Last week’s deadline has passed and six initiative campaigns turned in petitions to qualify for the November ballot. Meanwhile, a number of lower-profile proposals failed to turn in any signatures.
A high-profile initiative to legalize marijuana, which didn’t rely on paid signature gatherers, did not turn in petitions.
Indeed, all the campaigns that turned in signatures used paid signature gatherers—more fodder for the case that Washington state’s initiative system has strayed from its populist origins.
Here’s what the non-corporate initiative campaigns had on their minds. Along with the pot initiative, a long list of other proposals failed to turn in any signatures, including a batch of Tea Party agenda items that would have: blocked the federal health care reform law; prohibited any income tax legislation (and automatically triggered a recall effort on any legislator who voted to overturn the initiative); empowered local sheriffs to overrule federal employees; prevented taxes on greenhouse gas polluters; and made state and local agencies enforce federal immigration laws and mandate that drivers licenses and public assistance only go to U.S. citizens.
Some lefty initiatives also flopped. Among them: preventing discrimination against gays in “the Washington State Military Department” and setting up safeguards against bank foreclosures.
A straight populist initiative—lowering the signature requirement for candidates who lack the filing fee—also failed.
There were also a few oddities—a measure to prohibit possessing or using martial arts weapons in schools, including universities and colleges, and one that would repeal all laws adopted in 2010.
And finally, there was I-1069, which probably falls under the Tea Party banner, (we have a call out to the sponsor), which gets this year’s award for the most oddball initiative proposal of all:
This measure would require the Seal of the State of Washington to be changed to depict a vignette of a tapeworm dressed in a three piece suit attached to the lower intestine of a taxpayer shown as the central figure. The seal would be required to be encircled with the following words: “Committed to sucking the life blood out of each and every tax payer.” The illustration would be selected from submissions submitted by taxpayers.
Measures that did turn in signatures included: I-1053, a measure backed by Tim Eyman and the Association of Washington Business that would mandate a two-thirds majority vote of the legislature to raise taxes; 1082, an insurance industry and Building Industry Association of Washington initiative to privatize workers’ comp; I-1098, a measure backed by labor and Bill Gates, Sr. that would institute a high-earners income tax; I-1100 and I-1105, competing initiatives (the former paid for by Costco) to privatize liquor sales; and 1107, a Beverage Association of America measure to repeal the temporary sales tax increases on soda, gum, candy, and bottled water.
Tweet
Maybe the tapeworm initiative people should have used paid signature gatherers.
I was looking forward to getting stoned and then creating my submission for the new state logo design.
In my memory, very few initiatives have gotten on the ballot without the help of paid gatherers. I can think of Eyman's 695 $30 cartabs back in 1999, which had the help of car dealerships (no Eyman initiatives since then); then in 2000 there was an animal rights initiative that did it; 2002 had the firefighter pension initiative, with firefighters gathering signatures just 6 months after 9-11 when the public would have done anything for them. It is possible that the nuclear waste initiative in 2004 did it, but I can't remember. Costco's liquor initiative doesn't count since they used their own paid staff for that. Beyond that, if you think the initiative process is worthy in a time of skepticism and apathy, when no one is willing to do any volunteering on political issues beyond changing their Facebook status, and people are willing to spit on you even if you are a volunteer gathering signatures for a cause you believe in, well, then, you just have to give up and recognize that the only way to get something on the ballot is with paid gatherers. If you want to kill the initiative process, outlaw paid gatherers. I'm not saying which is the right choice, just saying you have to be honest about what “populism” means in 2010.
1068, with only a bit more control and forethought, will cruise control into either the 2011 or 2012 ballots. It would be almost impossible for it not to.
I'd be down with outlawing paid gathers if they lowered the signature requirement a bit. Say by 15-20%.
There's been only 2 non-paid drives since 1999:
* I-695 ($30 tabs) only spent $50,000 and got 514,000 signatures, 2nd highest total in state history (voters approved it)
* I-912 (no new gas tax) spent $381,211 and got over 411,000 signatures (voters rejected it)
The animal trapping initiative in 2000 — I-713 — spent $482,012 with paid and volunteer signature collectors.
The firefighters initiative in 2002 — I-790 — spent over $1.1 million to get on the ballot and used paid signature gatherers (payments to them totaled $407,000).
35 initiatives have qualified since 1999, voters have approved 20, rejected 15. Voters don't make 'paid versus volunteer' a factor in their ballot box decisions on ballot measures. Voters are basing their votes on the merits of the initiatives' policies.
Speaking of tapeworms…
If/when I win the lottery, I will throw as much money as it takes to pass an initiative to amend the constitution to eliminate the initiative process. Timmy will have to find a new way to support himself.
But then again, hopefully the income tax initiative will pass, and Timmy will have already left the state.
The teachers union got a (class size?) initiative on the ballot a few years back without using paid signature gatherers.
Actually, no, they used paid gatherers. I know that with certainty.
That's correct, the class size initiative — I-728 — spent $739,027 to get on the ballot ($466,069 went to paid petitioners). Even with the vast network of activists and volunteers associated with education, they still used professionals to collect their signatures.
I was talking about 732, but I assume it is true on 728 also.
Sadly, we won't outlaw paid gatherers without a ballot initiative.
good luck with that constitutional amendment thing.
Here's a better idea:
use the tools we have. Get a good initiative together, run a campaign, get donations and do what the right wingers like Eyman do, instead of whining, dreaming, bemoaning and lamenting and calling the guy Timmy.
I was remembering 732 which was about cost of living raises. The Seattle Times said they didn't use paid signature gatherers. Who do I trust more, Tim Eyman or the Seattle Times? I never thought I would say this, but in this case I probably but my trust in Tim.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/arch...
This is what probably should happen. Paid sig gathering is a sham because it utilizes sales-style coersion to get the needed “support”.