Washington’s Democratic Process Hijacked by Initiatives

By Matthew Hayward

11-9-2016

The initiative process was intended to provide an outlet for citizens to take direct action in the legislative process when elected officials fail to enact the will of the people. Unfortunately, it appears the process has been hijacked by wealthy special interest groups after they failed to lobby our elected officials into passing protectionist laws on their behalf.

Citizens United has brought about a hyper-awareness of political expenditure in politics. Two Initiatives, I-735, and I-1464 were on the ballot in Washington State this election, both designed to address big money in politics. There was also a presidential campaign that was largely based on “Getting Big Money Out of Politics and Restoring Democracy,” Bernie Sanders.

Ironically I-735 was funded with over $500,000, largely from out of state donors intending to influence Washington’s elections. 4 of the top 10 donors were from out of state. This initiative has an additional caveat; it makes no difference that it passed. It was run primarily as a get out the vote effort by special interest groups on the left.

Initiative I-146,4 raised over $4,000,000, with 24 of the top 30 reported donations coming from out of state, Soros being the largest single donor at $400,000. Billionaire Ballmer made multiple donations equaling $500,000.

Fortunately, money does not always guarantee a victory. I-1464 failed, as did Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. Clearly, money is not the only factor in elections.

One thing has become abundantly clear, as long as money is speech, a statewide initiative process is not the right tool for the people to respond to government, instead, it is a tool for special interest groups to bypass the legislative process and our elected officials.

A 3rd initiative, I-1501 is proof that money and the right ballot title given by a political ally is all you need to control public policy.

I-1501 came to be in the aftermath of a battle between the Freedom Foundation and Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The Freedom Foundation made a public records request for a list of state employees affected by the Supreme Court decision Harris v. Quinn, a decision that provided certain employees the right to work without having to pay for union representation.

SEIU has filed frivolous lawsuits to prevent the Freedom Foundation from gaining access to public records that would allow the Foundation to notify these employees of their constitutional rights. They will stop at nothing to prevent these workers from knowing they have the

$C:\Users\matthew.hayward\Desktop\Screen Shot 2016-11-02 at 4.21.51 PM.png$

SEIU lost every case and every appeal they brought forward for two years. However, they did succeed in tying the Freedom Foundation up in litigation and delayed their members from being informed of their rights.

After SEIU had lost the first round in court, they turned to the legislative arena. SEIU drafted a bill to amend the public records laws, SB 5678 and companion bill, HB 1349. Of course, they also failed to get their bill through the legislature.

When special interest groups are unable to successfully lobby a bill through the legislature, and they can’t win in court, they resort to the ballot box in the form of initiatives.

With the help of political ally, Attorney General Bob Ferguson, SEIU got one of the most deceptive ballot titles in history;

“Initiative Measure No. 1501 concerns seniors and vulnerable individuals.

This measure would increase the penalties for criminal identity theft and civil consumer fraud targeted at seniors or vulnerable individuals; and exempt certain information of vulnerable individuals and in-home caregivers from public disclosure.”

Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]

Several national publications and nine of the largest newspapers in WA State came out against I-1501, yet it passed with over 70%.

There is something wrong with the initiative process. There is something wrong when voters can so easily be tricked into voting for something that amounts to keeping people from learning their rights.

It may be time to either do away with the statewide initiative process or change it in such ways as to make it more of a populist tool instead of a tool for special interests like SEIU, who was the sole donor of this initiative, spending $1,800,000.00 until days before the election when a local Democratic group donated $50.

…

But hey, if all it takes is a lot of money to get your agenda passed, maybe someone will fund an initiative for right to work in WA State? You never know :-)

PRESS RELEASE

Nov. 8, 2016

Freedom Foundation statement

on the passage of Initiative 1501

OLYMPIA, Wash. – Below is a statement from Freedom Foundation Labor Policy Director Maxford Nelsen in response to passage of Initiative 1501, which purported to be about protecting vulnerable seniors from identity theft but was, in fact, a Trojan horse whose true purpose was to prevent the Freedom Foundation from notifying state-paid home healthcare aides represented by SEIU 775 of their legal right to opt out of union dues and fees.

“Unfortunately, SEIU 775 – with the complicity of Attorney General Bob Ferguson – was able to deceive enough well-meaning Washington voters tonight to claim a hollow, temporary electoral victory.”

“The Freedom Foundation will immediately seek a restraining order to keep the measure from becoming law until it can be challenged in court. In the meantime, we are prepared to file a lawsuit on a variety of statutory and constitutional grounds, including:

• I-1501 is a textbook abuse of the ‘single-subject’ rule. The measure lures voters in by promising to do one thing – protect seniors – but its true intent is something entirely different – protecting SEIU. This sort of bait-and-switch is the whole reason the single-subject rule was adopted in the first place.

• I-1501 violates the First Amendment because the Freedom Foundation’s outreach to union members is political speech and 1501 was passed specifically to prevent that speech.

• It also violates the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution because it allows the unions to obtain the lists (and can speak to union members) while no one else can.”

“The courts and the state Legislature have spent the past two years rejecting all the union’s arguments about why it should be the only entity allowed to contact the caregivers. We’re supremely confident our challenge to 1501 will have the same outcome.”

