Sound Politics: On the ballot

July 08, 2006

On the ballot

Four statewide initiatives appear to have submitted enough signatures by yesterday's deadline to qualify for the November ballot:

* I-917, Tim Eyman's "the third time is a charm" $30 car tab initiative.

* I-920, the death tax repeal

* I-933, for property fairness

* I-937, the "renewal energy" boondoggle.

Two other high-profile attempts to qualify for the ballot, "one-strike-you're-out" for certain sex offenders; and citizenship verification for social service recipients, did not turn in enough signatures.

In other races, Libertarian Bruce Guthrie qualified as a U.S. Senate candidate in November.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at July 08, 2006 03:33 PM | Email This

Comments

1. I am not supprised about the two that did not qualify. I had heard about them just recently and did not see anyone out with those petitions. Well, maybe next year.

Posted by: TrueSoldier on July 8, 2006 04:12 PM

2. The first thing I read on the I-937 site was that the initiative was supported by a broad based "coalition". How the left loves that word.

This dumb initiative is brought to you by the same frybrains who want to tear down the dams that already provide us with renewable energy.

If I-937 passes will it make energy more expensive for the "poor" that the left claims to champion? You only get one guess.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on July 8, 2006 04:19 PM

3. SPers,

Postman is reporting on his blog that the Democrats anti-war candidate Mark Wilson is endorsing Cantwell, and will begin campaigning for her full time after a press conference tomorrow.

Posted by: Patrick on July 8, 2006 05:42 PM

4. I'm glad that Bruce Guthrie will be on the ballot. More Libertarians in office would be a good thing.

Posted by: Barcroft on July 8, 2006 05:47 PM

5. Speaking of elections.... we still need to know if we Have real elections in this state !!! There are a fair number of our fair citizens who doubt the process ! Before the "election" in the fall, we need a plan !

Posted by: ljm on July 8, 2006 06:30 PM

6. Hmmmm. I didn't know that the Libertarians had lost major party status.

Posted by: ScottM on July 8, 2006 07:10 PM

7.
Didn't a Libertarian cost Gorton his seat in 2000?

Posted by: Wondering on July 8, 2006 09:38 PM

8. Didn't a Libertarian cost Gorton his seat in 2000?

And Dino the big chair in '04. If Ruth Bennett hadn't been running, Dino beats Queen Chris by a big enough margin that even Ron Sims couldn't fix.

Posted by: Steve_dog on July 8, 2006 09:49 PM

9. Careful about libertarians - they can be losertarians to the Republicans, by recent results. :(

Libertarians can cause everyone to suffer under continued Democrat rule, just because they think it is all about them...

Posted by: KS on July 8, 2006 09:55 PM

10. This dumb initiative is brought to you by the same frybrains who want to tear down the dams that already provide us with renewable energy.

I was going to say... doesn't hydro-electric qualify as "renewable" energy? Thus negating the need for for this initiative?

Posted by: Mike H on July 8, 2006 10:11 PM

11. KS, Steve_dog, etc.: I think you make an error when you assume that Libertarian voters are to Republicans voters as Ralph Nader voters are to Democrats. It's absolutly clear that, if forced to choose between Democrats and Republicans, Nader voters would side overwhelmingly with Democrats. But I don't think you can say that, given the same choice, Libertarian voters would side overwhelmingly with Republicans. Nadar-ism was, in essence, far-left Democrat-ism. But Libertarianism isn't far-right Republicanism. It's a philosophy that sits on the sidelines of the traditional left-right spectrum, and share some ideas with both the left and the right.

Posted by: David Wright on July 8, 2006 10:31 PM

12. Methow Ken,

It doesn't surprise me that the State Gop
took the easy way out on this.Its that kind
of thinking that got them so screwed up
in the first place.It is absurd for the
State Gop to take the position of waiting
until after they qualify for the ballot
to decide whether they will support it.

This is an initiative that every republican
organization should have been supporting from the
get go.The mere fact that the mainstream
republicans of Washington State are opposed
to it should tell everyone else what that
joke of an organization is really about.

So what is Mike McGavick's position on I-933?
or on property rights in general?Well its the
same position he took on the federal amendment
on marriage.Anybody want to take guess?That's
right to this point in time McGavick has said
nothing about either.Mike McGavick had an
opportunity to take a position on the marriage
amendment when Cantwell voted against it in early
june.Instead Mike McGavick said nothing.I guess
he must of thought if he kept quiet no one
would notice.

Posted by: Phil Spackman on July 8, 2006 11:44 PM

13. The citizenship verification one sounds very sensible. I didn't even know it existed!

Posted by: Michele on July 9, 2006 12:04 AM

14. Amazing what paid signature gatherers will accomplish.

Hey all you originalists out there...I guess that's what our state constitution framers had in mind: let the (few) people with HUGE bank accounts pay people to get signatures so that their special interest ideas are brought forward to the people as a check against the government (the actual intent of the initiatives).

Stefan...you should be railing agasint I-920 for just this reason. A single person bankrolled most of the signature gatherers...how in earth is this the "voice of the people"?

