Search Results for: performance audits

I just sent the following email to Tim Eyman. Think he’ll accept my olive branch?

From: “David Goldstein” david@horsesass.org
Date: Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:38:53 AM US/Pacific
To: “Tim Eyman” insignia@greekwatch.com
Subject: Please join me in supporting SHJR 4205

Dear Tim,

I can’t tell you how much it saddens me that we haven’t been able to develop a more constructive, working relationship. Indeed, some might even describe us as downright adversarial.

For example, you sponsor an ill-conceived, boneheaded initiative, and I oppose it. You send out a deceptive, misleading press release, and I refute it. You cook the books to hide the fact that you are using initiative campaign contributions to fund your personal compensation committee, and I file a complaint with the Public Disclosure Commission.

And then, of course, there was that whole “Tim Eyman is a Horse’s Ass” initiative. While I’m sure we both had a good laugh at that one, I’m guessing we were probably on opposite sides of the issue. (I was for it.)

But I think I have finally found an issue we can both support.

This week the state House passed by a 73-25 margin, a constitutional amendment that would eliminate the 60% super-majority required by local school levies. The amendment faces a tougher challenge in the Senate, but if it passes by two-thirds, it will be sent before the people for their approval.

As a self-proclaimed champion of direct democracy, you have time and again admonished our elected officials and judges to honor the will of the people. In defense of your own initiatives — even the really, really stupid ones — you have argued that voters, not politicians, should be trusted to choose the kind of government they want. Thus I am confident that you will agree with me that the super-majority amendment can and should be decided directly by the voters… for to contend otherwise would be hypocritical.

That’s why I urge you to join me in asking the Senate to approve SHJR 4205. I suggest we draft a joint letter, instructing our respective supporters to contact their state senator, and demand that the people be given the opportunity to decide this important issue for themselves. Since I happen to have a copy of your list, I’d be happy to directly email your supporters on your behalf.

This is a terrific opportunity, not just to strike a blow for direct democracy, but for you to jump-start your stalled initiative career by supporting something that actually has a chance of passing. You’ve had two consecutive years without an electoral victory, and you’ve got to admit, this year’s performance audits initiative was dead on arrival. (Oh man… what were you thinking?) This is a chance for you to briefly be relevant again.

Given the opportunity to work together, I believe we can make a positive impact on all of Washington’s citizens, as well as learn a little something from one another. For example, I could teach you how to directly answer a reporter’s questions… and I understand you could teach me a few creative accounting tricks.

I look forward to our new partnership, and eagerly await your reply.

Affectionately yours,

David

I enjoy The Seattle Weekly. And I really like frequent contributor Geov Parrish. But his current piece, “Eyman’s Good Idea“… um… oy.

Geov writes, well… glowingly about Tim Eyman’s latest products, I-905 (the “Hands Off Tim’s Business” initiative) and I-900 (which would finally enact performance audits… six months after they’re enacted by the Legislature.)

Suspicious as I am of Eyman’s intentions, I cannot for the life of me think of a reason this would be a bad thing.

You’ve got my phone number, Geov… I wish you would have asked me.

I could have told you that by automatically requiring a referendum on legislation that alters the initiative process, I-905 is blatantly unconstitutional. And I could have explained how I-900 would quadruple the auditor’s staff, add $90 million to the budget, and take as long as 12 years to implement. I could have also explained the realpolitik of Timmy’s flagging initiative prowess.

After a lackluster 2004, during which he backed a failed gambling measure that was far afield from his usual turf, Eyman will in all likelihood have two initiatives on the ballot in 2005.

Not a snowball’s chance.

In his absolute, best-case, fundraising scenario, Timmy struggles to get one initiative on the ballot, let alone two. In mentioning the gambling measure, which cost $600,000 of industry money to buy the signatures, Geov forgets Eyman’s last two “grassroots” petition drive failures: I-807 and I-864. Indeed, Tim hasn’t qualified one of his own initiatives for the ballot since 2002.

