Legislative Initiative

greenspun.com : LUSENET : I-695 Thirty Dollar License Tab Initiative : One Thread

The transportation union's legal challenge to I695, if successful, will cause serious voter dissatisfaction.

It is important at this point to get a bipartisan sponsored bill introduced in the state legislature. Those opposed to it need to be on the record. If it passes then it is strengthened against legal challenge. If it fails then we have a record of those opposed.

Right now too many elected officials have legal cover and plausible deniability. They can work hard to subvert the referendum without actually having to say they are against it.

Most of the state legislature is in office because they court the unions and agencies that receive their incomes from state and local taxes. In effect, even if they are for I695 they can't vote for it because of the backlash from their more organized constituencies.

By using the referendum, as was recently done with I 695, it is possible to set the legislative agenda more in line with non-union voters' wishes.

Tim Eyman is onto something here that goes way beyond single issue referendums and gets at the heart of the populist and reform party movement.

Small, organized, liberal, tax supported unions and well funded businesses exercise a greater degree of control over the legislative process than their small numbers seem to predict. Many people are very dissatisfied with this, but feel powerless to intervene. Why? Because even when they do win (I695) it is immediately challenged in court by the same organized entities that are exercising unnatural control over the public agenda often for very narrow reasons... their own paychecks or business bank accounts over the greater public good.

I think that the Son of 695 is logical and necessary but that it diverts energy and resources from what should be the strategic goal. -----Forcing the legislature to sponsor and bring to the floor for a vote, the I 695 referendum as it stands and is crafted now, so that everyone who voted yes can have an accurate picture of who is for the majority will and who stands in its way prior to elections next November.

-- Ron Hamilton (dietco_1@hotmail.com), November 23, 1999

Answers

I disagree. The initiative process works well in fighting these individuals. Excepting the personal sacrifices of a year of Mr. Eyeman's life, the initiative was relatively cheap, and the cost was distributed over a great number of individuals. The opposition spent more than ten times as much, spread over a far fewer number of individuals .......... and lost. It now goes to the courts. Priced a lawyer recently? A great deal of money will be spent on this, depending how high it is taken. Most of the pro-695 side will be paid for by ........ the citizens of Washington, including those union members who are paying union dues to support the lawsuit AGAINST 695 while paying taxes to defend it. And their costs are far higher than ours, because the cost of the lawyers against 695 are spread over a far fewer number of union supporters than ours are. So basically, this process reverses the leverage that usually works in favor of the public employee unions and others who swill at the public trough.

If I had my way, we'd send initiative after initiative at them. Money they spend on lawyers for court cases can't be spent buying influence.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 23, 1999.


I think we are saying the same thing Craig. I'm just saying take it a step further by forcing it through the legislature. Tim Eyman and everyone who contributed to Yes on I 695 are by definition an organized populist movement. I 695 galvanized a widely disparate group of non-union voters behind a single banner. The politicians who publically oppose the initiative are from safe districts for the most part. Those who are quietly against it have political cover and are waiting on the court to strike down the part of the initiative that effects the representative government's constitutional duty to set and collect taxes.

The same group that voted yes on I695 can vote for candidates that will support tax relief and fair taxes next year if they can see who is actually opposed to it. Everyone thinks their own representative or their own teacher etc., are great even though they have a negative opinion of the legislative system or the school system in general. This is what I mean by setting the agenda. If the agenda is tax relief and fair taxes then even those who have a high opinion of their own representative and continually return him/her to office will see where that person stands on the issue.

Otherwise I695 will be gutted in the courts because of the voter approval of new taxes provision and then the legislature will go to work raising taxes again in other ways. The term limits initiative was struck down by the courts and the voter approval for tax increases will be struck down as well. The courts here are liberal and feel they must legislate as well.

-- Ron Hamilton (dietco_1@hotmail.com), November 24, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