Newsroom Archives by Year: 2007

July 23rd, 2007

I-960 lawsuit will continue for now

In the Courts

Our parent organization’s blog reports that Futurewise and SEIU 775 – the plaintiffs in the lawsuit to block Tim Eyman’s initiative from being considered by voters – have filed an emergency motion for accelerated review with the state Supreme Court because the Superior Court refused to actually consider the issues at hand.

That’s good news, but the Court still has to take the case.

MORE (JULY 25th): A number of articles have appeared recently in Washington media outlets conveying the idea that Tim Eyman’s I-960 has overcome all obstacles and is now guaranteed to go before the voters of Washington State. Despite I-960’s passage of a random sample check conducted by the Secretary of State’s office, the initiative is still not cleared for placement on the ballot yet because Futurewise and SEIU 775 have appealed Judge Catherine Shaffer’s decision to allow I-960 to proceed. The lawsuit thus continues while the state Supreme Court decides whether to hear the case.

“If the Supreme Court accepts the case, it is our hope that it will set a precedent that checks abuse of the initiative process and upholds the rule of law,” said NPI Executive Director and Permanent Defense Chair Andrew Villeneuve.

“The initiative process has limitations for good reason. It cannot, for instance, be used to amend the U.S. Constitution. An initiative that attempted to covertly amend the U.S. Constitution would be struck down by the Courts and not allowed to go before voters. Likewise, I-960, which contains language that is in conflict with our state’s Constitution, ought to be nullified.”

July 19th, 2007

I-960 passes random sample check

Ballot Watchdogging

The Secretary of State’s office just put out a release saying that a random sample check has determined that Initiative 960 has sufficient valid signatures to qualify for the November ballot, as expected:

According to elections officials, a check of petition signatures submitted in support of the proposal has shown that the measure meets constitutional requirements for a minimum of 224,880 valid voter signatures. The measure will appear on the November 6th General Election ballot.

Initiative 960 would require two-thirds legislative approval or voter approval for tax increases, legislative approval of fee increases, certain published information on tax-increasing bills, and advisory votes on taxes enacted without voter approval. The official ballot summary on Initiative 960 reads, “This measure would require either a two-thirds vote in each house of the legislature or voter approval for all tax increases. New or increased fees would require prior legislative approval. An advisory vote would be required on any new or increased taxes enacted by the legislature without voter approval. The office of financial management would be required to publish cost information and information regarding legislators’ voting records on bills imposing or increasing taxes or fees.”

Sponsors of Initiative 960 submitted a total of 314,504 petition signatures to the Secretary of State. Election officials conducted a random sample of 9,607 signatures, of which 8,410 were valid signatures – 1,197 were determined invalid. Signatures are invalid if the signer is not a registered voter or if he or she signed more than once.

The petition was checked using the “random sample” process authorized by state law. Under the process, a statistically valid percentage of the signatures are selected at random and checked against voter registration records. A mathematical formula is then applied to the results to obtain a projected rate of invalidation.

Election officials examined 9,607 (a 3 percent sample) on Initiative 960. From that inspection, it was determined that the measure had an invalidation rate of 17.1 percent.

There is a possibility that I-960 will still not go before voters in November, if the state Supreme Court accepts for review the case filed by Futurewise and SEIU 775 and decides for the plaintiffs. But the likelihood is that I-960 will be on the ballot, and we will be doing everything we can to ensure that it fails.

July 13th, 2007

Setback in I-960 lawsuit

Ballot WatchdoggingThreat Analysis

Via our parent organization’s blog, some bad news:

Judge refuses to block I-960 from ballot
Before actually granting the state’s motion, the judge explained the various reasons why she did not want to address the issues raised by the plaintiffs. At one point she even paused and clearly stated, “This is very limited review.”

She did not address the constitutionality of the measure, noting that would, however, be appropriate for post-election review.

And while acknowledging that the scope issue was pertinent to the case, she basically sidestepped it. For example, she refused to look at the supermajority issue on the basis that a similiar requirement was approved years ago as part of Initiative 601 (and is now on the books, although the Legislature has not considered the law to be binding, and no court has considered its validity or constitutionality.)

So we didn’t get the definitive ruling for or against the suit that I thought we would get from the Court. Restraint evidently weighed heavily on Judge Shaffer’s consideration of the plaintiffs’ request.

