Category Archives: Threat Analysis

May 9th, 2013

Tim Eyman again borrows against his house as a fundraising gimmick for his latest initiative

Rethinking and ReframingStatements & AdvisoriesThreat Analysis

Tim Eyman acknowledged today that he is moving forward with his latest unconstitutional initiative by loaning his campaign committee a quarter of a million dollars, presumably so that he can begin a signature drive for the measure.

Eyman is once again borrowing against his house, as he has in years past – or at least that’s what he’s told reporters like the Everett Herald’s Jerry Cornfield. The quarter of a million dollar check was reported by Eyman’s treasurer yesterday as a cash donation (see the C3) but Eyman says it’s really a loan, and the PDC reports that treasurer Barbara J. Smith filed will need to be corrected to reflect this.

A reasonable person might think that after being involved in campaigns for some fifteen years (going back to the late nineties) Tim Eyman would have figured out how to run a squeaky clean operation, be in compliance with our public disclosure laws, and report contributions, expenditures, and loans correctly the first time.

Sadly, it’s apparent that Eyman doesn’t care about following the law, just as he doesn’t care about the constitutionality of his initiatives. Eyman doesn’t care how inaccurate or misleading his reports are.

There’s another irregularity on that C3 that caught our attention.

Contributors who donate large amounts of money to a campaign are, under the law, supposed to state their occupation. The C3 filed by Barbara J. Smith yesterday lists Eyman’s occupation as “Retired”.

Seriously? That’s what they put? Retired from what? Selling watches?

Tim Eyman is not retired. He is employed on a full time basis as as a public services demolition expert, in the tradition of Grover Norquist. (“Professional activist” would be more charitable, but we’re not sure how Eyman can be called a professional given how sloppily run his campaign committees are).

Eyman does not do initiatives as a hobby. He does initiatives full time, with the aim of profiting from his campaigns. As he told the AP’s David Ammons in 2002 after he admitted taking supporter donations for his own personal use: “I want to continue to advocate issues and I want to make a lot of money doing it.”

If he is able to successfully run a paid signature drive on this latest measure, he will have two initiatives on the ballot this year for the first time since 2000. And one of those initiatives, I-517, is explicitly intended to help him run more and cheaper initiatives in the future.

Eyman’s initiative factory is a lucrative profit machine. Last year, he and his buddies reported that they spent $1.2 million on the I-1185 signature drive. But we know from talking to petitioners on that campaign that they were only paid a dollar a signature. And less than 350,000 signatures were submitted. So if the petitioners got less than a third of the money that was spent on the signature drive, where’d the rest go? It seems reasonable to assume it ended up in the pockets of Eyman and his associates.

It appears to us that I-1185 funds were also used for the I-517 signature drive. This and other irregularities regarding the I-517 campaign’s PDC reporting were documented in a complaint filed by Tacoma activist Sherry Bockwinkel in August of last year, which alleged that Eyman and his associates violated our public disclosure laws.

The PDC announced several weeks ago that it had formally opened an inquiry and would investigate the complaint.

Tim Eyman’s eleven all-time top wealthy benefactors over the years are as follows:

  1. Michael Dunmire
  2. Kemper Freeman, Jr.
  3. Beer Institute
  4. Great Canadian Gaming
  5. Michaels Development
  6. British Petroleum
  7. Tesoro
  8. ConocoPhillips
  9. Equilon/Shell
  10. Wes Lematta
  11. American Beverage Association

We’ve been anticipating that Eyman would move forward with this latest initiative. Accordingly, we will be organizing to fight it.

Washington State simply cannot afford any more destructive Eyman initiatives intended to eviscerate our public services and sabotage our Constitution.

July 6th, 2012

NO on 1185: Permanent Defense calls on Washingtonians to stop greed, reject latest oil-soaked Eyman initiative this November

Ballot WatchdoggingEye on Money: DevelopmentsRethinking and ReframingStatements & AdvisoriesThreat Analysis

Earlier today in Olympia, Tim Eyman made his annual appearance at the Secretary of State’s Elections Division (as usual, accompanied by Jack and Mike Fagan) to turn in signatures for his latest initiative, made possible by more than a million dollars in contributions from some of the world’s most powerful corporations. The list includes BP, Shell, ConocoPhillips, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Dr Pepper Snapple Group (through the American Beverage Association), Anheuser-Busch, MillerCoors, Crown Imports, and Heineken USA (through the Beer Institute).

Initiative 1185 is a clone of Initiative 1053, sponsored by Eyman two years ago and backed by many of the aforementioned corporations. It would sabotage our plan of government by allowing one-third of either house of the Legislature to decide the fate of any bill seeking to raise revenue for Washington’s common wealth. I-1053 was itself a clone of I-960 (from 2007), which was based on I-601 (from 1993).

“Initiative 1185, like its predecessors, is a serious threat to the health of our democracy,” said NPI founder Andrew Villeneuve. “Our republic is built on the idea of majority rule with minority rights. Our Constitution explicitly sets the standard for passage of legislation as a majority vote – an interpretation recently affirmed by King County Superior Court Judge Bruce Heller, who concluded that I-1053, I-1185’s predecessor, is unconstitutional on multiple grounds.”