Sad....but not unexpected. Thank goodness we don't have such folks running our government here!

Posted by: Jim Hartman on July 9, 2006 03:05 AM

15. ah yes, Jim Hartman-the typical liberal response. The people are just too stupid to know what is good for them. Too stupid to resist signing a petition on anything. Just generally way too stupid.......

So what if one person bankrolled something-the other 299,999 of us who signed it are not dummies or robots. Your arrogance is stunning......

What is so "special interest" about telling Olympia to leave $30 car tabs alone? and, multiple times now telling those idoits to leave car tabs alone.

What is so "special interest" about telling Olympia that a death tax philosophically stinks from the standpoint of double, if not triple, taxation? So what if a death tax applies to 250 persons per year, it still is an outrageous confiscation of private property.

What is so "special interest" about forcing local goverment to pay up if looney and overbearing laws and regulations trash the value of citizen's property? This is not Communist China, oops, sorry, well, at least all the other counties than Martin Luther King County.

What is so "special interest" about asking Washingtonians if they want to raise energy prices for some vague feel good rationale about alternative energy?

It is perfectly OK to put any concept 300,000 people signed a petition for on the ballot.

Not to get off track, but if you have lived in WA for more than a couple of weeks, and are reasonably concious, you will duly note that solar energy is silly and laughable as the sun doesnt shine at night, and half the time the sun doesnt shine in the day. Get it, Sherlock? And, the wind doesnt always blow. So, the giddy attraction to alternative energy is feel good dopey liberalism at its most delirious extreme. Let us hope this one does not pass so that poor people dont get hijacked on energy costs needlessly. The rest of us can handle the price increase if dopey reasonsing skills not based in fact and reality prevail.

Posted by: hank on July 9, 2006 06:01 AM

16. To Wondering, Steve, and KS,
The State LP has data to show that Ruth Bennett actually hurt to Dems more than the Republicans, so that myth that she cost Dino his race is incorrect.

Posted by: mark s2 on July 9, 2006 06:34 AM

17. "A single person bankrolled most of the signature gatherers...how in earth is this the "voice of the people"? "

The voice of the people will be heard in November, thanks to all that dirty, evil money. It's called an "election." Quaint concept, I know.

Posted by: ScottM on July 9, 2006 08:08 AM

18. I am a signature gatherer. NOT a paid signature gatherer, but rather, I do gather signatures on petitions that I think are about important issues that stand a chance to make positive changes in this crazy state. My experience, way too many people do not know the facts, or do not give a damn. Way to many liberals scream at me and flip me off. There are a lot of nice conceratives out there. Thanks to both the liberals and the conservatives you all made my day in your owns special ways. You people who don't give a damn need to wake up!

Posted by: cindy on July 9, 2006 08:48 AM

19. I think that people in this state are all initiatived out. How's an average person supposed to keep track of them all?
There's too many of these things being pushed all at the same time with no real overall goal or strategy as to how they fit into today's political battleground.
If folks want to feel good about passing one or two initiatives by voting yes, that's fine. The odds are that it will be thrown out in court anyway.
Which is why everyone needs to be focused on getting legislative and judicial candidates elected instead of having our attention diverted to these silly things.

Posted by: Reporterward on July 9, 2006 10:54 AM

20. Amazing what paid signature gatherers will accomplish.

I fail to see the connection of paying a signature gatherer, and the person doing the signing. Leave it to a Liberal duffus to think that people are incapable of knowing what they're doing. I guess that using your same logic we should do away with elections all together and just have Socialist nanny's make all the choices for us.

And they wonder why Liberals are too stupid to operate voting machines.

Posted by: swassociates on July 9, 2006 12:46 PM

21. I think its interesting to hear people saying that 'people in this state are all initiatived out'. The funny thing is, if the legislature would pass some of these common sense type of laws, there would be no need for this many initiatives! If the legislature were not constantly governing against the will of the people, the people wouldn't have to come up with initiatives to thwart them. I think people who are 'initiatived out' are mainly tired of letting the people have their say in the matter.

Posted by: JustSumGuy on July 10, 2006 09:35 AM

22. JustSumGuy has it absolutely correct. The outcome of the Initiative process is the closest thing to the expressed will of the people.

It is shame that this Representative Democracy has to resort to such a old-fashioned tool in order to make themselves heard, but in the absence of competent representation, we have few choices left to us.

This doesn't stop us from the monumental task of unseating the non-representatives that currently prowl the halls of Olympia, but we simply can't wait for that day.

Posted by: alphabet soup on July 10, 2006 12:53 PM

23. I, for one, am grateful for the initiative process in this state to keep these professional politicians from running roughshot on our tax dollars. It also helps keep the special interest money that goes directly to politicians in check as well. Don't like them? Skip those questions on the ballot. No harm, no foul.

That said, I hope whoever is the organized opposition to the renewable energy boondoggle can come up with some solid figures as to how much this initiative will cost everyone in terms of higher energy bills. That will ensure this initiative dies a quick death.

Posted by: Palouse on July 10, 2006 02:48 PM