If I-864’s 25% property tax cut couldn’t excite his base, I wonder how the wonkish (and redundant) I-900 can break his two-year drought? As to I-905, I stand by my original analysis: it’s just a publicity stunt. Tim knows he can’t run two simultaneous signature drives without a sugar daddy, and he’s already financially committed to I-900. (He even paid for a gorilla graphic.)

And finally Geov, don’t take it personally, but your closer really hits a sore spot:

But if this initiative came from anyone else, it would be seen as a good government reform. Instead, because it’s Eyman, politicians and editorial boards have been suspicious. But I-900 is what it is

Share:

• Tweet
• Email
• Print

Oh… so now I get Tim Eyman’s patently stupid “initiative” initiative. (It’s true, Tim actually has a patent on “Stupid Initiatives”: US Patent No. 6,479,010.)

It was just a publicity stunt.

At a press conference today in the Secretary of State’s office, crotchety government-hating senators Pam Roach and Don Benton joined Tim as he filed his latest unconstitutional initiative. But it was all really just a subterfuge to get media into the room to witness them being the first to sign Tim’s floundering Initiative 900.

I-900 would finally enact performance audits… six months after they are enacted by the Legislature. But I-900’s total lack of political relevance is far from its weakest point; it is complicated, confusing, and unlike his successful campaigns, doesn’t put a penny back into voters’ pockets. Like 2003’s dismal I-807, this is a policy-wonk issue that will have trouble riling even his most loyal sycophants… an ever shrinking core group of supporters who have proven incapable of raising half the money Tim needs to qualify an initiative for the ballot.

So clearly, today’s initiative filing is just a load of hooey, much like the 776-Lite initiative he filed in February of 2003 in a desperate attempt to generate news coverage for his doomed I-807. Without a sugar daddy like the gambling industry, Tim is incapable of qualifying a single initiative for the ballot, let alone two. And just like two years ago, he has no intention of gathering signatures for this calculated farce.

The ploy may work, and Eyman may generate some news coverage from today’s events. But just a word of caution to my friends in the media: I do so enjoy I-told-you-so’s, and I intend to tell-you-so when this phantom initiative campaign fails to materialize.

Speaking of Tim Eyman… I’ve been doing some speaking of Tim Eyman:

A leading Eyman critic, David Goldstein, said Eyman has lost his touch for finding topics anyone would care about. “It’s really just whining,” he said.

That’s from an AP article by David Ammons, revealing that Tim Eyman is about to file an initiative about initiatives. How meta.

This paranoid piece of nonsense would apparently require voter approval of all legislation restricting initiatives. Unfortunately for Tim, it would also require a constitutional amendment, since Article II, Section 22 clearly specifies a simple majority in both houses to pass a bill… not that he’s ever allowed something as trivial as the Constitution to get in his way.

Of course, I can understand Tim’s concern. After all, over the past few years the Legislature has passed a number of bills restricting the initiative process… that number being exactly zero. Indeed, Timmy admits as much:

“It’s a perpetual battle with politicians wanting to gut the initiative process,” he declared. “…It’s something the voters shouldn’t have to always worry about.”

(HINT: the secret to understanding Eyman-speak is to believe the opposite of everything he says.)

“Battle politicians, blah, blah, blah. Voters worry, blah, blah, blah.” Poor Tim. Voters, legislators and the media have all started to tune him out, his predictable rants eliciting little more than that head-cocked, glassy-eyed stare you get when talking to your dog.

First he files a performance audits measure after it’s become apparent that the Legislature is already going to pass one, and now he files an initiative to protect the initiative process from a legislative onslaught that doesn’t exist. It’s not been a good year for Tim, and I think it’s beginning to take its toll. I’ve always suspected he suffers from a mild bipolar disorder, and this is just the sort of paranoid, political miscalculation that’s typical of his depressive phase.

How else can you explain an initiative campaign so carefully crafted to appeal to the voices in Tim’s head? It is true that hundreds of initiatives have been filed over the past six years, but even if a third of them had not been filed by Tim himself, it still wouldn’t leave this initiative with much of a constituency.