“I-1185 is an illegitimate attempt to amend Article II, Section 22 of our state’s Constitution, which says that a majority vote is the threshold for determining the fate of a bill. I-1185 tries to undemocratically require a higher standard of two-thirds for some bills – specifically, any bills that would raise revenue to fund vital public services like our schools and universities,” Villeneuve added.

“I-1185 is purposely intended to create gridlock in our statehouse, so that a small group of reactionary legislators can wield veto power over important decisions about our state’s budget. That’s wrong.”

“We urge Washingtonians to join us this fall in taking a stand against unchecked corporate greed by voting NO on Initiative 1185.”

“The only reason this measure is going to be on our ballot is because nine corporations and corporate fronts collectively shelled out more than a million dollars to hire mercenary petitioners to collect signatures. They’re betting that they can trick the people of Washington into approving this scheme to shield their tax breaks and tax loopholes from possible repeal. They’ve made it clear they are unwilling to pay their fair share in membership dues to our state, while at the same time disingenuously calling on our state’s leaders to strengthen investment in our schools, universities, roads, and bridges.”

“Here’s what the people of Washington need to know: We can only afford to keep our pubic services strong if we all pitch in, pay our fair share, and work to make our tax system fairer and more equitable. Unfortunately, that’s the last thing these corporations want. We’ve seen their true colors – they’re cheaters who want to rig the system for their own advantage. And they must be stopped.”

Throughout the rest of the summer and into the autumn, NPI’s Permanent Defense will be working with other concerned Washingtonians to build a strong coalition to oppose I-1185 and educate voters as to its true cost and consequences.

An updated list of the top ten contributors to Initiative 1185 is available at Permanent Defense’s Eye on Money page.

The chart shows that the top nine contributors are responsible for a whopping 93% of the total (estimated to be $1,131,704). All of the other contributors – combined – are responsible for only 7%. These figures make it plainly clear that this initiative was bought and paid for by powerful interests, including some of the world’s biggest and most profitable companies.

Who are the top nine?

  • Beer Institute: $400,000
  • BP: $100,000
  • ConocoPhillips: $100,000
  • Tesoro: $100,000
  • Equilon/Shell: $100,000
  • American Beverage Association: $100,000
  • WA Beer & Wine Distributors: $100,000
  • WA Realtors: $25,000
  • WA Restaurant Association: $25,000
  • Everyone Else (multiple entities): $81,703.95

FOR MORE: See State Representative Reuven Carlyle’s blog post about I-1185, The painful irony of using majority rule to eliminate majority rule.

May 11th, 2012

Greedy oil industry once again propping up Tim Eyman’s initiative factory

Statements & AdvisoriesThreat Analysis

More than a month after Tim Eyman announced that he would attempt to qualify a clone of Initiative 1053 for the ballot in 2012 (I-1185), we finally know what it was that prompted him to launch his signature drive: a commitment from oil industry lobbyists to dump money into his campaign coffers.

Reports filed with the Public Disclosure Commission last night show that BP and ConocoPhillips, two of the world’s biggest oil companies, each contributed $100,000 directly to the latest incarnation of Eyman’s “Voters Want More Choices” campaign committee in April, while Tim Eyman revealed in an email to the press this morning that Tesoro and Equilon (Shell) recently sent checks for $100,000 and $50,000 to the Association of Washington Business’ political action committee, which have supposedly been earmarked to help buy signatures for I-1185 (or so Eyman claims).

“Once again, greedy multinational oil companies are underwriting Tim Eyman, lubricating the wheels of his initiative factory with barrels of cash,” said NPI founder Andrew Villeneuve. “Of the $247,285.59 raised by Eyman’s I-1185 campaign committee (“Voters Want More Choices – Save the Two Thirds”) so far, more than eighty percent of the total was contributed by BP and ConocoPhillips ($200,000). And of the $186,035 given to the AWB’s PAC that Eyman claims will ultimately be spent on I-1185, $150,000 (again, eighty plus percent) was contributed by Tesoro and Shell.”

“What are these oil companies after? It’s simple: they want to rig the system to put their own profits ahead of people and planet. They don’t want to be held accountable for the pollution that their refineries and storage tanks generate. Their executives and lobbyists are shameless swindlers who think they can buy our signatures, our votes, and our elected leaders.”

Big oil’s presence in Washington: A bit of background

BP (also known as British Petroleum): BP has the worst safety record in the oil industry, and as of 2010, is responsible for the worst environmental disaster in American history: the Deepwater Horizon gusher. The gusher, which began on April 20th, 2010, when a blowout preventer failed, spilled approximately 4.9 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico (that’s 779,037,750 liters) until it was capped on July 15th. As a result of the spill, BP became by one account the most despised corporation in America, overtaking the likes of AIG, ExxonMobil, and Citigroup. According to the University of Massachusetts, BP is the twenty fifth largest corporate air polluter in the United States. In 2006, its facilities emitted 4.41 million pounds of toxic gas into the air. BP’s major assets in Washington State include:

  • a refinery at Cherry Point, located at 4519 Grandview Road in Blaine
  • a storage terminal in Seattle, located at 1652 SW Lander Street in Seattle

