Next week, as it approaches the final day of the 2024 short session, the Democratic-run Washington State Legislature is poised to do something unusual: vote to adopt a set of three right wing initiatives into law.
The trio of measures are half of a slate of six schemes sponsored by Republican State Party Chair Jim Walsh (who’s also a state representative) and funded almost exclusively by one of his principal donors, hedge fund manager Brian Heywood.
Regular readers are likely familiar with this slate of initiatives, as I’ve been writing about them here for many months. They were all certified as initiatives to the Legislature back in January after a combined signature drive that Heywood put up millions of dollars for. Heywood is hardly the first millionaire to purchase consideration of an idea he wanted to get passed into law, but he is the first rich guy in Washington to purchase a set of six different schemes simultaneously.
Here are the numbers for all six, and a description of each:
- Initiative 2117 — repeals the Climate Commitment Act, which is raising funds to fight climate damage
- Initiative 2109 — repeals billions in education funding by eliminating the capital gains tax on the wealthy
- Initiative 2124 — sabotages the WA Cares plan to help Washingtonians afford long-term care
- Initiative 2113 — rolls back restrictions on police pursuits that are making our communities safer
- Initiative 2111 — bars the state and local governments from levying taxes on income as most other states in the country do
- Initiative 2081 — primarily restates existing laws concerning parental notification, might be used by some families to force public schools to give parents information that students may not want shared
Since even before the measures qualified, progressive strategists and lawmakers have been assessing them and contemplating what to do with them.
Because they’re initiatives to the Legislature, they were sent to the House and Senate first, rather than being sent straight to the general election ballot. The Legislature must either (a) adopt them into law, (b) forward them to voters, or (c) forward them to voters with alternatives. Option B is the default — it becomes the choice if the House and Senate can’t agree and they take no action.
The Legislature has a decades-long tradition of mostly going with Option B for initiatives. But as I alluded to above, a consensus has emerged that Heywood and Walsh’s slate should be cleaved in two. The first three initiatives, which would slash state revenue and harm public services, will go to the ballot. Those are Initiatives 2117, 2109, and 2124. The latter three — Initiatives 2113, 2111, and 2081 — won’t. They’ll instead get added to our state’s body of laws.
Why would Democratic legislators want to adopt half of Brian Heywood and Jim Walsh’s bad ideas into law? Well, there are three main reasons:
- First, Democratic legislators have concluded that two of the six initiatives (I‑2111, I‑2081) are mostly symbolic and won’t cause immediate damage to our communities — they seem to have been conceived as messaging tools — while the harm that a third might cause (I‑2113) would be limited.
- Second, adopting these measures into law eliminates an organizing and mobilizing opportunity for the right wing in the coming presidential election, because these measures won’t get considered by voters.
- And third, not sending them to the ballot guarantees the Democratic-controlled Legislature’s ability to amend them without Republican lawmakers’ consent for the next two legislative sessions.
Let’s discuss each of these reasons in more depth.
1. I‑2113, I‑2111, and I‑2081 wouldn’t cause the same widespread harm that their sibling measures would
Fiscal analysis has confirmed that Initiatives 2117, 2109, and 2124 would cause a lot of damage to Washington State’s common wealth, while credible public opinion research suggests Walsh and Heywood are going to have a tough time persuading voters to pass them. Accordingly, Democratic leadership isn’t even bothering to give those measures any consideration. They’re being sent straight to voters.
However, Initiatives 2113, 2111, and 2081 don’t attempt to repeal existing state revenue, so they wouldn’t cause the widespread harm that their siblings would.
Of the three, I‑2113 has the most potential for harm, because it would roll back some of Washington’s restrictions on reasonable police pursuits. However, I‑2113 doesn’t rescind all of the provisions of the laws previously passed by the Legislature on police pursuit, nor does it touch other police reform laws.
I‑2111, meanwhile, seeks to ban something we don’t yet have — an income tax — so it wouldn’t have any immediate, practical ramifications.
Similarly, I‑2081 has been assessed to be a measure that mostly restates existing law governing parents’ rights and access to information about their children.
Our team knows from twenty-two years of running our Permanent Defense project that not all right wing initiatives are equally harmful. When facing more than one, prioritizing the defeat of the worst ones is a logical move.
