State Senate eyes more time for initiative efforts
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - A committee in the Washington state Senate is considering a proposal to increase the amount of time that initiative campaigns have to collect signatures.
Initiative promoter Tim Eyman testified Thursday that the larger window of time would aid citizen-led campaigns that may not have the financial resources to fund an army of signature collectors. He said signature collectors also have to work during challenging winter months and during a time when other political campaigns are not active.
"The more time you allow, the more time you have grass-roots groups compete with the process," Eyman said.
Signature drives currently have about six months to get enough support to qualify for the ballot. The secretary of state's office recommends that the campaigns turn in about 325,000 signatures in order to safely get certified.
Opponents of the bill say the timeframe isn't necessarily a constraint and that the extended period may cause voter confusion if election cycles overlap. Steve Zemke of Seattle, who has participated in past initiatives, said he was part of successful efforts without relying on paid collectors.
"There's not an urgency to do this timeframe," he said.
Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, said that while it may be OK to collect signatures in a densely populated place like Seattle, it's more challenging for citizens in rural places.
Eyman already has an initiative qualified for this year's ballot that would expand signature collection time. The hearing came a day after the secretary of state's office announced that it had identified apparent fraud among three paid signature gatherers who provided petitions for Eyman's initiative campaign and another effort.
Eyman's latest proposal, which lawmakers also began considering Thursday, would separately require that voters be allowed to vote on any initiative that qualifies for the ballot, even if a lawsuit has been filed against the measure.
That second provision drew the support of people on opposite sides of the political spectrum. Randy Elmore, a conservative who pursued a vote on red light cameras in Bellingham, testified alongside Stoney Bird, a liberal who had attempted a vote that could have blocked coal trains in Bellingham.
Both of those Bellingham ballot measures were disrupted by lawsuits. Elmore and Bird said it improperly blocked the public's right of a vote.
"I never thought in my life that I would support a Tim Eyman initiative, but I'm here," Bird said.
Initiative promoter Tim Eyman testified Thursday that the larger window of time would aid citizen-led campaigns that may not have the financial resources to fund an army of signature collectors. He said signature collectors also have to work during challenging winter months and during a time when other political campaigns are not active.
"The more time you allow, the more time you have grass-roots groups compete with the process," Eyman said.
Signature drives currently have about six months to get enough support to qualify for the ballot. The secretary of state's office recommends that the campaigns turn in about 325,000 signatures in order to safely get certified.
Opponents of the bill say the timeframe isn't necessarily a constraint and that the extended period may cause voter confusion if election cycles overlap. Steve Zemke of Seattle, who has participated in past initiatives, said he was part of successful efforts without relying on paid collectors.
"There's not an urgency to do this timeframe," he said.
Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, said that while it may be OK to collect signatures in a densely populated place like Seattle, it's more challenging for citizens in rural places.
Eyman already has an initiative qualified for this year's ballot that would expand signature collection time. The hearing came a day after the secretary of state's office announced that it had identified apparent fraud among three paid signature gatherers who provided petitions for Eyman's initiative campaign and another effort.
Eyman's latest proposal, which lawmakers also began considering Thursday, would separately require that voters be allowed to vote on any initiative that qualifies for the ballot, even if a lawsuit has been filed against the measure.
That second provision drew the support of people on opposite sides of the political spectrum. Randy Elmore, a conservative who pursued a vote on red light cameras in Bellingham, testified alongside Stoney Bird, a liberal who had attempted a vote that could have blocked coal trains in Bellingham.
Both of those Bellingham ballot measures were disrupted by lawsuits. Elmore and Bird said it improperly blocked the public's right of a vote.
"I never thought in my life that I would support a Tim Eyman initiative, but I'm here," Bird said.
WE DO NOT NEED the Tim I'm-An-Idiot enablement bill!
Why cant timmy get a real job? Most of his initiative are failures like him.
NO, just NO. 6 months is too much time as is. If I want to sign your damn initiative, I will ask YOU for the paper. Stop accosting me at the grocery store. I. DON'T. CARE. Enough is enough!
Tell that to the folks that flood my mailbox with crap on a weekly basis even tho I tell them not to.
No more time. Initiatives are generally a waste of time and resources anyways. I've voted for precisely 2 in the past 20 years. Not because I didn't believe in the myriad of other initiatives that presented themselves, but because the vast majority are short-sighted, poorly written, and even less well understood. The ideas are often not bad themselves, but the details are often terrible. It's the nature of the beast. They're also useless because they're only enforceable as law for 2 years before they can be altered.
Some of the ideas I've liked but voted no for due to poor writing include: $30 tabs (illegal as written, no alternatives for funding systems that relied on tab taxes), Health Care training improvements (Inadequate funding provisions), Liquor privitization (poor timing scheme, bad exit strategy, poorly written taxation clauses), etc etc.
The 1st Amendment is a waste of time and resources???
Holy CRAP!!!
@bobalouie What does this have to do with the first amendment? Whether or not there is an initiative process in place, your right to say (mostly) what you will is not changed.
I'll bet the guy in the picture put "sigs" because he didn't know how to spell signature. Something I would have done..... Â Appreciate his service though
Sigs is a perfectly fine abbreviation for signatures.
I love how this article doesn't even mention how much extra time is being proposed. Another bang up job by the AP.Â