ConocoPhillips: According to the University of Massachusetts, ConocoPhillips is the eleventh largest corporate air polluter in the United States. In 2006, its facilities emitted 6.39 million pounds of toxic gas into the air. ConocoPhillips’ major assets in Washington State include:

  • a refinery in Ferndale, located at 3901 Unick Road in Ferndale
  • a storage terminal in Renton, located at 2423 Lind Avenue SW in Renton
  • a storage terminal in Spokane, located at 6317 E Sharp Avenue in Spokane

Equilon (Shell): According to the University of Massachusetts, Royal Dutch Shell is the twenty-eighth largest corporate air polluter in the United States. In 2006, its facilities emitted 2.98 million pounds of toxic gas into the air. Shell’s major assets in Washington State include:

  • a refinery in Anacortes, located at 8505 S Texas Road in Anacortes
  • a storage terminal in Seattle, located at 2555 13th Avenue SW in Seattle

Tesoro: According to the University of Massachusetts, Tesoro is the twenty-second largest corporate air polluter in the United States. Its facilities emit 3.74 million pounds of toxic gases into the air every year. Tesoro owns a refinery in Anacortes.

Data originally compiled by NPI’s Permanent Defense for StopGreed.org

“These powerful oil companies already benefit from billions in public subsidies, but that’s not enough for them,” Villeneuve added. “They don’t just want a loophole-filled tax code engineered in their favor. They want to prevent the people of Washington – and the people’s representatives – from requiring them to share in the cost of keeping our air and our water clean. That’s why they dumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into I-1053 two years ago, and that’s why they’re backing I-1185 now. They’re cheaters who have a mind to keep on cheating as long as we let them get away with it.”

In the coming weeks and months, NPI will be working to hold BP, ConocoPhillips, Tesoro, Shell, the Association of Washington Business, and other corporations and corporate lobbies accountable for their involvement in I-1185.

“Washingtonians need to realize that powerful interests are trying to trick us into undermining our own plan of government, which says that our Legislature shall operate democratically, by majority vote,” Villeneuve said.

“I-1185 is a recipe for more legislative gridlock, more underfunded services, and more unemployment. That’s not what our state needs. We urge all Washingtonians to stand with us in fighting to uphold our Constitution and strengthen our state’s common wealth in this crucial election year.”

March 5th, 2012

Tim Eyman, master of shameless self-promotion, accuses Senate Democrats of having “a lack of humility and self awareness”

Rethinking and ReframingThreat Analysis

A question for Washington’s press corps: Does the email sent out by Tim Eyman today about last Friday’s chaos in the Senate sound like it was written by an adult?

Because to us it reads like a series of petty schoolyard taunts and put-downs delivered by a third-grader who absolutely refuses to play nice with others.

There’s no substance or truth in this email. It’s just an entertaining pile of meanness. The funniest bit is the last sentence of the first paragraph: “They humiliated themselves publicly but their own lack of humility and self awareness stops them from feeling embarrassed by it.”

That line describes Tim Eyman’s near-constant behavior to a T!

We wonder: How much self-awareness did Tim Eyman gain after he was forced to admit that he took his own supporters’ donations for personal gain?

Here are some of the lowlights from Tim Eyman’s email:

RE:  Olympia’s Democrats throw a childish hissy-fit on Friday, stomping their feet, spitting venom and bile, holding their breath and turning blue … all because (gasp!) they didn’t have the votes but Republicans did – and they’re STILL pouting about it

In November, if Democrats lose their majorities in the state house and/or state senate and/or lose the governorship, it’ll be because they deserve it based on Friday’s childish hissy-fit.  In multiple floor speeches, Senate leader Lisa Brown could not have been more patronizing, superior, holier-than-thou, and condescending.  Wants-to-replace-congressman-Norm-Dicks-who’s-retiring Derek Kilmer nearly bawled like a little baby girl — quivering lip and all.  Craig Pridemore was a sanctimonious blowhard who’s still “searching for a word.”  They humiliated themselves publicly but their own lack of humility and self awareness stops them from feeling embarrassed by it.

Excerpt number two:

Maybe there’s a point when even 3 Democrats get tired of the arrogant, dictatorial, slave-master method of legislative manipulation employed by Speaker Chopp and Senate leader Brown and Governor Gregoire over the past 8 years.  Maybe there’s a point when even 3 Democrats can’t just whore themselves one more time, trading their vote for a bridge in their district and selling out their principles and constituents.  Maybe there’s a point when even 3 Democrats observe the railroading of minority Republicans on a daily basis for 8 years and think to themselves “we’re not omnipotent gods, let’s give some other reform bills a chance to be considered.”

All night long on Friday, the floor speeches by Democrats were pious, hypocritical, and pathetic.  Condescending lectures about abuse-of-process were pathetic and almost laughable.

And finally:

Chris Gregoire, Lisa Brown, Frank Chopp, and the other slave-master Democrats in Olympia have ruled with an iron fist for too long.  Power corrupts — absolute power corrupts absolutely.  These immature, power-obsessed Democrats are illustrating the need for new leadership in Olympia in November.

Eyman had no comment on the particulars of the Senate Republican budget (also supported by three “Democrats”: Rodney Tom, Tim Sheldon, and Jim Kastama).

