Bill would require justices to draw straws for job
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) — Still stinging from a Supreme Court ruling last week that overturned tax-increase constraints on the Legislature, three Republican senators have introduced a bill seeking to cut the high court by four justices.
The measure, introduced Wednesday, would require a public meeting for the current nine justices to draw straws. The four that draw the shortest straws "shall be terminated and those judges shall not serve the remainder of their respective unexpired terms."
Any savings to the state would be used to fund basic education. That section is a reference to the court's order that the Legislature is not fulfilling its constitutional duty to pay for education in the state.
Republican Sen. Michael Baumgartner, of Spokane, insists it's a serious bill, saying that as the Legislature looks to make cuts in other areas of state government, "why should the judiciary be exempt?"
Supreme Court justices currently make more than $164,000 a year. Baumgartner said that by reducing the court, you also reduce salaries that need to be paid to their clerks and other staffers.
"There's a lot of school teachers you could hire with these salaries," he said.
When asked about the drawing straws scenario, he said it was "simply an issue of making it fair."
Sen. Doug Ericksen, of Ferndale, and Janea Holmquist Newbry, of Moses Lake, have signed on to the bill, as well.
In a 6-3 ruling last week, the court ruled that an initiative requiring a two-thirds requirement for tax increases was in conflict with the state constitution and that lawmakers and the people of Washington would need to pass a constitutional amendment in order to change from a simple majority to a supermajority.
It's been estimated that the state needs about $4 billion to fulfill its constitutional promise to fully pay for basic education by 2018. The Supreme Court has ordered the Legislature to show meaningful progress toward that goal during this session. The state also faces an estimated $975 million shortfall for the next biennium.
Baumgartner's bill notes that originally, only five justices sat on the state Supreme Court, as written in the state constitution. In 1905, the Legislature permanently expanded the court to seven justices, and in 1909, it was increased to the present nine. Under his measure, the number of judges on the court could be done by a constitutional amendment — the same requirement the court said was necessary for a two-thirds requirement for tax increase votes.
To pass a constitutional amendment, two-thirds majority of the Legislature must give its approval and then a vote of the people.
Chief Justice Barbara Madsen isn't worried that she'll be drawing straws on the Supreme Court steps any time soon. Noting that only three justices come up for election at any time, and that all of the justices are in office until at least 2014, she said she's not certain the bill doesn't run afoul of the constitution.
"It certainly seems unlikely it could be done," she said. "It just does not appear to me to be completely thought through, if it's intended to be serious at all."
___
The measure is Senate Bill 5867
The measure, introduced Wednesday, would require a public meeting for the current nine justices to draw straws. The four that draw the shortest straws "shall be terminated and those judges shall not serve the remainder of their respective unexpired terms."
Any savings to the state would be used to fund basic education. That section is a reference to the court's order that the Legislature is not fulfilling its constitutional duty to pay for education in the state.
Republican Sen. Michael Baumgartner, of Spokane, insists it's a serious bill, saying that as the Legislature looks to make cuts in other areas of state government, "why should the judiciary be exempt?"
Supreme Court justices currently make more than $164,000 a year. Baumgartner said that by reducing the court, you also reduce salaries that need to be paid to their clerks and other staffers.
"There's a lot of school teachers you could hire with these salaries," he said.
When asked about the drawing straws scenario, he said it was "simply an issue of making it fair."
Sen. Doug Ericksen, of Ferndale, and Janea Holmquist Newbry, of Moses Lake, have signed on to the bill, as well.
In a 6-3 ruling last week, the court ruled that an initiative requiring a two-thirds requirement for tax increases was in conflict with the state constitution and that lawmakers and the people of Washington would need to pass a constitutional amendment in order to change from a simple majority to a supermajority.
It's been estimated that the state needs about $4 billion to fulfill its constitutional promise to fully pay for basic education by 2018. The Supreme Court has ordered the Legislature to show meaningful progress toward that goal during this session. The state also faces an estimated $975 million shortfall for the next biennium.
