I’m embarrassed to admit that I kinda like Seattle Times editorial columnist Bruce Ramsey… you know, as a person, not as an editorialist for chrisakes. But I’d like him a helluva lot more if he were a bit more consistent.
For example, today Bruce is outraged over legislative attempts to reform the initiative process (reforms that are brought up every session, yet predictably never get out of committee). Applying campaign finance limits to initiative campaigns? Spiteful. Requiring paid signature gatherers to register with the PDC? Punitive. Raising the $5 filing fee from its 1912 cost to something approaching an inflation-adjusted value (about $110)? Well… um… Bruce defiantly stamps his foot down:
[T]he state constitution declares that the people’s right of petition “shall never be abridged.”
Really, Bruce? Huh, I don’t remember you coming to my defense when your own editorial page urged a Thurston County court to bar Initiative 831 from the ballot, and I sure as hell don’t remember you pontificating about my “right of petition” when the judge issued a wholly unconstitutional order barring me from filing my petitions with the Secretary of State.
No, I guess denying me and my tens of thousands of supporters our right to petition our government was okay, because we weren’t taking the initiative process seriously enough for civic leaders like you and your fellow editors. Besides, I guess I should’ve been satisfied enough, having “successfully placed the phrase ‘horse’s ass’ into dozens of family newspapers.” As if I held a fucking gun to your heads.
In the end, a humorless assistant AG and a humorless Superior Court judge denied me my constitutional rights, knowing full well that I lacked the resources to file an appeal. Written in the form of a resolution, the AG argued that I-831 was not legislative in nature because it failed to amend the RCW, and thus was outside the scope of the initiative process. And so for only the second time in our history , the state stooped to pre-ballot review to invalidate a proposed measure.
And you and your paper cheered them on.
So here’s your chance to make amends Bruce. An initiative was recently filed seeking to change our state’s official seal to that of “a tapeworm dressed in a three piece suit attached to the taxpayer’s rectum.” I’m the last person to come out against the use of the initiative process for satirical purposes (even if it’s totally misguided considering that WA hasn’t raised a single tax since 2005), but I’ve read the initiative, and while it seeks to direct the Legislature to change the seal, like I-831, it doesn’t actually amend the RCW itself. Thus under the precedent set in Goldstein v. Gregoire, that should place it outside the scope of the initiative process.
So if you want to be consistent in your advocacy for the integrity of the initiative process, I would expect you and your editorial board to urge the AG to deny this initiative a title, and if it ultimately goes before a judge, to editorialize in favor of denying this petitioner the same fundamental rights that were denied to me.
Or… would that run counter to your impassioned defense of initiative sponsors against any and all obstacles?
I’m confused, Bruce. Perhaps you can explain why it’s so outrageous to, say, bar convicted sex offenders and identity thieves from being hired to gather our addresses and signatures, yet it’s okay to use the full legal resources of the state to harass a petitioner and bar his satirical initiative from the ballot? Or… would you argue that your ed board was wrong in advocating that I-831 be tossed from the ballot?
I await either an explanation or an apology.
Poor little irrelvant stammering Goldy….wah!
Can’t get laid, Times won’t hire him….Ditzy Darcy won’t put out….poor baby.
Goldy..
The face on that tapeworm looks just like YOU!!
Oooops, never mind…that was the taxpayers rectum that bears a strong resemblance to you.
I await either an explanation or an apology
Luckily, you have plenty of time on your hands . . .
Doctors, lawyers, accountants … hairdressers and barbers … debt collectors … even car drivers … have to pass competency tests and be licensed.
Gun owners and initiative signature gatherers don’t.
It’s the American Way of Idiocy.
So it was okay to abridge the right to file an initiative in 1912 by charging 22 times as much as the state charges in 2010, but we’re more enlightened now? Is that it, Bruce? Our great-grandfathers didn’t respect democracy, but this generation does? (See, e.g., rightwing arrests of citizens at Bush townhall meetings for having antiwar bumper stickers on their cars out in the parking lot.)
@1 Looks like Goldy wins this debate before you even get started, because … well … you don’t have anything to get started with.
@2 See #6. That’s Goldy 2, Wingnuts 0.
@3 See #6. Goldy 3, Wingnuts 0.
@4 Doctors, lawyers, accountants … hairdressers and barbers … debt collectors … even car drivers … have to pass competency tests and be licensed
Of course, the occasional bumbler slips through the process! Lucky, some of these wannabes get buried away in a government basement somewhere for decades where they can do little harm (or good!)!
The initiative reform idea that I (currently) support is requiring paid signature gatherers to be paid hourly, vs per signature.
I’m ambivalent about the increased filing fee. $110 is no hardship, but the change won’t prevent Eyman from gaming the system.
Anyone well-versed enough in the initiative process to draft one requiring a 2/3 vote to implement an initiative? After all, little Timmy is stamping his feet to force the issue with any tax or fee increases, so it seems only fair.
I had a great chat with Steve Zemke about some of the reform proposals.
He detailed how Eyman games the system. I wish I remembered the details. Something about dozens of filings, to test ideas, or some such.