It’s been over two years since an Eyman initiative has passed at the polls. Tim hasn’t just lost touch with voters… he’s lost touch with reality.

Well, I never had a chance to say hello to Tim Eyman this morning… he refused to make eye contact with me, and rushed out as soon as his Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) enforcement hearing was over.

Ah, well. Screw him.

As it turns out, Tim only got a slap on the wrist, a fine of $150.00 each for two incidents of failing to report an in-kind contribution ($300.00 total.) Looking a bit haggard and unshaven — and lacking his usual shit-eating grin — the early morning drive down to Olympia for an 8 AM hearing seemed to be worse punishment than the punishment itself.

The enforcement was in response to a complaint I jointly filed on behalf of TaxSanity.org with my fellow Eyman-watchers, Steve Zemke of Taxpayers for Washington’s Future, and Andrew Villeneuve of Permanent Defense. I stand by my allegations of conspiracy to defraud contributors, but clearly the PDC is not the proper forum to pursue justice. If you provide a detailed complaint of an isolated violation they will investigate and respond accordingly. But they seem unwilling (or lack the jurisdiction) to connect the dots.

Essentially, Tim’s whole public charade of separating his initiative campaigns and his personal compensation fundraising into two separate Political Action Committees is a total sham. Funds raised for one are used to support the activities of the other, and vice versa. This, despite the unambiguous disclaimer that appears in his most recent fundraising email:

Voluntary donations to I-900, the Performance Audits of Government Initiative, will be used to qualify this important taxpayer protection initiative for the ballot. A different political action committee, “Help Us Help Taxpayers,” raises money for a compensation fund for Tim Eyman, Jack Fagan, & Mike Fagan for their effective political work on behalf of taxpayers. These two campaign committees are kept separate and donations and expenditures for each fund are publicly reported every month.

What he doesn’t tell you is that absolutely 100 percent of HUHT’s activities are paid for out of VWMC funds. And, that money raised this fall for HUHT, is currently being used to subsidize the early fundraising activities of VWMC.

(Did I ever mention that Tim Eyman is a lying, thieving, blowhard?)

Anyway, perhaps we’ll just have to take our evidence someplace else — like a prosecuting attorney’s office — for the PDC is apparently too damn busy protecting the integrity of our system from the real villains. You know, like Rev. Paul Benz, who lobbies for social justice issues on behalf of the Lutheran Church, and was fined $100 today for reporting late on his lobbying fees for November, 2003… a month he didn’t have any lobbying fees.

Who the hell files a PDC complaint against a Lutheran minister for reporting late on absolutely nothing? I don’t know, but I did find out who tattled on the two unfortunate teachers who were fined $500.00 each this morning for distributing R-55 petitions to fellow teachers on school property… why, the Evergreen Freedom Foundation of course. (I’d call EFF a bunch of mean-spirited, vindictive bastards… but Marsha might shoot me.)

Meanwhile, Tim Eyman, a professional liar with a documented history of flouting the public disclosure laws, is fined only $150.00 per violation. And last spring, when the PDC ruled he had filed his January reports three months late, he was fined nothing at all. But I guess Tim deserves the benefit of the doubt… unlike that shady Rev. Benz.

Whatever.

Tim should rest assured that he shouldn’t rest assured, for we’ll continue to monitor his public disclosure filings, just to keep him honest. Hell… somebody’s got to.

Yesterday I went down to Olympia to support legislation that would authorize State Auditor Brian Sonntag to conduct independent, comprehensive performance audits on state agencies. Today I am heading back to the Capitol to support legislation that provides similar oversight of tax exemptions.

The House Finance Committee is meeting at 1:30 today for a public hearing on HB 1069, HB 1094, and HB 1096. It’s time we demand the same kind of accountability from tax exemptions as we do from other government programs.

