Broad Coalition of Groups Oppose Eyman and BP's Initiative 1053

A broad coalition of Washington State organizations has come out against Initiative 1053 which is on the November 2, 2010 ballot. Initiative 1053 was put on the ballot by Tim Eyman, BP, and other oil and banking interests in an attempt to give a minority of 1/3 of the Legislators in either house of the Legislature veto power over the state budget and raising revenue or repealing special interest tax breaks.

I-1053 is unconstitutional because it is trying to amend the Washington State Constitution. You can not amend the Constitution by an initiative in Washington State. That requires a constitutional amendment.I-1053 is trying to amend the language in Article II, Section 22 of the State Constitution which says the Legislature shall act by a majority vote in passing legislation. By I-1053 trying to require a 2/3 vote to pass revenue bills it is basically saying that only 1/3 of the Legislators in either House can overrule the vote of the majority.That is why it is unconstitutional.

Major statewide groups opposing I-1053 include:

League of Women Voters of Washington
Washington Association of Churches
Washington State Labor Council
Washington Conservation Voters
Washington Education Association
Washington State Democrats
Sierra Club - Cascade Chapter

Here is the complete list opposing I-1053 done alphabetically. More groups are joining every day.

•Adams County Democrats

•AFT Seattle Community Colleges, Local 1789

•Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1015

•Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1384

•Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1765

•Amalgamated Transit Union Local 587

•Amalgamated Transit Union Local 757

•Amalgamated Transit Union Local 843

•Amalgamated Transit Union Local 883

•American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network

•American Federation of Teachers - AFT Washington

•Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance (APALA)

•Asian Pacific Islander Coalition of King County

•Center for Social Justice

•Central WA Progress

•Childhaven

•Children’s Alliance

•Church Council of Greater Seattle

•Community Workers of America (CWA) State Council

•Cowlitz-Wahkiakum Labor Council

•Eastern Washington Voters

•Economic Opportunity Institute

•Entre Hermanos

•Equal Rights Washington

•Friends Committee on Washington State Public Policy (Quakers)

•Fuse Washington

•Futurewise

•Greater Seattle Business Association

•Health Point

•IBEW Local 46

•IBEW Local 77

•IFPTE Local 17

•Inland Empire Residential Resources

•Inter*Im Community Development Association

•International Community Health Services

•Japanese American Citizens League (JACL) Seattle Chapter

•King County Democrats

•King County Labor Council

•Kitsap County Labor Council

•Laborers Local 1239

•League of Women Voters of Washington

•Lewiston-Clarkston County Labor Council

•Lincoln County Democrats

•Latino PAC of Washington

•Lutheran Community Services Northwest

•Lutheran Public Policy Office

•Minority Executive Directors Coalition

•NARAL Pro-Choice Washington

•National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF) Seattle Chapter

•National Council of Jewish Women – Seattle Section

•New Futures

•North Central Washington CLC

•North Urban Human Services Alliance

•Northwest Progressive Institute

•Northwest Washington CLC

•Olympic Labor Council

•One America

•One America Votes

•Operators (IUOE) 302

•Organizing for Seattle

•Pacific County Democrats

•Peace and Justice Action League of Spokane

•Pierce County Democrats

•Pierce County Labor Council

•Planned Parenthood Pub Pol Network of WA

•Public School Employees of WA/SEIU Local 1948

•Puget Sound Alliance for Retired Americans

•Raising Our APA Representation

•Retired Public Employees of Washington

•Sahngnoksoo

•SEA MAR Community Health Clinic
•Seattle Human Services Coalition

•SEIU 925

•SEIU Healthcare 1199 NW

•SEIU Healthcare 775 NW

•SEIU WA State Council

•Sheet Metal Workers Local 66
•Sierra Club Cascade Chapter
•Sightline

•Snohomish County Democratic Central Committee

•Snohomish County Labor Council

•Snohomish County Young Democrats

•Southeast Washington CLC

•Southwest Washington Central Labor Council (Formerly Clark, Skamania, and West Klickitat CLC)

•Spokane Regional Labor Council

•Statewide Poverty Action Network

•Teamsters Joint Council 28

•Thurston, Lewis, Mason Counties Labor Council

•Twin Harbors Labor Council

•UA Local 32 Plumbers and Pipefitters

•UFCW 141

•UFCW 365/WPEA

•UFCW 21

•UNITE Here Local 8

•United Faculty of Washington State

•Washington Association of Churches

•Washington Association of Community and Migrant Health Centers

•Washington Bus Education Fund

•Washington Chapter American Academy of Pediatrics

•Washington Community Action Network

•Washington Conservation Voters

•Washington Education Association

•Washington Federation of State Employees

•Washington State Council of Fire Fighters

•Washington State Democrats

•Washington State Labor Council

•Whatcom County Democrats21

•Yakima South Central Counties Labor Council

•Yakima County Democrats

•2nd Legislative District Democrats

•5th legislative District Democrats

•28th Legislative District Democrat

•30th Legislative District Democrats

•32nd Legislative District Democrats

•33rd Legislative District Democrats

34th Legislative District Democrats

•36th Legislative District Democrats

•38th Legislative District Democrats

•41st Legislative District Democrats

•43rd Legislative District Democrats

•44th Legislative District Democrats

•45th Legislative District Democrats

•46th Legislative District Democrats

•47th Legislative District Democrats

•48th Legislative District Democrats

Supermajority Vote Requirement for Washington State Legislators as Proposed by I-1053 is Unconstitutional

This issue should have been decided long ago by the Washington State Supreme Court. Any attempt to limit the Washington State Legislature from enacting revenue bills or repealing non-performing tax exemptions by requiring a supermajority vote is unconstitutional. Initiative 1053 is unconstitutional and should be rejected by voters this November.