Nor did he defend Republicans’ failure to gather public input on their proposal. (Republicans pushed their ill-conceived draconian budget out of a back room and directly onto the Senate floor using a little-known parliamentary maneuver called the Ninth Order. Hours later, they voted to approve it and send it over to the House of Representatives, where it faces a very cold reception.)

Just imagine what could happen to our state if Tim Eyman’s cohorts in the Washington State Senate – including I-1053 cosponsors Don Benton, Janea Holmquist Newbry, and Pam Roach – were in charge year-round, as opposed to one day. They’d be gutting our common wealth and eviscerating vital public services under a cloak of darkness. That’s a future our state simply cannot afford.

February 21st, 2012

Direct democracy turns one hundred in Washington: Time to bring back the *citizen* initiative

Legislation & TestimonyThreat Analysis

One hundred years ago, the people of Washington prevailed upon their legislators to offer an amendment to the state’s Constitution providing for citizen lawmaking through the initiative and the referendum. That amendment, which the people adopted, was meant to give Washingtonians a stronger voice in their own government, complementing the legislative process rather than supplanting it. At many points during the last ten decades, the initiative and referendum have served as a helpful check on the Legislature, paving the way for change that otherwise would have fallen victim to dithering, inaction, or corruption.

Unfortunately, in recent years, the powers of direct democracy have been used more for ill than good, as exemplified by the emergence of Tim Eyman’s initiative factory.

Last week, Permanent Defense celebrated and commemorated its tenth anniversary, and a few days later, in honor of the one hundredth birthday of the initiative and referendum in Washington, Washington State University organized a forum on direct democracy in Olympia to ponder the question of whether the initiative process really still belongs to the people. (In our view, that’s no longer a question: the answer is no, and the evidence backing up that answer is overwhelming).

Eyman, who participated in the forum, sent out an email today attempting to portray himself as a tolerant good-guy looking out for the people’s right to make law at the ballot – ironic given that he has done more than anyone else to co-opt the initiative process on behalf of powerful interests.

His email included this paragraph worth of statistics which caught our attention:

An interesting fact: over the past 13 years, voters have passed into law 21 initiatives. Of those, 11 were liberal ideas and 10 were conservative. Of the 10 conservative initiatives, 7 of them were ours.

Since it is always a bad idea to trust Tim Eyman’s numbers, we went and looked up the electoral history ourselves. As it turns out, Eyman only fudged one number – the total number of initiatives Washington voters have passed into law over the last thirteen elections. It’s actually twenty-three, not twenty-one.

We would agree that eleven of those twenty-three successful initiatives could be described as liberal ideas – they were measures that had progressive backing. We would also agree that ten of those successful initiatives could be described as conservative ideas – they were measures with right wing backing.

However, voters also considered three measures that we don’t think correspond to ideological battle lines: I-696 from 1999 (concerned fishing restrictions), I-713 from 2000 (concerned outlawing certain types of traps), and I-872 from 2004 (concerned with creating a “Top Two” winnowing election).

The former initiative was defeated and the latter two were passed.

Furthermore, there were  fifteen other measures on the ballot over the last thirteen years that did not pass. Most of those were right wing initiatives, as the data below shows. Figures in bold denote the numbers of initiatives that voters passed; figures in roman denote the numbers of initiatives that voters rejected.

Progressive (left-wing) initiatives

  • 1999: None
  • 2000: 728, 732
  • 2001: 773, 775
  • 2002: 790
  • 2003: None
  • 2004: 297, 884
  • 2005: 336, 901
  • 2006: 937
  • 2007: None
  • 2008: 1000, 1029
  • 2009: None
  • 2010: 1098
  • 2011: 1163

Total overall: 14
Total successful: 11

Conservative (right-wing) initiatives

  • 1999: 695
  • 2000: 722, 729, 745
  • 2001: 747
  • 2002: 776
  • 2003: 841
  • 2004: 892
  • 2005: 900, 912, 330
  • 2006: 920, 933
  • 2007: 960
  • 2008: 985
  • 2009: 1033
  • 2010: 1053, 1082, 1100, 1105, 1107
  • 2011: 1125, 1183

Total overall: 22
Total successful: 10

Please note that referendum bills and referendum measures are not included in the above figures – nor are proposed constitutional amendments, which may only be put on the ballot by the Legislature, and tend to be uncontroversial.

Though the data above paints a more complete picture of our recent electoral history than Tim Eyman did in his email, it still leaves out out a lot. Without discussion and analysis, context is lacking. The lists above are analogous to a line score: they tell us what happened, but not how or why.

For instance, one important thing we can’t see from looking at these numbers is that many of the progressive initiatives that voters passed over the last thirteen years were modest in scope and did not attract particularly strong opposition.

Conversely, nearly all the right wing initiatives (both successes and failures) were deliberately written to inflict a great deal of harm to our common wealth or plan of government and, as a consequence, were fought by a series of well-organized no campaigns. Such aggressiveness by conservatives may result in a lower statistical win/loss ratio, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a profitable strategy.

To the contrary: It pays serious dividends.

That’s because even when they don’t win, conservatives still force progressives to commit substantial resources to defending the state.

And when they are successful, they can cause a lot of damage in one broad stroke, since the ramifications of their schemes are so far-reaching.