With the Legislature struggling over whether to raise some taxes in their efforts to close a $1.6 billion budget gap, one thing neither party seems to want to discuss are the billions of dollars of tax exemptions currently in place — an amount that actually exceeds the size of the budget itself. And of course, much of the lobbying that goes on in Olympia, is on behalf of millions of dollars in new exemptions.

If people like Tim Eyman really cared about giving taxpayers the most bang for their buck, he’d be down there with me, fighting to assure that our existing tax exemptions are actually producing the social and economic benefits that they promised. Otherwise, all this talk about performance audits on government expenditures, while allowing zero accountability on “tax expenditures”, comes off as just a load of partisan hooey.

I’ll post a full report tonight.

If I’m gonna talk the talk, I better walk the walk, so I’m heading off to Olympia this morning to attend a couple hearings on performance audits. But if I see Senator Don Benton (R-Vancouver) coming my way, I’m keeping my hand on my wallet.

According to Peter Callaghan in the News Tribune, Sen. Benton is developing an online newsletter called todayinpolitics.com, which he hopes to hawk to Capitol lobbyists and other courtiers. The newsletter, which costs $565.00 a year, will compile links to newspaper articles written about government and politics. (Hey… great idea! It’s called Google.)

The Legislature pays crap, so seeking a little side income, Sen. Benton sent out an email recently soliciting subscriptions.

But among those receiving the come-on were lobbyists who represent clients in front of the Legislature, including committees that Benton serves on. Legislative ethics generally restrict lawmakers from soliciting business from lobbyists. That’s because you can never be sure if they buy because they want to or because they feel like they have to.

“What will it cost you NOT to subscribe?” Benton wrote. “That could be a princely sum indeed!”

Yikes. That’s an unfortunate choice of words.

The newsletter is scheduled to start February 1… just in time to include links to news stories concerning his inevitable ethics board hearing.

The next big thing in Washington politics is an old thing: “property rights.”

As reported yesterday in The News Tribune, Oregon’s new anti-growth-management law, that requires financially compensating property owners for potential losses due to zoning or land-use restrictions, has spurred interest in Washington from the usual suspects. [State might copy Oregon property rights plan]

On Friday, some of the state’s most powerful interest groups met in Olympia to discuss acting on that inspiration by running an initiative similar to Oregon’s Measure 37, either this fall or in 2006.

“The conclusion was the time was ripe for such an initiative,” said Gary Tripp of a group called Bainbridge Citizens United. “We are going to draft an initiative ASAP.”

Tripp organized the meeting, which was attended by several building groups and initiative veterans, including the Building Industry Association of Washington, the Washington State Grange and Tim Eyman.

That’s right, the BIAW and Tim Eyman.

And the Grange…? Well, I’m still not sure what to make of them, but they’re beginning to piss me off.

Not that any of this should come as a surprise. Environmentalists have been expecting a copy cat initiative, and those of us on the Eyman-watch have been wondering when Tim would abandon his dead-in-the-water performance audits initiative to pirate this potentially more lucrative issue.

But being alert and being prepared are not the same thing. Those of us who believe that rational growth management policy is absolutely necessary to maintain our region’s quality of life, must start organizing, working the media, and raising money… now. For all of Eyman’s bluster and self-aggrandizing, all it really takes to get an initiative on the ballot is half-a-million dollars worth of paid signatures. There’s a ton of money to be made by builders and others from unconstrained development, and you can be sure that they are ready to invest millions at even the hint of electoral success.

As I’ve often complained, the initiative process tends to suck all the nuance out of public policy debates, throwing extreme proposals at complex issues. But as James Vesely points out in today’s Seattle Times, this is an issue worthy of further discussion:

The required 10-year review of the growth-management practices kicked a moribund engine into life. That engine is the desire of small property owners to develop their land, if they wish. The big question is: How can we accommodate them to avert a property-rights rebellion without changing a region’s core beliefs?

Good question. And perhaps in the comment thread of this blog entry we can thrash out some answers.

