that they would, given that they're political professionals; McKenna may even have been followed by a tracker during his campaign for Attorney General), then the only explanation for their behavior is that they wanted to give McKenna the freedom to say whatever he wanted to a group of Republican voters without the public getting wind of it, or that they wanted to play hardball with someone that they identified as belonging to their opponent's camp.

The 911 caller admits that the tracker wasn't making a disturbance. His only offense, according to the caller, was taping the event without permission. The assumption there is that Mr. McKenna should have control over how his public statements are used, and which are disseminated. He doesn't. He lost the right to make that case when he entered politics. Citizens have not only a right, but a duty to dissect, parse, and debate anything and everything that McKenna says in public. The tracker was not barging in on a private strategy session, or following McKenna into his personal life. McKenna was delivering a speech to members of the public at a publicly-owned building that members of the public had the right to attend. It's probably unpleasant for the Attorney General to be expecting a friendly crowd, and be greeted by some liberal with a camera, hoping that he accidentally says he drinks babies' blood. Tough. If you want to run for governor, this comes with the territory. You can't call the cops any time you want something to be off the record and someone won't stop filming, or every time you think your opponent's campaign is being mean (and ask the pro-McKenna trackers following Inslee how mean of a trick it really is). This is the job of campaigning for higher office, and McKenna can't take the heat, he should bow out and make way for someone who can. The police can't take time out of doing their duty to be Rob McKenna's bouncers: their role is to protect McKenna's safety, not to help make his campaign easier. Running for office isn't meant to be easy or fun, and for good reason: being governor isn't either.

A guy who knows when to call the cops

The fundamental issue at play here is when it is justifiable to call the police. Do we wait for violence to occur or is it acceptable to ask for police intervention before things come to blows? Other than the transcripts of the event, a two dimension data source devoid of any additional context (what exactly was the nature of the disturbance? what had the prior conversations been like? what escalated the situation to the point of calling the police?) all we have are basic facts. There was a disturbance involving videographers at a public event featuring Attorney General McKenna that necessitated a call to the police.

Assuming that rational people do not call the police at the mere sight of an errant member of the media, we can determine there was at the very least a verbal interaction that triggered the need to call arbiters of authority to the scene. Since few of us bore witness to this event, no one of can decide if that was an appropriate choice. You cannot make armchair calls on matters of other people's decisions about the safety of their environment.

The primary responsibility of the police is to respond to incidences where the public safety and or harmony is in question. I specifically include the word harmony because I believe that police, rightfully so, are empowered to not only respond to but also prevent violence and unsafe situations. When anyone; Rob McKenna staffers, John Doe civilians or you or I decide that a situation has become out of our hands and that police involvement is necessary the police must respond. And in a timely manner.

I am not arguing that anyone should have been arrested. I am not arguing against the fundamental right for media (friendly or critical) to be present at political events. Nor am I arguing that citizens have no right to be disturbing at said events. Nor do I consider this a pro-police or pro-censorship standpoint. I am arguing that when any situation, Rob McKenna-centric or otherwise, is deemed to require police interception, calling them is not inherently a "misuse of 911 emergency services". Even if the persons in question aren't making threats or wielding weapons or being violent. Even if you call them three times. Even if a report is not made nor any charges filed.

There was a situation. Someone decided the situation required police to deescalate. The police were called. The people who called the police followed up on their requests when after a half hour, the police had not responded. The police eventually appeared, assessed and restored the situation (without additional judicial or prosecutorial intervention or allocation of resources). Those are the kind of human (semi)dramas of our personal and political lives. That is the utility of authority. It is not 'misuse', it is use.