Baumgartner's bill notes that originally, only five justices sat on the state Supreme Court, as written in the state constitution. In 1905, the Legislature permanently expanded the court to seven justices, and in 1909, it was increased to the present nine. Under his measure, the number of judges on the court could be done by a constitutional amendment — the same requirement the court said was necessary for a two-thirds requirement for tax increase votes.
To pass a constitutional amendment, two-thirds majority of the Legislature must give its approval and then a vote of the people.
Chief Justice Barbara Madsen isn't worried that she'll be drawing straws on the Supreme Court steps any time soon. Noting that only three justices come up for election at any time, and that all of the justices are in office until at least 2014, she said she's not certain the bill doesn't run afoul of the constitution.
"It certainly seems unlikely it could be done," she said. "It just does not appear to me to be completely thought through, if it's intended to be serious at all."
___
The measure is Senate Bill 5867
It seems to me the so called judges and I use the term loosely have their own agenda other than that of the voters, so I feel we should remove them from office immediately and replace them with five new justices with a clear understanding DONâT MESS WITH THE PEOPLE.
Courts have now over-ruled the voters will. Legislating new laws via the court's
decisions is nothing new during the last two decades.
Sounds like the courts need to take a budget cut since they are trying to force WA to spend more money.Â
I would prefer to see a public poll taken to determine which judge keeps his job based on the public's perception of actual justice meted out. The Tuba man judge would be looking for work, if MY vote counted!
Excellent idea. How else can we downsize our government payrolls. Bring in on.
I do not think it is a bad idea. I agree with most, cut government (most of those Legislatures, and Municipal workers are unproductive anyway).
@schramalot I bet you would change your tune when the DOC (already understaffed) puts more and more offenders into YOUR neighborhood, just because there's not enough manpower to supervise them all. As it stands, the officers have about 2-1/2 hours a week to monitor each offender under their supervision.
@schramalot Next time there's a clogged sewer near your home, maybe you can head out with those "lazy" municipal workers at 0400 and show them how it's done. Or if your house catches fire, you could grab a 2.5 inch hose and really teach those firefighters a lesson in hard work.
Less government is always better government. Start with the Supreme Court and then cut all state government by 2/3rds.Â
Less government is always better. But weeding out the lazys is good too. State government had become so complacent and it is a sea of red tape. Since the invention of the "phone tree" it has gotten worse. However, how long will the lines be at agencies? And how many social workers will have to sit around and eat more donuts to figure out what to do next? How many children will remain in homes where they are abused because lazys are sitting at there desks shuffling paperwork. I do however like cutting the Justice's positions back to five.
Janea Holmquist Newbry represents my district, but she doesn't represent me. What a dumb, flippant and unproductive proposal. I guess if you just want to play politics and not truly address our state's problems, this is the kind of thing you do.
lets fire the senators instead
What a clownish, vindictive bunch of whiney snot nosed a holes these Republicans are.
"I can't have my way, so I'm going to get even with you" . Geez. our Momma's taught us that was wrong back when we were, what, 5 or 6 years old?
Man - what petty little twaddling morons.
Whether you like it or not, they followed the Constitution.,
Less justices, clerks and staff to cover the same work load. Â Yea, that's gonna work.
@My_Thoughts they are already bloated. everybody needs to tighten their belts.
When you can't work it out, throw the bums out! Is that it? Level the playing field, put the fear of god into them, those justices will never cross us again...I can hear the banter now.....how typical. But if the draw-the-straw idea is deemed ok, then I say we use the same scenario on Olympia. How many legislators could we bump out and save more than 4 Justices at 164,000 a year. And if they are drummed out, so are their freebies, health insurance, expense accounts, and everything else the people of Washington pay for them to sit there to do virtually NOTHING!
What more evidence does anyone need that Republicans want nothing but power for degenerate reasons? Why in the world else would they think the entire political process is just a game? From loony-bin, utterly unqualified candidates for the White House, governor and attorney general eight (or more) years running to insane ideas like this, they simply block progress, use any and all resources at their disposal to sabotage government institutions and utterly refuse to meaningfully participate in society when they can't have their way, just like spoiled infants.