Unfortunately, an initiative won’t afford voters such luxury; they’ll simply be allowed a thumbs up or down on a radical piece of anti-growth-management legislation. In 1995 voters rejected a similar Referendum No. 48 by a healthy margin, 59% to 41%. But that was the result of an intense, well-organized campaign… an effort we need to duplicate, and quickly.

Just thought I’d give you all a heads up.

I’m slipping. The Seattle P-I wrote an editorial critical of an Eyman initiative, and I never mentioned it: “Initiative wrong remedy.”

The Legislature will pass performance audits legislation in the current session, and it has nothing to do with bullying by our friend Timmy. State Auditor Brian Sonntag has been pushing for such legislation for years, and leaders of both parties have committed to passing it.

Sonntag’s office says it’s there, and not in the proposed initiative, that the better prospects lie.

To do what the initiative proposes, Sonntag says, would require his department to “grow to at least four times its current size over the course of the next 10 to 12 years” and it would cost $90 million more every two years. And it would be “ill-advised,” Sonntag’s office says, for the state to conduct performance audits at the local level.

Those tempted to sign the audits initiative would do well to heed the auditor’s advice.

And Eyman would do well to find himself another initiative.

If Tim Eyman calls a press conference, and no reporters show up, did he make a sound? Apparently not, for the most striking thing about the media coverage of Tim’s performance audits initiative was the almost total lack thereof.

Yesterday was the opening day of the initiative filing season, an event Tim has traditionally turned into an annual photo op… but this year, few reporters took advantage of the opportunity. Indeed, scanning the papers, Tim’s “I-900” received nary a headline and barely a mention in the wrap-ups of the day’s political events.

Of course, with the filing coinciding with the first day of the legislative session, and the GOP’s failed efforts to block certification of Christine Gregoire’s election, part of Tim’s failure to grab headlines was due to timing. But it is also due to the fact that Tim Eyman’s time may have passed.

In fact, the most press coverage an Eyman initiative got today was actually his four-year-old I-747. A group of environmentalists, social organizations and at least one county have filed suit to have the measure tossed out. [Lawsuit says I-747 violates state constitution]

I-747 is a particularly nefarious initiative because its impact is so gradual, masking from the public the enormous cuts projected out onto future budgets. I-747 limits property tax revenue growth to 1% a year… well below inflation, let alone growth in population or personal income. As revenues grow slower than demand for public services, these services are gradually cut. Without revision or repeal, many local taxing districts — particularly in rural communities in eastern Washington — face insolvency over the next few years.

Eyman claims the initiative was carefully drafted to avoid constitutional problems, but as usual, I tend to trust experts over lying blowhards:

Attorney Hugh Spitzer, whose firm has challenged many of Eyman’s initiatives, said it was clear after the initiative passed that there were constitutional issues that could be raised, but there wasn’t a group of cities and counties that wanted to spend the time and effort to litigate it.

If Hugh Spitzer says there are valid constitutional issues, then there are valid constitutional issues. Whereas if Tim Eyman says the sky is blue, I’d have my doubts.

Anyway, it’s nice to see Timmy on the defensive, and it’s unlikely we’ll see him recover any time soon. His newest initiative is a dog, and even if it wasn’t about to be obviated by a more reasonable legislative proposal, he still lacks the grassroots and financial resources to qualify it for the ballot. And now I-747, his most lasting contribution to our state of perpetual budget crisis, is under legal attack.

Tim has failed to pass an initiative two years running, and as his ethical scandals continue to outnumber his electoral victories, he will continue his inevitable slide towards political irrelevance.

Who knows, maybe next year, when the media fails to show up for yet another filing day press conference… perhaps I won’t even bother to blog on it?

First day of the new legislative session… first day to file initiatives to the people… it’s back to the real work of governing. While Dino Rossi, the BIAW, and the folks at (un)Sound Politics continue to pursue their real agenda — undermining the public’s faith in all government — I hope you’ll excuse me if I take a break from refuting their lies to address some real issues.

