FWD of previous message.
i.e. The Legislature doesn't necessarily look at constitutionality at
the bill prep. phase.
Bills with almost the same provisions are introduced annually to the
Legislature. I understand that my own Senator, Tim Sheldon, is
pushing the same idea. My sense is that the constitutionality is
only given a cursory consideration at the bill stage. In fact, many
bills are introduced without even the remotest possibility of
passing- just to pander to constituents.
Rep. Mike Carrell is knowledgeable in this area. Perhaps he might
give you some information on how legal beagles view this in Olympia.
Paul Telford
-----Original Message-----
From: dbvz@wa.freei.net
To: telfordp@olywa.net
Date: Friday, December 24, 1999 10:42 AM
Subject: Response to Son of 695 - Bad Idea
>dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net) responded to a message you left
>in the I-695 Thirty Dollar License Tab Initiative bboard:
>
>Subject: Response to Son of 695 - Bad Idea
>
>Marsha:
>
>No, I didn't know about the legislative review. They can sometimes
>pass a law that is declared unconstitutional also; but they can get
>staff lawyers and the State Attorney General to give them an
opinion.
> What I am concerned about is that the anti-government bias of the
>proponents is so strong they will not accept advice from those
>sources. I was looking for a legal review that would have some
>credibility, but is not currently part of the government. The
>legislative review is a good sign. Perhaps they can avoid some of
the
>problems 695 has.
>
>--
So are we to suspect Legislators of some wrongdoing? If you are
implying politicians are corrupt, I would caution you that most folks
would tend to think a legal opinion by "legal beagles" would be
biased, based on who payed for it. Gee, if you can't trust any of
them, then who is left? The Reform Party of Washington?