Futurewise and SEIU 775 could still appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court, which might come out of summer recess to hear two other unrelated cases that also pertain to the 2007 general election this November.

Eyman should think twice before he gloats…this may not be over yet.

July 6th, 2007

Statement on submission of signatures for I-960

Off Topic

Here’s the press release we sent out this morning following the news:

Permanent Defense today responded to Tim Eyman’s submission of signatures for I-960 to the Secretary of State’s office by renewing its commitment to fight the measure if it qualifies for the ballot.

“Anyone with half a million dollars can buy their way onto the ballot, no matter your issue or political ideology,” said Permanent Defense chair Andrew Villeneuve. “We anticipated that Mr. Eyman would turn in a significant number of signatures for this un-American, unconstitutional, unfair proposal…but it remains to be seen if it’s actually true.”

“We’ll be waiting to see if the Secretary of State’s office actually has the number of signatures that Eyman claims he turned in. We already know we can’t trust his boasting.”

Villeneuve noted that I-960 may never qualify for the ballot, even if there are enough signatures. A lawsuit filed in King County Superior Court last May by Futurewise and SEIU 775 is due for a hearing next week (July 13th). The suit seeks to block I-960 from the ballot because it is outside the scope of the initiative process – it attempts to do what our state’s initiative process was not designed for and expressly prohibits (amending the state Constitution by initiative).

“We will work diligently with a broad and diverse coalition of other organizations to defeat this measure in November and protect our cherished tradition of majority rule,” Villeneuve added.

July 2nd, 2007

Hutcherson abandons Initiative 963

Threat Analysis

Antioch Bible Church pastor Ken Hutcherson, who earlier this year filed an initiative to overturn Washington’s recently amended civil rights law that bans discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, admitted today that he has not been doing any work to qualify the measure.

Initiatives currently require 224,880 valid signatures to appear on the ballot. I-963 never had a signature drive, so it stands no chance of going before voters. Its demise is the religious right’s second failure in two years to force a vote on the law. Last year’s Referendum 65 (an effort by Tim Eyman, Hutcherson, and others) also came up short. The equal rights law appears to be safe for the foreseeable future.

June 19th, 2007

Decline to Sign Referendum 67

AnnouncementsThreat Analysis

Our parent organization’s blog has a post about a message sent out by Representative Steve Kirby earlier today concerning insurance industry trickery. Insurers, using a shell PAC called “Consumers Against Higher Insurance Rates” are attempting to collect signatures to force a vote on a consumer protection act that the industry wants repealed.

Referendum 67 is not about screening you from higher insurance rates, it’s about rolling back safeguards that defend your family. If you are approached by a petitioner to sign Referendum 67, decline and immediately report your encounter to Permanent Defense so we can track and respond to their activities.

June 18th, 2007

Seattle Times editoralizes against I-960 lawsuit

Endorsements

The Seattle Times editorial board published a predictably lame editorial this morning denouncing the lawsuit filed by PD allies Futurewise and SEIU 775 to block Tim Eyman’s Initiative 960 from the ballot. The main gist of the whiny editorial was that the suit, which contends that I-960 is outside the scope of the initiative process, is essentially unfair.

David Goldstein has admirably deconstructed the Times’ editorial, which we’ve all anticipated was coming ever since the lawsuit was filed.

June 3rd, 2007

State GOP endorses Eyman’s I-960

Endorsements

Why did they do it? Well, because the Washington State Republican Party loves initiatives that conflict with our state’s Constitution.

Yesterday, at the state committee’s quarterly meeting, the Evergreen State GOP unanimously renewed its firm and unwavering commitment to the right wing agenda.

In other action Saturday, the Republicans voted to endorse Initiative 960, activist Tim Eyman’s latest attempt to rein in taxes.

The initiative, which needs about 225,000 valid signatures by July, would require a two-thirds vote in both houses of the Legislature for tax increases, or simple majority plus voter approval.

The snippet above comes from an Associated Press article about the meeting, held in Yakima (via the Longview Daily News).

The state GOP has an established tradition of endorsing right wing initiatives – and not just those sponsored by Tim Eyman. Those Republicans who wonder why they’re losing need look no further than their party’s endorsement of I-960 yesterday, the latest exhibit in why the GOP won’t be taking over the statehouse anytime soon.