For example, as I write this, initiative profiteer Tim Eyman is holding what I expect to be a sparsely attended news conference, to introduce his newest ill-conceived initiative: mandatory performance audits of every state and local government agency, account and program.

Personally, I think performance audits can be a useful tool, along with Gov. Locke’s Priorities of Government program, for evaluating the efficiency of existing state programs, and reprioritizing government spending. But as usual, Timmy’s proposal is more about punishing government than making it efficient, and this initiative is really, stupidly over-the-top.

It’s one thing to empower the State Auditor to conduct performance audits. It’s another thing to require him to audit every single agency, account and program in the state. I mean, let’s be serious… the cost of conducting a performance audit on the average local cemetery district would likely far exceed the district’s entire budget.

How expense is this initiative. Well, Eyman dedicates a portion of the state sales tax equal to about $10 million a year. I believe in accounting terms, this is technically referred to as “a lie.” According to the State Auditor’s Office, the real cost would likely be in excess of $90 million per biennium. Not only that, it would require increasing staff levels by at least four-fold, and take 10 to 12 years to implement. That’s right… Eyman is proposing over a half billion dollars of new spending!

Way to cut government, Tim!

Don’t believe me? Check out the document provided by the State Auditor’s Office in response to questions by public watchdog group Permanent Defense. The Auditor is particularly critical of including local government agencies in the initiative, calling it “ill-advised.”

So where do I stand on this issue. As usual, I tend to defer to well-regarded professionals when it comes to issues on which I have only limited expertise… so I support giving State Auditor Brian Sonntag the kind of legislation he wants:

We believe the intent behind the initiative is good, however, we also firmly believe that there is a better way. We were nearly successful in getting a measure passed during the 2004 session of the Legislature… In our view, the optimum means of accomplishing an independent, comprehensive performance audit function is to have the Governor and Legislature embrace it and enact authorizing legislation and funding to support it.

Sonntag nearly got the legislation he asked for last year… it had the votes to pass the Democrat-controlled House, but was blocked in the Republican Senate. Now that the Democrats control both houses of the Legislature, and the Governor’s Mansion, it seems likely that responsible performance audits legislation will be signed into law, preempting Eyman’s initiative, regardless of his rhetorical gamesmanship.

But even if the Legislature grinds to halt in the partisan meltdown currently being promised by Republicans, and nothing is passed, this initiative still doesn’t have a snowball’s chance. Over the past few years Eyman has demonstrated that he lacks the grassroots support to finance both an initiative campaign and his standard of living. If he couldn’t rile up money-in-my-pocket fervor with last year’s “25% tax cut” initiative, performance audits is guaranteed to be a fundraising dud. And without directly benefiting a greedy special-interest like the gambling industry, he has no sugar-daddy to bankroll his efforts.

Makes you wonder, what with all the money he’s wasted proposing and running failed initiatives… isn’t it time his contributors conduct a performance audit on Tim Eyman?

I’ve been awfully quiet about Tim Eyman recently, and for a number of reasons, not the least of which being my reluctance to be pigeonholed an “Eyman critic” at a time when Tim is gradually transitioning to the role of a marginal political figure.

But I have also been loathe to publicly discuss Timmy’s proposed performance audits initiative in any detail, for fear he might cull something constructive from my criticism. I’ve never subscribed to the theory that Tim is some sort of a political genius… but he ain’t dumb. And he certainly doesn’t need my help in perfecting the initiative’s policy or rhetoric prior to its January filing date.

That said (or not said), I agree 100 percent with the sentiment expressed in an editorial today in The Seattle P-I: “Beware of magic bullets.” Surprise… Tim is pitching a very simple fix to a very complex public policy issue, cloaked as usual in his familiar anti-government spiel.

I support the concept of performance audits — in theory — perhaps even to a greater extent than currently conducted by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC). In fact, I would like to see JLARC extend the audits from state agencies to tax exemptions.

