Links   E-mail             Print              Comments (1) Advertisement

This is one time that "do as we meant, not as we said," just doesn't seem to apply.

Initiative 1029 backers turned in more than 315,000 voter signatures on petitions delivered earlier to Secretary of State Sam Reed and normally that should be enough to guarantee a spot on the ballot.

But I-1029 is not your ordinary measure. It could be perceived as both an initiative to the Legislature AND an initiative to the people. For that reason, we have serious doubts that it will withstand a court challenge.

The secretary of state's office is validating signatures on I-1029, a measure to increase training for long-term health care. It's sponsored by the Service Employees International Union and is opposed by the Community Care Coalition of Washington, which represents home-care employers and others.

Supporters say is intended to be an initiative to the people for a November statewide vote. They point out that the full text of the initiative filed with the secretary of state in March clearly says is is to be "enacted by the people of the state of Washington."

But we doubt many signers of initiatives bother to read the full text. What they do read are the petitions they signed to qualify it for the November ballot and those petitions clearly label it "an initiative to the Legislature."

The two types of initiatives are entirely different processes.

* Once certified for the ballot with enough signatures, an initiative to the people goes directly to the voters to say yes or no.

* Initiatives to the Legislature, once certified with enough signatures, are submitted directly to the next legislative session where lawmakers have three options: Accept the measure as is; reject it, which places it on the November ballot for a statewide vote; or lawmakers can fashion an alternative and both the original initiative and the alternative go to the voters.

If you read the petitions circulated for signature and the text of the proposed law, it would be easy to get the impression I-1029 claims to be both.

What's particularly bothersome is the fact that the state Supreme Court invalidated Tim Eyman's Initiative 747 on property tax limits because it said voters were deceived and misled as to its intent. That's the short answer to a long, convoluted series of events that culminated with a one-day special legislative session late last year to clean up the mess and reinstate a 1 percent limit on property tax increases.

Given Eyman's unpopularity in some quarters, we can't help but think that if he had submitted this flawed measure, the cries would go out for invalidating it.

Eyman has twice written Reed and says that "processing I-1029 petitions as anything other than an Initiative to the Legislature is clearly contrary to the court's ruling in the I-747 case."

He has a point. If voters were confused on I-747, one has to wonder about I-1029 that says "to the Legislature" on the petitions for signature gathering and "to the people" in the text of the measure.

A spokeswoman for The Community Care Coalition of Washington said her group is filing a lawsuit this week against Secretary of State Sam Reed, arguing that people signed the petitions thinking the issue would go to the Legislature and that's where it should go.

To the people or to the Legislature? If turned down by the courts as one to the people, whether it goes on to the Legislature is something for the courts to decide, said a spokesman in Reed's office. In this case the office is only checking signatures on what was accepted as an initiative to the people -- even with the flawed wording on the petitions.

Given the track record on the Eyman initiative, it would seem a bad case of double standard, based on the double-speak of the petitions and the measure itself, if the I-1029 is allowed to go ahead to the November ballot as an initiative to the people.

* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic Editorial Board are Michael Shepard, Sarah Jenkins, Bill Lee and Karen Troianello.