When progressives brought direct democracy here a hundred years ago, they hoped future generations would use the initiative and referendum as tools to build Washington into a stronger state. And on many occasions, the initiative has been used to allow the people to vote on ideas to improve quality of life.

But unfortunately, in recent years, the citizen initiative has turned into the corporate initiative. With the help of a rogue’s gallery of wealthy benefactors, Tim Eyman has showed how the process can be abused and hijacked to serve destructive ends: sabotaging our Constitution, crippling our common wealth, eviscerating public services, eroding public trust in government, and discouraging civility.

In between sponsoring his ill-conceived initiatives, Eyman has become a regular visitor to the Capitol Campus in Olympia, appearing at legislative hearings to denounce efforts to return the initiative process to the people and falsely accusing those in favor of reform with wanting to do away with direct democracy altogether. Were the initiative process to be more grassroots-oriented (as the framers of the Seventh Amendment intended it to be), it would complicate Eyman’s operation, which cannot run without six figure checks from wealthy benefactors.

It should come as no surprise that Tim Eyman’s unrelenting, knee-jerk opposition to initiative reform has more to do with self-interest than principles.

January 10th, 2012

Tim Eyman backtracks on plan to run “Son of 1053” in 2012, now says it’s just one of several possibilities

Statements & AdvisoriesThreat Analysis

This Friday, we will be one month away from Permanent Defense’s ten year anniversary. During the last decade, we have devoted ourselves not only opposing Tim Eyman and his initiative factory, but watchdogging Eyman as well. And in that time, we’ve repeatedly caught Eyman telling his own followers and the press one thing after he had told them something very different just a few months earlier.

For instance, in 2006, we caught Eyman in a lie about the signature drive for Initiative 917, which never made the ballot. (Eyman blamed I-917’s failure on the Secretary of State, suggesting petitions had been “pilfered”, even though he was well aware that I-917 fell short because he didn’t pay for enough signatures to be collected).

It appears that once again, Eyman is being not being upfront with his supporters.

Shortly after New Year’s Day last year, Eyman laid out his plans for the next two years, blasting Governor Chris Gregoire for telling reporters she wasn’t going to allow the passage of I-1053 to dictate how she governed for the remainder of her term. Here’s a passage from his email, dated January 6th, 2011:

Four times the voters have approved the policies in I-1053. We’re going to give the voters their 5th opportunity in 2012. [Note: These figures are incorrect. There have been only three ballot measures having to do with instituting a two-thirds vote for tax increases: I-601, I-960, and I-1053. Eyman is dishonestly inflating the number].

So for the next two years, the voters will be watching Olympia to see if they got the message. If the Legislature and Governor abide by the will of the people in the next two legislative sessions, our 2012 initiative may not be as popular as I-1053. But if Olympia disregards, dismisses, or disrespects the policies, purposes, and clear intent of I-1053, the voters will surely renew I-1053’s policies a 5th time (and we’ll likely tighten the belt a notch tighter).

The following Monday (January 10th, 2011), Eyman held a press conference to affirm his plans to run a 1053 clone in 2012. Here is an exact quote from the middle of that press conference (which was attended by a number of reporters), just before Eyman staged his photo-op at the Secretary of State’s front desk.

We’re announcing today that we are filing an initiative to renew the two-thirds requirement for raising taxes [and] the requirement that the Legislature has to take a recorded vote in order to increase fees… We have learned from last year’s campaign that we weren’t able to raise enough money and organize things in one year in order to be able to get that initiative done. I took out a second mortgage on my house – that’s still outstanding – and so, we’re going to take the next two years in order to organize this effort to renew the two-thirds.

In the months that followed, Eyman sent out over a dozen emails asking his supporters for money to “renew the two-thirds” and to pay down the mortgage he took out to finance I-1053. When he unveiled Initiative 1125 on May 2nd, 2011 (which he later qualified for the ballot with Kemper Freeman’s money), he again explicitly recommitted to his pledge. From his email sent that day:

We had originally planned to simply reinstate the policies in I-1053 with a Son of 1053 initiative next year. WE’RE STILL GOING TO DO THAT.

But we’ve decided to do an initiative this year that addresses Olympia’s sidestepping of I-1053 but also brings a few urgent transportation policy decisions to the attention of the public.

However, in an email sent out to supporters yesterday, Eyman made no acknowledgment of his 2011 pledge, characterizing his plans for 2012 as “to be determined”. Here’s the relevant excerpt from the email:

 As for our initiative efforts in 2012, we want to see how the legislative session unfolds before deciding which initiative(s) will be pushed. On Friday, we filed 5 different initiatives (Son of 1053, Bring Back our $30 Car Tabs, Let the Voters Decide on Automatic Ticketing Cameras, Protect the Initiative Act, and Stop Government Fraud Act).  Each one tackles a serious public policy problem. There will likely be others. Which one(s) we’ll do in 2012 will be announced later. On several issues, Olympia isn’t listening to the people and so if they aren’t going to solve these problems, we’d like to give the voters the chance to.

So, just to recap: Tim Eyman appears to have downgraded his “Son of 1053” initiative from its status as the plan for 2012 – count on it! to Option A for 2012. Or B. Or whatever. What matters is this: Eyman has been asking his followers to give him money for an initiative he said was going to spend two years promoting. But now that initiative is just one of many initiatives that Eyman might push. What’s up with that?