I hope that Zemke explains how Eyman operates. Closing whatever loophole Eyman is exploiting is a much better plan, compared to silly feel good measures which have potentially negative unintended consequences.
Speaking of election reforms…
Sam Reed’s pushing the internet voting again this year. It’s all but a done deal, unless we remind our reps that it’s a really bad idea.
Olympia Embraces Internet Voting
@9 “some of these wannabes get buried away in a government basement somewhere for decades where they can do little harm (or good!)!”
Unfortunately, they can do harm, which is why the state needed me.
I’ve posted my reply on the Times Ed Cetera blog, here:
@10 “I’m ambivalent about the increased filing fee. $110 is no hardship, but the change won’t prevent Eyman from gaming the system.”
The state needs the money, and in these budget-strapped times, charging 1912 fees for 2010 services is ridiculous. It costs tens of thousands of dollars to process those initiative petitions, and charging initiative hobbyists a $5 user fee is an unjustiable burden on taxpayers.
Hell, even a daily parking pass at a state park costs that much.
@15 That’s great, Bruce, as far as it goes. You make a reasoned argument. Now, can we see your reasoned argument for keeping the initiative filing fee at the 1912 level? But more importantly, can you point me toward a business establishment that hasn’t raised its prices in 98 years? I’m a retired worker trying to make it on a 1970 income.
Ambivalent, not opposed.
earlier post wrote: It costs tens of thousands of dollars to process those initiative petitions
response: The Code Revisor’s office drafts over 12,000 bills for legislators every session (the politicians pushing this bill are sponsoring 1216 bills in 2010). Legislators are not required to pay ANY fees to have their bills drafted and reviewed; instead, the Code Revisor’s office is funded with a fixed yearly budget of $4.6 million per year. They don’t work on commission – they aren’t paid on a per-bill basis – it’s a fixed cost regardless of the number of bills introduced by legislators. The Code Revisor’s office also reviews the handful of initiatives that are filed each year (23 initiatives to the people were filed in 2009). If there were no initiatives filed, there would be no reduction in the Code Revisor’s $4.6 million budget. It costs taxpayers the same for them to review 50 initiatives or 10 or 1. Same goes for the Secretary of State and Attorney General’s offices. This bill radically increases the cost to file an initiative and is clearly intended to deter citizens from petitioning their government for change. The huge number of signatures required to qualify for the ballot already provides a big enough hurdle. Our state Constitution makes clear that only laws that facilitate the process are allowed – this bill certainly doesn’t make it easier. If legislators are interested in deterring legislation and revenue-generation, why not require legislators to pay $5 for each bill they introduce? That would put them on par with what citizens pay for initiative filings. The people overwhelmingly support the initiative process and oppose legislative sabotage, like these, imposing additional burdens on the citizens.
If you’re wondering what the significance of 1970 is, that’s the last time America’s workers received a raise. Real wages have been trending downward ever since. Meanwhile, more and more capitalists have gotten filthy rich. The only logical thing to do in this economic environment is quit working and become a capitalist. That’s what I did. I don’t work anymore, and I’ll never work again, because being productive just doesn’t pay. The tax breaks for leeches like me are better, too! I get a 2/3rds discount on my income taxes for pushing the same money in little circles that produce absolutely nothing of any value for the economy. And I get to sleep in late, avoid commuting hassles, and be my own boss while doing it, too! Why would anyone work for a living?
@20 Well, Tim, if you want to compare yourself to legislators, then my question is, who elected you?
Tim Eyman comparing himself to elected legislators is beyond funny. Hey Tim, if you want to file your legislative proposals for free, why don’t you run for state representative? It’ll save you 5 bucks per bill, which should more than pay for your campaign expenses in two years’ time.
@20 “The Code Revisor’s office drafts over 12,000 bills”
12,000? Really Timmy? Boy, our representatives in Olympia must be the legislative equivalent of James Brown.
Whats the difference if filing fee is $5 or $110? That price difference isnt going to prevent any initiatives from being filed…and at the same time, it sure isnt going to put a dent in the states f’d-up budget.
talk about an irrelevant item…damn
@14 Roger O.C.D. Rodent queefs:
(“some of these wannabes get buried away in a government basement somewhere for decades where they can do little harm (or good!)!”)
‘Unfortunately, they can do harm, which is why the state needed me.’
What, did they piddle on the basement floor and you had to get a mop and bleach and clean it up? That is after all a courthouse janitor’s job Rodent, so quit whining and enjoy your pension.
@25 I surmise you’d rather cut food stamps than ask Timmy to carry a tad more of his own freight. You seem like that type.
@26 “What, did they piddle on the basement floor and you had to get a mop and bleach and clean it up? That is after all a courthouse janitor’s job Rodent, so quit whining and enjoy your pension.”
Not a bad metaphor for what I did. State pay is so low they have a hard time keeping good help, so yeah, I was sort of a legal janitor cleaning up after incompetents.