But once the public learns of the true costs of Eyman’s overreaching initiative, and how little in savings we can reasonably expect to see in return… well… I don’t suppose it will make much of a difference one way or the other, as I sincerely doubt that Tim can raise the kind of money or grassroots fervor necessary to get this dog onto the ballot.

More on this subject after the New Year.

As I predicted yesterday, Tim Eyman’s latest initiative garnered little media attention… a single, obligatory AP newswire story that appeared last night in the online edition of the P-I, and was excerpted in today’s Olympian. Quite a step down from the media circus that accompanied the introduction of I-892 last March.

Media fatigue has steadily grown for the-boy-who-cried-tax-revolt, and it seems likely Tim’s performance audits initiative will continue to draw a collective yawn from reporters and voters alike.

It’s not that performance audits are necessarily a bad idea (I’ll reserve comment on the merits of Tim’s initiative until I read the specific language.) It’s just that it’s not a particularly controversial idea, and controversy, after all, has long been Tim’s currency in the public debate. D’s and R’s have repeatedly passed competing performance audit bills through the state House and Senate, and now that the D’s control both houses of the legislature, it seems likely the new governor will have an opportunity to sign something into law.

Of course, if that happens, Timmy will claim credit for forcing their hand. Don’t you believe it.

Only the most politically unobservant legislators are still cowed by Tim’s threats of voter backlash, or impressed by his frenetically maintained celebrity. Gone are the days when Tim can qualify an initiative for the ballot on the strength of $200 contributions from kitchen-table conservatives. And his attempts to feebly display grassroots support have been pathetic — the last few times he emailed his 3600-weak list to ask them to show their passion by joining him at an event, you could count the turnout on one hand.

Sure, Tim may yet find some special-interest sugar daddy to bankroll another for-profit initiative… though his talk of pushing slot machines again naively assumes his mini-casino buddies are bigger chumps than their customers. And even a politically marginalized Eyman will maintain a degree of media appeal in a state inordinately blessed with boring politicians. So I’m not suggesting we let down our guard and relax our rather effective efforts at refuting his lies.

But as an initiative sponsor, Tim’s track record over the past two years speaks for itself.

To call Tim a paper tiger would be to exaggerate the dangers of paper cuts.

Well, I can gleam one great piece of news from Tuesday’s election, and that is that initiative campaigns in Washington state just got quite a bit more expensive.

To qualify an initiative for the ballot you need a number of valid signatures equal to 8% of the votes cast in the previous gubernatorial election. For the past four years that number came to about 198,000 signatures. Due to fraud, duplicates and other errors, campaigns generally shoot for a cushion of about 20% over the minimum, so 240,000 has been the magic number.

The bar just got higher.

The final count isn’t in, but it looks like approximately 2.85 million votes were cast for governor on Tuesday, resulting in a qualifying threshold of about 228,000 signatures. Add a 20% cushion, and campaigns are looking at a qualifying target of over 273,000.

Long gone are the days when signatures are gathered by an army of energized volunteers. Tim Eyman pioneered reliance on paid petitioners in Washington state, and no campaign has successfully attempted an all volunteer effort in years.

My impression is that Tim’s core base of support is limited, and shrinking. There is a ceiling on the number of volunteer signatures the true believers will gather for him… so those extra 35,000 signatures are going to cost him $1.50 to $5.00 a pop.

It’s been three years since Voters Want More Choices has raised near enough money to qualify an initiative for the ballot — both I-807 and I-864 fell well short of the mark. Depending on the language, Tim’s proposed “performance audits” initiative may not actually be terrible policy… but it certainly won’t be exciting enough to generate the necessary influx of $200.00 contributions.

Throughout the I-864 signature drive Tim told his supporters he needed $400,000 to reach the ballot. He raised a little more than half that. Add the expense of another $100,000 in signatures, and it looks like Tim’s “populist” days are over.

I’m not writing Tim off. He’s done a great job selling himself as a professional initiative whore (and if you ask I-892’s major financial backers, they’ll tell you they’ve been royally screwed.)