A year ago, Tim Eyman stood in the foyer of Secretary of State Sam Reed’s office in the Legislative Building with Jack and Mike Fagan at his side and pledged to spend the next two years preparing to “renew the two-thirds”. We were there. We witnessed it. And we subsequently witnessed Eyman’s attempt to raise money for the effort. “We are raising funds for the next 2/3’s initiative,” Eyman said in a February 2nd, 2011 email to followers in which he declared he was “hitting the big panic button”.

If Eyman had actually leveled with his supporters and been totally honest, he would have said something along the lines of, “We’re raising money for my benefit. I’ll decide what to do with the money after  you give it to me. We might use some of it to do a Son of 1053, but we might not, because I could change my mind depending on whether a ‘super supporter’ steps up to help make this possible. Either way… please send your most generous contribution to me right now!”

But honesty is not what Tim Eyman is known for. He’s a master salesman with a gift for deception. His conscience is apparently three sizes (or maybe three hundred sizes) too small, because it only kicks in when he’s telling whoppers, and only after he’s been called out – as he was during the Initiative 747 campaign, when Christian Sinderman accused Eyman of pocketing his own supporters’ money for his personal use.

(Eyman lied to his supporters for months about taking the money before finally confessing the truth in February 2002.)

As we have amply documented above, Eyman told the press, the public, and his supporters last year that he was doing a “Son of 1053” initiative this year. He attempted to raise money for the effort. But evidently, the fundraising wasn’t going well, because Eyman quit talking about “raising funds for the next 2/3’s initiative” during the I-1125 campaign. And he’s not moving ahead with “Son of 1053” now.

It appears that privately, he is in now in auctioneer mode, attempting to sell his wares –  er, initiatives – to a sugar daddy, hence the “to be determined” posture. Eyman knows that without a sugar daddy, he can’t qualify “Son of 1053” – or any other initiative he might like to run – for the ballot. And he doesn’t want to mount a signature drive only to have it end in failure. So he is keeping his powder dry until he can close a sales pitch with a wealthy benefactor.

It’s probable than he’ll find someone… he got the gambling industry to finance I-892, Michael Dunmire to finance I-900/I-917/I-985/I-1033, big banks and oil companies to finance I-1053, and Kemper Freeman to finance I-1125.

Eyman could level with his followers about all this. But that would mean the press and the public would find out, too. He’d have to admit that his initiative factory isn’t grassroots. So he’s keeping his own people in the dark. Pretty sad.

January 9th, 2012

Whatever happened to “Let the voters decide?”

Statements & AdvisoriesThreat Analysis

Earlier today, in lieu of holding a press conference at Secretary of State Sam Reed’s office in the Legislative Building to discuss his plans for 2012, Tim Eyman drafted and began sending out an email to his followers (and the press) announcing that he intends to be active in opposing any and all efforts to raise revenue in the Legislature during the sixty-day session that begins today and will last until at least mid-March.

Emphasis is ours:

One of our top priorities in 2012 is beating back tax increases (hence our PAC’s name change to:  Voters Want More Choices “No New Taxes 2012”). That means fighting against the umpteen bills being pushed in Olympia to raise taxes (Democrats’ new income tax bill, Democrats’ new property tax increase, Democrats’ new capital gains tax bill).

But we feel it is particularly important for us to take the lead in opposing the two tax increases being put on the ballot (Gregoire’s 10% sales tax on the April ballot and her task force’s $21 billion tax increase on the November ballot). We don’t want them increased in Olympia and we don’t want them put on the ballot (and if they are put on the ballot, we want voters to vote no).

That last sentence sure is a doozy, isn’t it? But at least Tim Eyman is being honest for a change. For years, he’s falsely said or implied that he doesn’t want to make raising revenue impossible – merely difficult. He’s also said or implied that he has no objection to elected leaders asking voters to raise revenue. For instance, in 2002, just days before Permanent Defense was founded, he told the Seattle Weekly:

We’ve always contended that any tax increase that any taxing district wants to support is fine, as long as it goes to the voters.

But today, we’ve seen Tim Eyman’s true colors. Mr. “Let the Voters Decide” has just said, plainly and unequivocally, that he is against letting voters decide whether to save services that are on the chopping block. He doesn’t want to put the matter in the people’s hands. His direct democracy evangelism is a sham, and this is simply the latest proof. A true citizens should be in in charge missionary would welcome the Legislature’s interest in referring a question on any topic of importance to the people. But the initiative and referendum, to Eyman, are simply a means to an end… the end being the destruction of Washington’s common wealth.

Inflicting sabotage is always what Eyman’s initiative factory has been about. All of his initiatives have been deliberately written to cause harm.

As Eyman’s own words demonstrate, there are no circumstances under which his dogma – which he shares with his idol Grover Norquist – condone taxes being raised.

It doesn’t matter that our social safety net is in danger of being eviscerated. It doesn’t matter that Washington is failing to adequately provide for the education of its youth, as our state Supreme Court just ruled. It doesn’t matter that the state and its many local governments continue to lay off public workers, making our unemployment problem even worse. As far as Tim Eyman is concerned, an all-cuts budget would be welcome news. In fact, his goal is to ensure that this happens… he wants Washington’s government wrecked so it cannot serve its people.