Business Week reports today the U.S. jobs picture is turning around:
“The trends are heading in a positive direction for the labor market,” said Russell Price, a senior economist at Ameriprise Financial Inc. in Detroit who forecast ADP would show a decline of 30,000. “Businesses are becoming more confident that the economy does have legs.”
http://www.businessweek.com/ne.....ate3-.html
This means Obama’s rescue of the economy is working. Of course we won’t return to happy times overnight. But if we had followed GOP prescriptions — cut government spending, let banks fail, let the money supply shrink and the currency deflate — we’d be in a Great Depression instead of the beginnings of economic recovery and rehiring.
I heard the last half of a discussion last night on the radio about the Republican counter-proposal to Obama’s proposed federal budget.
According to the person speaking (who’s name I didn’t catch), the Republican proposal would (a) keep Bush tax cuts in place, (b) eliminate the capital gains and estate taxes, (c) privatise medicare and instead issue vouchers to seniors to buy private insurance at 25% of the current cost of medicare premiums, (d) assume that tax cuts would boost the economy into growth rates so phenominal it would offset the loss of revenue from the tax cuts (remember the Lafler curve?), and (e) balance the budget in 75 years.
I’m a bit skeptical – surely Republicans aren’t THAT dumb, are they????? More tax cuts for the interest coupon-clippers, a 75% reduction in Medicare, and 75 years to balance the budget? Usually they are a lot more sneaky in trying to push their agenda. I’ll have to wait until I can see the actual proposals before I jump on this bandwagon.
When I was applying for graduate school, I was tempted to send applications to lots of colleges across the country, just to cast a wide net. Then I came across the problem of the application fees. This was in the 1970’s, and $15.00 or $25.00 fees were a substantial investment for me at the time (my weekly food budget was $10.00, and this was before ramen noodles were available). So I had to narrow my choices down to three colleges. Fortunately, I was accepted by all three, so I could choose among them.
I think the filing fee for an initiative should be similar. We aren’t going to be able to match the actual cost of processing an initiative, but we should at least make sure that it’s high enough so that someone can’t game the system by using it file lots of similar initiatives in a sort of market-testing campaign.
I think $5,000 would be a good figure. If an initiative really has popular support it wouldn’t be that hard to raise that amount of money (1,000 people giving $5.00 each), but it would discourage multiple filings.
Eyman @ 20
$110 isn’t radical.
And let’s be clear: the goal of the proposed reforms are to deter you, Tim Eyman. If you didn’t abuse the system, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Preventing you from doing more damage vs the people’s rights.
It’s quite the dilemma.
Personally, I think your shtick has run its course. The campaign against your initiatives is a simple “Vote Against Eyman”. So I’m reluctant to make many sweeping changes just to mitigate you.
(Damage done, of course. Congratulations.)
@27…and you seem like an asshole…so whats your point?
you think an extra $105 is gonna make any difference….shit, my 6 year old has more than in her piggy bank.
goebbels fail.
We “fucking liberal retards” in the disabilities rights community are not amused, Rahm, and we think you’re a fucking liberal goldy.
@33 you drastically misspoke about Herr Goebbels Himmler Dumb Bunny
Change it to “you are an asshole…”
Corrected
I stand corrected.
@30(d) At some point tax cuts result in less revenue. We don’t need to speculate about that; after Bush’s 2001 tax cuts, federal revenues didn’t return to 2000 levels until 2006. I had this argument many times with Mark the Welshing Redneck, but you can’t reason with these wingnuts. They believe what they want to, and facts be damned.
For example, supporters of the misnamed “Fair Tax” (which would give the rich an enormous tax break by replacing the income tax with a consumption tax) insist that a $30 tax on a $100 purchase is a 21% tax. (They get that result by dividing adding the $30 tax to the $100 purchase and then dividing the $30 by $130 instead of $100.) Of course, a $30 tax on a $100 purchase is a 30% tax, and any sixth grader can figure that out, but as I said these people have no use for facts or even simple percentage mathematics that contradicts what they want to believe.
You might as well bash your head against a brick wall as waste your time trying to explain it to them.
@31 I agree with $5,000.
@33 Seem nothing, I am an asshole, thank you very much. I not only invest like a Republican, I also work like a Republican and behave like a Republican. Are you surprised? You shouldn’t be. It takes one to beat one.
@33 (continued) It’s about time I got the recognition I’ve earned.
@35 You’re on top of things a little better than lebowski is, but that doesn’t make you smart. Any kid reading this blog can see I behave exactly like a Republican asshole.
@36 A goat would have gotten it right the first time. Why didn’t you?
Only
a complete fucktardGoldy would try to conflate valid ballot initiatives proposed to tax payers that would help them keep more of their hard earned monies in their pockets with a layabout, backwater blogger with his own misguided personal vendetta making a mockery of the system by trying to deem the former, a private citizen, a “horses ass” by state decree.But then, this is Goldy we’re talking about, so why am I not surprised?
@43 “valid ballot initiatives proposed to tax payers”
Wheeeheeeehaaaahaaaahaaa … let’s see, how many of Eyman’s tax initiatives have not been thrown out by the state supreme court?
Given all the massive indignation, I really am beginning to wonder what would need to be done on the citizen level to legally shut down Eyman, the Fagans, the general trolling of the process. As in, for real.
Bruce Ramsey is a pompous ass, who personally attacks folks in commments for disagreeing with his blogs.