Sure, Democrats padded their majority in the Washington legislature and Senator Maria Cantwell won a surprisingly easy reelection. But there were hints of challenges to come.

Cantwell dispatched Republican Mike McGavick by about 17 percentage points, as of early today. McGavick had run a strong campaign until the final months, when it veered into wedge issues like promoting drug testing for welfare mothers and clamping down on the Mexican border. Challengers from third parties had a negligible impact. At her victory rally at the Seattle Sheraton, the most cheritable thing Cantwell could say was “thank you to my opponent for putting his name on the ballot.”

Now it’s clear that the Democratic majority needs to translate its gains — especially on the state level — into visible improvements on issues like transportation and education financing, while still improving the climate for job-creating businesses. State party chair Dwight Pelz noted that the reelection campaign begins today for Gov. Chris Gregoire, who faces another challenge from Republican Dino Rossi.

There were a few other signs of obstacles ahead. Congressman Dave Reichert held a narrow lead over Democratic challenger Darcy Burner, suggesting that voters want to vote for opposition candidates rather than against incumbents. Meanwhile the Democratic base isn’t entirely united. Cantwell’s victory speech was interrupted by a group of supporters who loudly chanted “Stop the war!” until the dozens of supporters on stage drowned them out with a rehearsed “Six more years!”

Before the polls had even closed, disgraced former U.S. House leader Tom Delay told TV interviewers that the Democrats will likely face a “lame-duck majority” when they take office. National Republican strategy may be to obstruct any policies by Democrats. But without substantial accomplishments Democrats won’t be celebrating in 2008.

Seattle voters will decide Tuesday whether to effectively ban strip clubs from the city. Following a nanny-state trend that’s already curbed cigarettes, voters might as well adopt a ban on junk food in the workplace, columnist Bruce Ramsey suggests in a column.

It turns out that moralistic arguments against the vice du jour echo Washington’s past. After all, it wasn’t long ago that the state arrested people who drank alcohol.

Readers have asked Cascadia Report for input on Seattle-area ballot issues. So here’s our logic, in brief, on some key measures:

— Washington Initiative 933: No. The measure would overturn land-use rules developed democratically over the last 15 years to manage growth. Sure, those policies need to be fair, consistent and not hurt the little guy. Instead of gutting the rules with this measure, hold elected representatives accountable for the hard decisions necessary to handle the region’s growth.

— Washington Initiative 920: No. Cascadia is steeped in the idea that individuals should carve their own fortune, not inherit it. The estate tax helps preserve a level playing field by affecting only the very wealthiest citizens. The fact that a few rich sponsors paid signature gatherers to get this measure on the ballot and then have misrepresented it as a “death tax” that affects everyone makes this vote even easier.

— Washington Initiative 937: Yes. We’re generally not fans of legislation by initiative. But requiring that large utilities generate 15 percent of their energy from new renewable sources by 2020 is a reasonable goal. This should stimulate resourceful industry and force the state to deal with thorny details like siting and building costs.

— King County Prop. 2: Yes. We would prefer a progressive tax to finance transportation. But this .01 percent increase in sales tax dedicated to more bus service along the area’s busiest routes is still an essential step toward building a regional transit system.

— U.S. Senate: Maria Cantwell. She advocates energy efficiency and protection of this region’s environment, and is an essential check on the Bush Administration. Republican challenger Mike McGavick could have made a very effective senator but took a wrong turn in his campaign, especially with divisive gambits like calling for drug testing of welfare mothers, oil drilling in a national wildlife refuge and wasteful spending on an ineffective wall along the Mexican border.

— U.S. House, 7th District: Linnea Noreen. This young Independent believes Seattle should be represented in Congress by someone who wants to work for realistic solutions to heath care, education and transportation problems. Incumbent Democrat Jim McDermott has marginalized himself with extreme positions. Listen to the candidates on KUOW’s afternoon interview show.

— U.S. House, 8th District: Darcy Burner. This is a vote against the Bush Administration’s policies. While there are more qualified Democrats to hold the seat (they chose not to run), incumbent Republican Dave Reichert is mostly a rubber stamp for policies that are bankrupting the country with a disastrous war and costly yet ineffective tax cuts. The Republican majority he supports also blocks conservation measures important to this region.

— Washington Supreme Court: Susan Owens. She’s a nonpartisan judge who takes her responsibility seriously. Challenger Stephen Johnson is an ideologue Republican state senator with a conservative agenda to push on the court. He’s mostly funded by the Building Industry Association of Washington, whose main goal is to gut regulation — no matter how popular with the public.

— Seattle Initiative 91: No. This measure would prevent almost all city spending on sports despite the spillover economic benefits that can result. Make sure elected officials make wise decisions, but don’t tie their hands with this crude measure requiring an arbitrary level of return on investment.

— Seattle Referendum 1: No. Seattle’s tame strip clubs don’t need more draconian regulation. This is a legitimate industry that serves consenting adults from around the region. The city should spend its time solving real problems, not legislating morality.

— Seattle Prop. 1: No. This would increase property taxes to pay for basic services like roads and bridges. The city has sweetened the deal by promising $38 million for bicycle paths. Defeat this measure so the city has to prioritize critical projects within its budget.

The Seattle area is still having trouble running glitch-free elections — at least if this experience is an indication.

Before the primary election in September I received two ballots, one each at both my current and old addresses. The ballot at my current address included instructions to ignore the extra one. It seemed a sign that King County’s well-publicized problems holding a vote had been fixed.

Then, this week, I received two ballots for the general election, at the same two addresses. But now the current and old addresses were switched, with the ballot at the old address instructing me to ignore the one sent to my correct address. I also received two new voter-registration cards with wrong information. When I called the elections department to correct the error, I was told that someone had switched my information again, and they have no record of my current address — just the old one.

Mistakes can always happen and surely the people at the elections department are doing their best. Regardless, it seems we need to brace for more reports of election mix-ups that may mar the outcome of close races.

Here’s some shocking news: voters’ view of an issue changes depending on the information they have.

That’s seems to be the case when it comes to replacing Seattle’s earthquake-damaged viaduct freeway. A poll earlier this month of 400 voters (40 percent over age 60), found 47 percent support for a new elevated freeway along the waterfront and 29 percent support for a tunnel. Politicians who can’t decide have used the poll as proof of public support for a new viaduct.

But another poll of 400, mostly younger, voters found that 52 percent supported a tunnel when told of the cost and larger size of a rebuilt viaduct. Fifty-five percent supported a tunnel when told that it would create open space downtown. The second poll was sponsored by business and anti-viaduct groups.

The results suggest that representatives need to lead on this issue, rather than look to polls for support. Replacing the viaduct with a combination of improved surface streets and transit remains the least costly and most effective way to handle this opportunity to reshape the core of the city.