The remaining reporters who still cover state affairs as part of the Capitol press corps owe it to their readers to challenge and expose Eyman when he masquerades as a proponent of direct democracy with fake slogans such as “let the people decide”. Empowerment and self-determination are the opposite of Eyman’s real agenda, and the media ought to know that by now.

January 6th, 2012

First day to file initiatives to the people in 2012 is recycling day for Tim Eyman

Threat Analysis

Today was the first day to file initiatives to the people for the 2012 ballot, and Tim Eyman took advantage, filing five different drafts electronically with Secretary of State Sam Reed’s office. The Elections Division has not yet made the drafts available for download, so we haven’t read through them yet, but we do know what they’re about.

Of the five initiative drafts Eyman filed today, four are clearly retreads of measures he’s filed before. Here’s a short history of each recycled scheme.

  • Eyman’s first draft, titled “Protect the Initiative Act” appears to be a rehashed version of several measures that he’s filed over the years, but never attempted to qualify for the ballot. Previous measures with near-identical titles sought to expand the amount of time allowed to gather signatures on a measure and make it easier for petitioners to file frivolous claims of harassment with the police. There are probably similar ideas in this incarnation.
  • Eyman’s second draft, titled “Son of 1053”, is obviously intended to be the sequel to Eyman’s unconstitutional, undemocratic I-1053 (2010), which itself was the sequel to I-960 (2007), which was based off of I-807 (2003). But even I-807 was a recycled initiative. It was a do-over of Linda Smith’s I-601, which narrowly passed in 1993 but was later suspended by the Legislature. I-601 was the right wing’s first successful effort to subvert Article II, Section 22 of the Constitution and require two-thirds votes for revenue increases.
  • Eyman’s third draft doesn’t have a title, but it’s about vehicle fees. More specifically, it’s about capping vehicle fees as thirty dollars. Where and when have we seen this movie before? Oh yeah… here! In 1999 (I-695), 2002 (I-776) and 2006 (I-917). The first of those three (I-695) was a clone of a measure Eyman had filed the year before, and the idea for that came from the gubernatorial campaign of Republican Jim Gilmore of Virginia.
  • Eyman’s fourth draft also doesn’t have a title; but it does have a subject: “automatic ticketing cameras”. This appears to be a measure that would restrict or ban red light cameras and other kinds of cameras set up to catch people who break traffic laws. It’s no secret that Eyman dislikes red light cameras (and their cousins). He tried to impose limits on cities’ deployment of red light cameras with a provision in I-985 (2008), but voters overwhelmingly rejected the measure. Since then, he’s fought cameras in Mukilteo and attached his name to anti-camera efforts in Bellingham, Longview, Monroe, Lynnwood, and Redmond.

We haven’t reviewed the “Stop Government Fraud Act” yet, but supposedly it would create a new government agency headed by an inspector general to investigate fraud. No doubt Eyman’s proposal requires some percentage of some existing revenue source to be dedicated to this new agency, much like how I-900 (2005) required part of the sales tax to go the state auditor’s office. Wonder how Tim’s going to spin this proposal? He’s always saying that government can’t be trusted. Wouldn’t creating a new government agency simply result in more government that can’t be trusted?

At a press conference in January last year, Eyman, flanked by his cohorts, said he would be running an I-1053 clone in 2012. At the time, he did not announce an effort for 2011 (though he later secured money from Kemper Freeman, Jr. to run I-1125). Unless Eyman decides to run one of these other schemes – or something altogether different – any forthcoming announcement will really just be a re-announcement of what he’s already committed to doing.

July 8th, 2011

NPI’s Permanent Defense responds to submission of signatures for I-1125

Statements & AdvisoriesThreat Analysis

This morning, at the Secretary of State’s Elections Annex at Union and Cherry in Olympia, Tim Eyman and his associates turned in an estimated three hundred and twenty plus thousand signatures for Initiative 1125, paid for by developer and Bellevue Square owner Kemper Freeman, Jr. Although the Secretary of State still has to conduct a random sample check to verify that enough valid signatures were submitted, it’s a safe bet that Eyman has succeeded in buying his way onto the ballot again.

“The only reason we’re voting on Tim Eyman’s latest scheme to mess with plans to replace crumbling infrastructure like the SR 520 Floating Bridge is because one wealthy developer sunk half a million dollars into it,” said NPI founder Andrew Villeneuve.

“Around this time of year, Tim likes to put a number on a whiteboard and say, ‘Look at how many people signed and are in support of our initiative!’ But during the signature drive for I-1125 (as with other Eyman measures) paid petitioners working for Eyman cajoled people into signing by telling them that they don’t have to decide whether they support the measure or not because signing it only puts it on the ballot. It’s one of their favorite tactics for convincing people to succumb to the pressure they exert.”

“The people Eyman uses to get signatures just want to make a buck. They don’t necessarily believe in his cause. They may not even be Washington residents.”

“What we hope people understand is that there is no grassroots uprising going on here. The only reason Eyman was able to do a signature drive is because Kemper was willing to pay for one.”