“SEIU pumped almost $2 million of its members’ money into this campaign, compared with a total of about $15,000 spent to oppose it. That’s $2 million the union couldn’t spend on politics this year. More importantly, we’ve seen 8,000 caregivers opt out of the union in the past two years. At $500 a year, that’s another $4 million in dues the unions didn’t get because it stayed in the pockets of the workers.”

“The union has tried every illegal, unconstitutional trick in the book to avoid living up to its responsibility under Harris v. Quinn; I-1501 is just the latest and most brazen. There’s no question in our minds this will be overturned, hopefully before it’s in effect for a single day.”

________________________________________

The Freedom Foundation is a member-supported, Northwest-based think and action tank promoting individual liberty, free enterprise and limited, accountable government.

CONTACT:

Max Nelsen, Labor Policy Director

(360) 362-3991

MNelsen@FreedomFoundation.com

Washington Newspapers oppose I-1501:

The Columbian said: "The second clause reveals that the true purpose behind the measure is to protect the Service Employees International Union, which represents a large percentage of in-home caregivers. Union officials would prefer that members not be informed that they no longer can be forced to pay dues to the SEIU. If protecting seniors and others who require care is the goal, then the measure should stick to that issue. But I-1501 goes too far beyond that."

The News Tribune said: "’it’s unclear whether it would have any effect on identity theft. But that’s not really why it’s on the ballot. I-1501 is a Trojan horse. It’s being run by a deep-pocketed special-interest group that wants to weaken the state Public Records Act, reducing the people’s access to government records. Don’t be fooled by I-1501’s pitch to close scary loopholes and block the release of records that enable identity theft. There are no such loopholes. The state’s Public Records Act already gives sensitive records explicit protections."
The Seattle Times said: "I-1501 is a Trojan horse. It’s being run by a deep-pocketed special-interest group that wants to weaken the state Public Records Act, reducing the people’s access to government records. Don’t be fooled by I-1501’s pitch to close scary loopholes and block the release of records that enable identity theft. There are no such loopholes. The state’s Public Records Act already gives sensitive records explicit protections."

Seattle Weekly said: "SEIU has a legitimate grievance with this situation. However, their proposed solution—I-1501—is ill-advised… Restricting the flow of state information to prevent people from knowing their rights is a dangerous precedent Washington voters should not be tricked into setting. Vote no, and let’s figure out other ways to help unions thrive in the state.”

The Spokesman-Review said: "The American Association of Retired Persons says there are ways to protect seniors without touching the public records law. AARP will be advocating for a bill in the Legislature. That’s a better way to go, so vote no."

The Stranger said: “The SEIU are good guys and the Freedom Foundation—a bunch of free-market-fellating Republicans—are bad guys. But I-1501 is a bad idea. This initiative would chip away at our state's strong public-disclosure laws and lock information about publicly funded employees out of public view.”
Tri-City Herald said: "The true reason behind the initiative can be found in the last lines of the proposal, where it says it would “amend the Public Records Act” to prohibit disclosing information, such as names, addresses and telephone numbers of “vulnerable individuals and their in-home caregivers.” The Freedom Foundation has been trying to contact home health care workers so it can tell them they can leave their union and stop paying dues... The organization legally filed a public records request to get the contact information of those in-home caregivers so it could relay the information, but the Service Employee International Union sued to thwart the attempt.”

Walla Walla Union-Bulletin said: "The first part of the proposal is unnecessary. Laws are already in place to protect everyone from identity theft and consumer fraud. And the second part of the measure, changing the Public Records Act to prohibit disclosing “sensitive personal information” of both vulnerable individuals and “in-home caregivers of vulnerable populations,” seems to be a move to make it easier for the SEIU."

Yakima Herald said: "What that exemption to the Public Records Act would do is to make care workers’ contact information available to the Service Employees International Union, which wrote the measure to help it collect union dues from the workers. The Public Records Act has hundreds of exemptions; it doesn’t need another one benefit only one entity."

Citizens' Guide to Initiative 1501: to change the state’s public records act to further the special interests of organized labor - WPC

Statewide Initiative to protect seniors from fraud is more involved than it appears – KOMO News

Voter Guide: Initiative 1501 – Increase Penalties for Crimes Against Vulnerable People – Q13Fox

Vote No On I-1501 – Official no on I-1501 Commercial

1501 Truth – No I-1501 website

No I-1501 – unofficial FB against I-1501

Could Today Be the Cheapest Price for Bitcoin Ever Again? Here’s Why

By: Matthew Hayward Current price Nov 10, 2024 76.72K 80.43K Is Now the Time to Buy Bitcoin? Bitcoin has come a long way since its early days as a niche digital asset. Today, as we enter another phase in its established four-year cycle , Bitcoin may be at a historic high, but it could soon become the new baseline price. This cycle, which has repeatedly shown Bitcoin’s resilience and long-term growth potential, suggests that the current price might be the lowest we’ll see again. While recent political shifts, including Donald Trump’s landslide election victory, have added new momentum and support for Bitcoin, the timing within the cycle itself makes this an ideal moment to consider buying. A Political Shift: From Anti-Crypto to Pro-Crypto For years, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies have faced an uphill battle against a U.S. government determined to restrict and control their growth. This opposition was largely led by Gary Gensler, who waged an outright war against crypto from hi...

Search This Blog