But it is ironic that a man who made his career railing against powerful special interests is now entirely beholden to them.

Mrs. Betty Bowers, America’s Best Christian: How to teach the Bible in Oklahoma’s public schools

NowThis: ♫ Bette Midler calls out Supreme Court ♬

Electile Dysfunction 2024:

• Bruce W. Nelson: ♫ The Choice—Biden or Трамп ♬
• WaPo: No, Dotard, immigrants aren’t more likely to commit crimes
• J-L Cauvin: The Dotard reacts to Joe Biden’s ABC interview
• Dark Brandon: Shocking secrets of sharks and batteries exposed
• Rocky Mountain Mike: AI Трамп visits Mr. Wizard:

• Katie Phang: MAGA ringleader says quiet part out loud in chilling “accidental confession” on Project 2025
• Bruce W. Nelson: ♫ Celebrating our FINAL Independence Day? ♬
• Jabari Jones: AI Трамп reads the Declaration of Independence
• Knotheadusc: ♫ Voting Blue ♬
• Tommy Campbell: Трамп’s false claims and Biden’s performance—Comedian talks bad gigs and fact checks
• Bruce W. Nelson: ♫ How Трамп Will Make America Great ♬
• Sandy and Richard Riccardi: ♫ Kiss My Rump, Dotard Трамп 2024 ♬:

• Dark Brandon: Maga Morons of America—Aspiring to be like Трамп
• Bruce W. Nelson: ♫ Patriotic Songs for The New Regime ♬
• Chris Hayes: Трамп World “panicking” as Project 2025 gets on the radar of voters
• Patrick Fitzgerald: Трамп’s leaving on a jet plane
• The Daily Show: Small town values & absent diversity at the RNC’s of yore:

• The Daily Show: RNC throwbacks—Bristol Palin’s right to choose & John Oliver audits Red states
• Right Plight: This is what Biden should have said at the 1st debate
• Bruce W. Nelson: ♫ How Трамп will make America great ♬
• Stella Magz: Real housewives casting tape
• Jabari Jones: AI Трамп—January 21, 2025

Honest Ads: If July 4th was honest

The Cult of The Felon Von Shitzenpantz:

• ScaredKetchup: ♫ Little MAGA Mike—A lost Motown classic ♬
• Robert Reich: Трамп v. United States
• Bruce W. Nelson: ♫ Happy Prison Sentence, Steve Bannon! ♬
• Rachel Maddow: Stormy Daniels shares new details of her traumatic encounter with Felon Von Shitzenpantz
• ScaredKetchup: ♫ Bounty Hunter Marge Music Video ♬:

• Bruce W. Nelson: ♫ On Hating Others When You’re Perfect ♬
• Knotheadusc: ♫ Mama, He Treats Your Daughter Mean ♬
• Tommy Campbell: Marjorie Taylor Greene and Steve Bannon heckled outside prison
• J-L Cauvin: The Dotard celebrates Independence Day

Robert Reich: The truth about immigrants and the economy

Supremely Fucked:

Jonathan Mann: ♫ Tyranny ♬

Alex Wagner: Overwhelming evidence against Трамп dulls benefits of Supreme Court gift ruling in immunity case

J-L Cauvin: The Dotard defends his immunity

ScaredKetchup: ♫ A Big Supreme Court Clusterfuck ♬

LegalEagle: Трамп is immune!!

Bruce W. Nelson: ♫ HEY JOE! (Advice for Biden, based on a Supreme Court Ruling) ♬:

MSNBC: The “very bad news” for Трамп in the immunity decision

Right Plight: BBC Presents—The MAGA Cowards Of America

Liberal Redneck: So America has kings now

Christopher Titus: KING ME! The Supreme Court’s utter corruption

Darrin Bell: Animation of a political cartoon about the Supreme Court’s Трамп immunity

J-L Cauvin: The Dotard reacts to getting absolute immunity

Robert Reich: The lie that costs Americans their jobs

Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.