“Tim frequently says he wants to have a debate about the merits of his ideas, but he ignores the fact that he pays for petitioners to go out and deceive people. We know people are being misled and lied to because we’ve documented it. We saw petitioners for I-1125 in action this spring. We recorded their sales pitch. And they weren’t even trying to accurately represent what I-1125 would do.”

State Treasurer Jim McIntire has already warned that I-1125’s passage could hinder Washington State’s ability to finance critical projects like the new Evergreen Point Floating Bridge using tolls. If I-1125 prevents the state from collecting the needed toll revenue to finance the project, it could actually increase the cost to taxpayers across the state, because SR 520 is a state facility.

“The Legislature did not draw up the plans for tolling SR 520 overnight,” Villeneuve noted. “Years of public input have gone into designing this project and its financing mechanism. That’s why construction hasn’t been started sooner. Now, the state is trying to move forward and get this done, and Eyman is trying to throw a monkey wrench into it.”

“Tim is constantly admonishing the Legislature for ignoring the will of the voters. In reality, the Legislature does listen. Lawmakers were paying attention when voters said NO to Initiative 912 (the 2005 fuel tax rollback), which Tim strongly supported and wrongly predicted would pass. Lawmakers were paying attention when voters said YES to Sound Transit 2, which Tim fiercely opposed and wrongly predicted would fail.”

“And they were paying attention when voters overwhelmingly rejected Eyman’s own Initiative 985 – his last attempt to mess with transportation planning and restrict tolling – in the same election.”

“It’s funny… he didn’t mention any of those recent votes at his press conference today.”

As NPI’s Permanent Defense has previously pointed out, I-1125 contains a clause intended to mess with Sound Transit’s East Link project, a major part of the voter-approved Sound Transit 2 measure. The clause seeks to prevent the state Department of Transportation from transferring part of the Homer M. Hadley Memorial Bridge over to Sound Transit, even though that is exactly what a longstanding agreement between King County, Seattle, Mercer Island, and the state government calls for.

The clause is no doubt one of Bellevue Square owner Kemper Freeman Jr.’s favorite parts of the initiative. (Freeman despises Sound Transit, can’t stand the thought of light rail coming to Bellevue, and has actively worked to try and stop ST from fulfilling its promises to voters and its obligations to taxpayers.)

NPI’s Permanent Defense intends to work closely alongside the many other individuals and organizations coming together to vigorously oppose Initiative 1125.

“Over the next few months, we’ll be working to help the people of this great state make sense of the cost and consequences of Tim Eymans’ Initiative 1125,” Villeneuve said. “We’re confident that if voters understand the ramifications, they’ll handily vote this ill-conceived scheme down and keep projects like the new Evergreen Point Floating Bridge on track.”

May 4th, 2011

I-1125 appears to contain an anti-East Link clause

Rethinking and ReframingThreat Analysis

It turns out that Initiative 1125, the toll-restricting measure that Tim Eyman says he intends to qualify for the ballot this year, wouldn’t just restrict the Legislature’s ability to raise revenue for transportation projects using tolls.

A review of the measure’s text indicates it also seeks to shut down Sound Transit’s voter-approved East Link project in a dubious, iffy fashion.

(East Link is Sound Transit’s endeavor to bring light rail to Mercer Island, Bellevue, and Redmond via Interstate 90).

It’s no secret that Tim Eyman and his backers, Michael Dunmire and Kemper Freeman, Jr., despise Sound Transit.

Dunmire and Freeman actually took Sound Transit to court last year to seek a ruling preventing the Homer M. Hadley Memorial Bridge from being used for East Link, even though the bridge was mostly built using federal dollars and the stipulation that part of the bridge deck be turned over to rail transit as soon as possible.

The Supreme Court just last week dismissed that lawsuit, but Dunmire, Freeman, and Eyman are undeterred.

The pertinent section of I-1125 is as follows:

NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. State government, the department of transportation, and other agencies may not transfer or use gas-tax-funded or toll-funded lanes on state highways for non-highway purposes.

Translation: No portion of a state highway can be dedicated to high-capacity transit, period, even if the state is compensated for the portion of the highway that it turns over (the wording above spells out no exceptions).

This section is meant to mess with East Link, but what Eyman and the law firm he retains don’t take into account is that Interstate 90 is a federally designated highway. The section that runs from Seattle to just east of Spokane is owned and operated by Washington State, but it was built with federal money and belongs to the Interstate Highway System. Consequently, the state cannot simply do whatever it wants with I-90, even though it is responsible for the aforementioned portion of I-90.

Decades ago, when Tim Eyman was just a boy, the state, King County, and the cities of Mercer Island and Bellevue signed an agreement which explicitly stated that the bridge deck would be built so that the portion now known as the express lanes could be dedicated to rail transit:

The I-90 facility shall be designed and constructed so that conversion of all or part of the transit roadway to fixed guideway is possible.

An update to this 1976 agreement, signed in 2004 by the aforementioned parties and Sound Transit, laid out a specific plan for making this conversion, which is presently being carried out. Eyman and his wealthy backers desperately want to nix the plan before Sound Transit can get East Link off the ground.

If passed and enforced, I-1125 would also presumably prevent light rail from being added to the new Evergreen Point Floating Bridge, which is currently being designed to replace the existing SR-520 facility over Lake Washington.

You are here:

Newsroom > Threat Analysis

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