The legislative coup against the people's constitutional right to initiative is meeting resistance -- both from the House Democrats' adult supervisors (see the remarks from Speaker Frank Chopp) and from us citizens who are offended by the legislature's disingenuous assault on our rights. Michael Dunmire, who has supported several initiatives for limited and accountable government, was so incensed by the legislators' conduct, that he pledged $250,000 to Tim Eyman for the Taxpayer Protection Initiative. Here's an excerpt from Dunmire's statement that Eyman e-mailed to his list:
My name is Mike Dunmire and I'm retired and live in Woodinville. Although starting out with very little, I've been fortunate -- I live in the most beautiful state in the union, I have my health, a wife I love, and had a career that brought me financial success. I've supported many philanthropic efforts during my life. In recent years, I've supplemented my 'normal' charitable giving by supporting political efforts to hold government more accountable. I met many of you during the I-900 (Performance Audits) and I-917 ($30 Tabs) campaigns where I was a financial supporter. To me, these donations are another philanthropic effort to give back to the community by giving voters the opportunity to have a voice. I greatly admire the initiative process because it allowsPosted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 08, 2007 11:00 AM | Email This
greater participation by average citizens. Why shouldn't regular people have the opportunity to sign petitions and give voters a chance to vote on important issues?When it came to this year's Taxpayer Protection Initiative, which I fully supported, I had told Tim as recently as December that because of other business and charitable commitments that I wasn't going to be able to financially support it (despite Tim's repeated requests).
But something changed my mind. For two weeks, I've joined other citizens in Olympia at three legislative hearings on various anti-initiative bills. And I am truly offended by what I've seen and heard:
* Legislators ignorant about the contents of bills that they themselves are co-sponsoring;
* Repeated, purposeful misrepresentation of the facts by the Secretary of State, misleading legislators, the press, and the public;
* Committee hearings where microphones are cut off when citizens are speaking;
* Legislators snickering and rolling their eyes during citizen testimony;
* Far-reaching bills with an "analysis" that is a single paragraph;
* Without discussion or debate, votes on bills with only two legislators present (we asked staffers "How can you vote without a quorum?" - they refused to answer);
* Long lists of citizens signing up to testify against these bills but chairs limiting testimony to three minutes each for just two people; and
* Legislators sponsoring bills that the judiciary has already ruled unconstitutional.I am offended by their arrogance, their ignorance, their mistreatment of citizens, and their disrespect for the Constitution. Their shameless actions have moved me to do something meaningful to fight back. I cannot and will not ignore their assault on the citizens' initiative process without a constructive response.
Tax and spend ballot measures are skewed in favor of the governments who draft them. Statists get to draft the ballot measures, and they design them to 1) be deceptive, and 2) deprive citizens of all meaningful control for decades once there is a "yes" vote. These ballot measures are written to not inform citizens what the tax impacts will be on them if they pass. Look at Seattle Monorail project. You want more of that? Eyman wants more of those, and his initiative would subject us to more of those.
Also, the proponents of tax and spend ballot measures get to choose who writes the "Statement Against" for the Voters Guide. That is another way the deck is stacked against taxpayers by votes on tax and spend measures. King County chose disbarred lawyer whack job Will Knedlik to write the opposition to "Transit Now" last November. It was unpersuasive, and went off on an irrelevant tangent relating to Sound Transit. The measure passed. They pick patsies.
The campaign support for measures like Eyman's initiative would require all would come from the "yes" side. The proponents of higher taxes ballot measures are self-interested deep-pockets who can buy elections (unions, contractor groups, developers). In contrast, there is no organized money opposing tax and spend ballot measures. Both the Bridging the Gap and the Transit Now measures last November show that pattern.
For a supposed "enemy" of Sound Transit, Eyman is acting a whole lot like a spokesman for ST2. Just like the SMP's ballot measure, ST2 would impose unlimited taxes for a project list that can be changed and reduced after the vote. AND THAT IS A GOVERNMENT OF POLITICAL APPOINTEES. Eyman's new initiative supports ST2 because there would be a vote on that measure.
Here's a test for Eyman - a way for him to prove he's actually concerned about the rights of taxpayers (and not just a shameless promoter of himself). He should post a description of the ways in which the 1996 ST ballot measure was NOT good for taxpayers. He also should identify what the ST2 and RTID ballot measure should have in the way of taxpayer protection terms (e.g., bonding limits, taxing limits, limits on how projects can be changed after the vote, etc.).
If Tim takes a public stand now about how ST2 and RTID should be structured to afford protections to taxpayers, then he could well be sincere regarding this new initiative campaign of his. But I doubt he will. He likes the political system just as is.
Posted by: Forensic Files on February 8, 2007 11:13 AMLet me tell you that I'm offended by Bush's assault on my rights as an individual. Suspending Heabus Corpus is just a drop in the bucket compared to say loosing paid signature gatherers.