The Washington State Constitution is very clear on this issue. 

Article II, Section 22 states:

"PASSAGE OF BILLS. No bill shall become a law unless on its final passage the vote be taken by yeas and nays, the names of the members voting for and against the same be entered on the journal of each house, and a majority of the members elected to each house be recorded thereon as voting in its favor.

It does not state that more than a majority vote can be required. Initiative 1053 tries to change that by requiring Legislators to act by a 2/3 supermajority vote in both Houses to enact revenue measures or repeal tax exemptions. It happens to be revenue in this case but it could just as easy be environmental protections or labor issues or race issues or women's issues or any other issue.

The fact of the matter is that anything more than 50% to pass a bill would give Legislators on one side of the issue more power than the other side in determining the outcome of a vote.  Requiring a 2/3 vote to pass a measure means that the vote of 1/3 of the Legislators can prevail over the vote of 2/3 of the Legislators.

A majority vote gives both sides on a issue equal voting power  to pass or reject legislation. Everyone's vote has equal weight. It's the basic concept of one person/one vote. But a 2/3 vote requirement for Legislators to pass something means that 1/3 of the Legislators can prevent passage;  in essence giving the vote of those opposed to a measure  twice the weight of someone voting for the measure.

This sets up a two tiered system of weighted votes, something that is not in the State Constitution for passing legislation.  It distorts the process of representational government. Initiative 1053 tries to change the Washington State Constitution by saying that in some cases your elected Senator or Representative will represent you with one full vote to decide an issue but in cases involving raising revenue or repealing non-performing tax exemptions, they will essentially only have the equivalent of half a vote to decide the issue if they vote yes. If they vote no their vote will represent a full vote.

This is the flaw in supermajority votes. Under a 2/3 majority vote requirement to pass some issues, it sets up a system that essentially assigns Legislators the equivalent of half a vote if they vote yes or a full vote if they vote no on certain issues.

While I-1053 would require supermajority votes for deciding to raise revenue or repeal non-performing tax exemptions, it only requires a simple majority to pass itself. It does not require a 2/3 vote.

Washington voters are certainly not overwhelmed by this proposal based on past voting. In the one instance in which it was mentioned specifically in the ballot title, it just barely passed. That was Initiative 960 in 2007. It only received a 51.24% yes vote. That is nowhere near the 2/3 voting requirement it is asking the State Legislature to operate under.

In 1993, the 2/3 vote requirement was an issue in Initiative 601, even though it was not specifically mentioned in the ballot title.  It also just barely passed with a 51.21 % yes vote.

Eyman mentions this measure passing 3 times which is misrepresenting the issue. In 1998 voters passed Referendum 49. It's subject dealt with motor vehicle excise taxes, bonds for highways and spending limits. Nowhere was a 2/3 vote requirement mentioned in the ballot title or official arguments for the voters pamphlet by supporters and opponents as referenced by the League of Women Voters.

These attempts to negate the concept of 1 person/1 vote for Legislators voting are unconstitutional. They are attempts to assign different voting powers to different Legislators depending on whether they vote for or against a particular measure. The Washington State Constitution does not allow the ability to weight votes for bills depending on the subject.

Article I, Section 29 states:

CONSTITUTION MANDATORY. The provisions of this Constitution are mandatory, unless by express words they are declared to be otherwise.

The State Constitution does not set up the power to weight votes depending on a Legislator's position on a bill.

The issue of revenue/taxes is specifically addressed in another part of the Washington State Constitution.

Article VII, Section 1 states:

TAXATION. The power of taxation shall never be suspended, surrendered or contracted away.

Initiative 1053 is obviously an attempt to take away the Legislator's authority to raise revenue or taxes to support public services. The only way this can be altered is by a constitutional amendment.

An initiative or legislative bill can not amend the state constitution. That requires a constitutional amendment. Because constitutional amendments affect the basic framework of how our government works, it is a specific instance where the state constitution spells out a requirement for a 2/3 vote by the Legislature and a majority vote of the people to pass. Two other instances spelled out for 2/3 votes by the Legislature are to expel a member of the house and a 2/3 vote in the first 2 years to amend an initiative.

No where does the Washington State Constitution say that voters can by a simple majority vote on an initiative, limit the power of Legislators to pass revenue legislation or repeal under-performing tax exemptions  by requiring supermajority votes. Under Article I, Section 29 to do so would require express words and no such words exist in the Constitution.

 Initiative 1053 should be rejected by voters this November. It is unconstitutional. Uphold our Constitution by voting No on 1053 this November 2nd!