I'd propose that anyone voting Republican ought to have their head examined, but doctors undoubtedly wouldn't find a thing in there.
Yeah and 20 years of Democrats running this state into the ground has worked...
I keep saying that while I agree Reps or Dems it really doesn't matter. However if you look at the control in Olympia over the past decade and beyond that the dems have played the field. This state is a mess and it has been under democratic control. Lock did it, Gargoyle did it and now Inslee will no doubt follow suit. Someone says lets fire members of the senate and house...it's called voting and obviously idiots voted them into office. Just like they did PBO.
payback is a mother
Keep it petty Republicans, keep it petty!
What a bunch of twits.
@Audio Cat
So you support the Democrats who are running our state into the financial ditch are better than this? You might want to look in the mirror and ask yourself why you believe this. It doesn't say much about you if you approve this style of government.
@komonews Honestly someone proposed a bill for this? Not experience and expertise perhaps? Who are these morons we elect?
Does anyone else find it funny that it will take a 2/3's vote by the legislature in order for this to happen?
Ok, lets also cut the legislature by 45% and we will save a whole bunch more money. Lead by example, practice what you preach and all.
Good. Let's see what other branches of our government can be minimized.Â
So... since three of them went against the vote to get rid of the tax increase imitative my money is on if this goes in there that the 3 negatives will be of the 4 that are out.... yeah... that is too funny
What ever happened to the Lotto money funding education? Â Where is that money going now? Â I would like to see one of our representatives introduce a bill for term limits.Â
@NWNative I agree with your idea of term limits. I propose that the Olympians serve only two terms: One in office and one in prison!
@Glassman hahaha!  Now that is a creative solution!!!
@NWNative For a historical look at where the lottery money goes read this OP ED:Â http://houserepublicans.wa.gov/news/budget-and-taxes/where-does-the-lottery-money-go/
@jcman  Certainly some unbiased reporting there. /sarcasmÂ
OP = opinion. Â We all have them. Â Doesn't make it fact.
@NWNativeÂ
I always love it when people post what you just said. Â Have you ever looked up the lottery web site to see where the money is going? Â Better yet, read the audit.
@NWNative The lottery was never "promised" fund education, it was stated to go to the "General Fund" which pays for education and other programs. No one ever reads the fine print, they only read the titles published in the papers.
@RTNavy You are right of course, but the scoundrels marketed it in a way that made it seem like almost all of it was going to education. Politics is all about smoke and mirrors. Can't believe anything any of them say.
@Alert Eagle @RTNavy  Deception is usually based on lies. I remember the commercials and arguments, and all indicators were the lottery money was going to be centered on education and roads.
@NWNative That money is being siphoned off by the teachers unions and a lot of it is never making it to the school rooms.
@Gaikokujin @NWNative Cite your source for this allegation. Or are you going to pull another disappearing act like when you got cornered on the 47% thing?
@Gaikokujin @NWNative Yep, chickened out again. I dub thee Sir Robinkujin!
@Gaikokujin @NWNative You should be careful, slander and libel are crimes. The Unions are only funded by dues paid by the Teachers and other members! The Unions have no power to siphon funds from State coffers.
Which is perfectly legal AND is done in the same manner that any other organization can - even right wing conservative tea party groups. Yeah - so before you urinate on one group, remember that groups you support do the very same thing.
@Alert Eagle @RTNavy And anywhere in your sentences does it prove that the teachers' union siphons money from the lottery fund before it makes it to the district coffers?
@RTNavy Well lets see, unions contribute to campaigns, which in turn benefits their members, which in turn puts more money in their coffers.
Provide vouchers to parents for their children"s education and abolish government schools. Let those involved have a choice. The State Supreme court is mostly liberal and what is needed is more disclosure of their dealings.
@contraryjim I'm sure if you read the entire ruling and the dissenting opinions you'd get a lot more of the disclosure you want.