For more information on the harmful consequences of this disaster, visit Reasons to Oppose Initiative 960.

May 31st, 2007

May Campaign Update debuts

Announcements

The Journal is back after a long hiatus, newly integrated into the latest and greatest version of Permanent Defense’s online home (Version 7, the May Campaign Update, codename Whidbey). We have worked hard to improve the user experience. Here’s a summary of the major changes we’ve made.

New slogan/motto. We recently restyled Permanent Defense’s tagline to emphasize its broader mission of fighting against bad libertarian ideas (Opposing Right Wing Initiatives and Fighting Tim Eyman). This change is permanent as of this update.

Page Background Adjusted for Easier Reading. A number of visitors have long complained that Permanent Defense’s stucco background, which has been used on the site since its inception in February of 2002, makes reading text too difficult. So we’ve refitted the stucco pattern to appear on the screen where there isn’t page content. (Where there is, you’ll see a white backdrop).

Improved accessibility. Almost every image on the site uses an alternate tag now

Faster loading. The site now uses more optimized graphics (especially for navigation) and a leaner, better codebase, which means it will load more quickly in your browser.

Darker red theme. We used a softer, darker hue of red for text and buttons in this version to reduce the amount of glare or annoyance caused by the previously brighter color used throughout our site.

New address for the archives. The Permanent Defense Archives, which are being restored, reorganized, and expanded, will in the future be accessible at archives (dot) permanentdefense (dot) org. We hope to complete our work on the archive as part of this summer’s July Relaunch.

Reshaped Navigation. Old sections of our site that have outlived their usefulness have been removed (such as the Press Box, which is now integrated with the Release Center). The Permanent Defense Journal is now incorporated into the left navigation menu. And there is a major distinction between the two types of buttons in the menu – red ones take you to sections inside of Permanent Defense’s site, blue ones take you to other parts of the Northwest Progressive Institute’s network.

Front Page Changes. We’ve refreshed the appearance of the menu centers on the front page (Breaking News, Releases, and the Journal) which help you find important information about our latest activities. The front page sports a new NO on I-960 banner and a frequently asked questions (or FAQ) about Initiative 960.

A more useful Release Center. We’ve retooled the Release Center/Newsroom to help you easily browse official statements, special reports, our document library, tax references, and press coverage of right wing initiatives. The Release Center has incorporated the now retired Press Box as mentioned above.

Updates for all permanent sections. We’ve carefully and thoroughly revised all the major sections of our website, including our about and contact pages, Links & Resources, Dangerous Initiatives, and the Action Center. Essays: Our Arguments includes a new exposition on I-960 and Reasons presents the case against Tim Eyman’s undemocratic idea.

New materials available. Handouts are available for download to help educate the public about the harmful consequences of Initiative 960. They can be downloaded from either the Action Center or the Release Center.

May 17th, 2007

NPI/PD applaud legal challenge to I-960

Statements & Advisories

The Northwest Progressive Institute and Permanent Defense today commended Futurewise and SEIU Local 775 for filing suit to have Tim Eyman’s Initiative 960 blocked from the ballot because it exceeds the scope of the initiative process.

“Initiative 960 is an assault on the very fabric that holds our republic together,” said NPI Executive Director and Permanent Defense Chair Andrew Villeneuve.

“Democracy is all about majority rule with minority rights. Allowing a minority to completely control the budgeting process in our state is a step down the dangerous path to oligarchy.”

“Tim Eyman and his cohorts want to rewrite the rules because the electorate does not agree with their ideas. But our constitution cannot be amended by initiative or referendum. The Supreme Court has established that a measure which purports to amend or circumvent our state’s most sacred document can be challenged prior to an election. We hope the courts will set a precedent that checks abuse of the initiative process and upholds the rule of law.”

You are here:

Newsroom > 2007

Mobilizing for 2024 to counter new threats

Stop Greed: Vote no in 2024
Visit StopGreed.org to learn about three harmful right wing initiatives we're opposing that are headed for the November general election ballot

What we do

Permanent Defense works to protect Washington by building a first line of defense against threats to the common wealth and Constitution of the Evergreen State — like Tim Eyman's initiative factory. Learn more.

Protecting Washington Since 2002

Newsroom Archives