This Blog's whacked priorities amuse me to no end. =)
I don't see you having a problem with DSHS's practices of violating civil liberties on a far larger scale...which include far more lock ups than any Bush has been behind.
you civil liberty fakes are a sick bucket of puke.
Posted by: Andy on February 8, 2007 01:02 PMGet a clue already.
Posted by: Cato on February 8, 2007 01:22 PMThis should be interesting........
Posted by: Cliff on February 8, 2007 01:24 PMWhen the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)
CATO then states:
"I personally have not experienced any harm from the removal of Heabus Corpus."
Having your rights assaulted by the President is not harm?
Do you even understand the statements that you make? Either you are parroting what someone else has told you or you are a liar.
Posted by: Cliff on February 8, 2007 01:49 PMIf people felt strong enough about initiatives they represented I'm sure would be happy to volunteer to stand outside the local supermarket / mega-mall collecting signatures. As it stands paying signature gatherers is just viewed as another expense of doing business in this state.
I find paid signature gathers to be the moral equivalent of paying off a politician so you can get that special tax break you wanted.
I feel my access to signature gatherers and the ability for me to be able to sign a petition will be reduced if this bill goes through.
I as a voter could care less who gathers my signature as long I have the opportunity to give mine on an issue that I believe in.
The state should make every method possible available to obtain these signatures to reach as many voters as possible, just like voter registration.
It is the voters signature and intent that matters not the way it is collected.
Compared to the lack of any ruling of if enemy combatants and terrorists are afforded constitutional rights....this measure CLEARLY is more vile, immoral and reprehensible than ANYTHING the Bush administration could even dream of!
Additionally, there's a little something called the Washington State Constitution (which every legislator is supposed to uphold) which clearly states:
"That the authority hereby conferred upon the legislature shall not be construed to grant to the legislature any exclusive power of lawmaking nor in any way limit the initiative and referendum powers reserved by the people."
Notice it says IN ANY WAY?
When you state that paid signature gatherers is the equivolent of paying off a politician..how do you reach that conclusion. Signature gatherers are only attempting to get the public to vote on a measure. Paying off a politician to get a tax break wouldn't be very useful if the tax breaks had to be voted on by the public. How do you fell about paid voter registration gatherers? Why wouldn't the legislature want to outlaw them? Oh, I forgot...those are aimed at getting democrats to register...legally or not, doesn't matter.
Lastly, your post that unconstutionally banning paid signature gatherers would make the process more legit either comes from a complete lack of logical thinking or ignorance! The Oregon law has shown the exact opposite. The US Supreme Court has the logic right when they state:
"It cannot be assumed that a professional circulator - whose qualifications for similar future assignments may well depend on a reputation for competence and integrity - is any more likely to accept false signatures than a volunteer motivated entirely by an interest in having the proposition placed on the ballot."
You see, when you are a volunteer and by definition have a vested interest in getting the measue on the ballot...you are FAR more likely to participate in fraud than someone who is paid and who has to do a good job in order to get paid in the future. Someone who has a reputation for submitting forged signatures will not be hired to collect more. Someone who only wants a certain measure on the ballot has no future ramifications.
Sorry Cato...your posts are illogical left wing rhetoric. Try doing some research and getting a clue already (as you so poetically stated).
Posted by: drw on February 8, 2007 02:58 PMNow they are ready to throw out 20 legal citizen signatures because the signature gatherer forgets to sign the back of the initiative, without ever checking the valid signatures on the initiative.
They are a truely a party of hipocraps.
Posted by: GS on February 8, 2007 03:54 PM"If people felt strong enough about initiatives they represented I'm sure would be happy to volunteer to stand outside the local supermarket / mega-mall collecting signatures. As it stands paying signature gatherers is just viewed as another expense of doing business in this state."
I will give up the paid signature gatherers the day you give up the paid AFL-CIO "activists".
Posted by: pbj on February 9, 2007 12:52 AMHowever, the Constitution specifically mentions defending us from our enemies. Take away my right to buy the toilet of my choice, wear a motorcycle helmet only if I want to, cut down the trees on my land and the liberals are all in favor of the goverment regulating me. Stop us from being attacked by terrorists by intercepting phone calls to suspected terrorists overseas? Outrage. Stop us from being attacked by preventing US groups from donating money to known terrorist organizations? Outrage. Stop us from being attacked by interrogating known terrorists who were captured on the battlefield actually attacking or planning to attack us? Outrage.
The left has become brain dead and is populated with morons like Cato. By the way, I resent your using the name Cato when you are in no way representing libertarian views. You spout off about the things that government should legitimately be doing but not a peep about the constant intrusion into our daily lives by left wing politicians.
Frankly, I find it much less an intrusion to know that the government is making an effort to find and stop terrorists than I do when the government tells me how to live my daily life. That is what government is supposed to be for. Protect me from force so that I can live my life the way I want to.
Posted by: Calvin A on February 9, 2007 03:33 PM