Tim Eyman’s 2/3 majority requirement for raising new state revenue is unconstitutional, according to King County Superior Court Judge Bruce E. Heller.
The law enacted through Initiative 1053 is ruled unconstitutional; it directly contradicts the Washington State Constitution, Article II, Section 22:
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.
Of course, the ruling will be appealed and, ultimately, settled by the Supreme Court. With any luck, the Supreme Court won’t be able to weasel its way out of a substantive ruling this time….
The next question: If I-1053 is unconstitutional, what should be the fate of its latest incarnation, I-1185, should it get enough signatures to qualify for the ballot? Will AG Rob McKenna sue Eyman to keep an unconstitutional initiative off the ballot?
You know, like AG Christine Gregoire did with Goldy’s Horses’ Ass initiative.