We’ve done that ourselves — in 2005, for instance, we opposed both Tim Eyman’s I‑900 and John Carlson and Kirby Wilbur’s I‑912, but most of our energy went to stopping I‑912, an effort to rescind gas tax increases, which voters rejected.
2. Passing I‑2113, I‑2111, and I‑2081 into law now will keep them off the coming presidential election ballot
Statewide initiatives enjoy top billing on general election ballots under existing state law. They appear first, even above President of the United States and Governor. By adopting I‑2113, I‑2111, and I‑2081 into law, the House and Senate will be able to keep them off the ballot, chopping in half the amount of ballot real estate that Walsh and Heywood will get. This also averts the need to run statewide campaigns against them, and it eliminates an organizing and mobilizing opportunity for the Washington State Republican Party in the presidential election.
To Democratic and progressive strategists, I‑2081 and I‑2111 in particular appear to have been crafted to be irresistible “messaging” initiatives, intended to help get Republican voters excited about turning out in the presidential election and give Republican legislators and activists election results they can crow about amidst a wave of massively disappointing results in candidate elections.
I‑2081 and I‑2111 are in some ways similar Tim Eyman’s push polls (“advisory votes”), which our team led a five year-effort to repeal. They pose what looks like a binding question concerning public policy or public finance, but regardless of how voters respond, there’s no immediate, real-world impact.
I‑2113 is different. It’s not primarily symbolic like the other two, but the right wing is obviously prepared to use it as an organizing and mobilizing opportunity as well. Of Walsh and Heywood’s slate, I‑2113 arguably has the best ballot title — the words voters would see representing the measure if it went to the ballot.
3. If I‑2111, I‑2113, and I‑2081 are voted into law now, they can be amended by majority vote in 2025 or 2026
Now we come to the final big reason to take this action. By adopting I‑2081, I‑2111, and I‑2113 into law now, the Democratic Legislature guarantees that it can amend these measures in 2025 or 2026, whereas if any were to pass this November, they would require a two-thirds vote of both chambers to change under the Washington State Constitution for a period of two years.
While it’s possible Democrats could win a supermajority of both chambers this November, it’s unlikely. That would mean that Republicans would be able to use their votes to keep I‑2113, I‑2111, and I‑2081 in place as written until 2027 — in the event that Walsh and Heywood and the Washington State Republican Party were successful in getting a majority of voters to approve them.
There is merit to preventing this worst-case scenario.
If it turns out that I‑2111 or I‑2081 cause harm that wasn’t expected or anticipated, the Legislature could simply pass a bill amending them at any time by majority vote, which would then go to Governor Inslee or his successor to be signed into law. I‑2113’s potential for harm is greater, but I‑2113 at least doesn’t force local police departments to be more irresponsible and revert to all of their bad old practices that have led to death and destruction in the past.
NPI’s research has found that a majority of Washingtonians would prefer Democrats remain in control of both chambers of the Legislature in 2025. Republicans’ odds of picking up even one chamber this year are considered pretty much nonexistent by strategists in both parties.
No role for Governor Inslee in making this decision
The Washington State Constitution does not give the governor a role in deciding the fate of initiatives to the Legislature. If the House and Senate approve an initiative, it becomes law. If they send it to the ballot, voters decide its fate. If they send it to the ballot with an alternative, voters answer a two-part question: (1) should either or neither of these proposals be adopted, and (2) if one is to be adopted, which would should it be? Partly because these two-part questions can be confusing, the Legislature has not sent an alternative to the ballot since 1988.
Consequently, Governor Inslee doesn’t have a role in making this decision, although he can weigh in with his thoughts privately or publicly if he wants.
What Walsh and Heywood want
Publicly, Jim Walsh and Brian Heywood are clamoring for all of their initiatives to be voted into law, but they of course don’t expect for that to happen.
They and the House and Senate Republicans have been clamoring for hearings for each for weeks. Democratic legislative leadership has refused to waste time and resources hearing I‑2117, I‑2109, and I‑2124, given that they are not considering adopting them into law or sending them to the ballot with alternatives.
I‑2113, I‑2111, and I‑2081 were all heard this week, with Heywood appearing in front of the Senate Law & Justice Committee to pitch I‑2113.
Privately, they may not be as thrilled about what’s about to happen. They’ll definitely take a public victory lap if I‑2113, I‑2111, and I‑2081 get approved — we’ll hear some gloating and maybe toasts to bipartisanship, since Republicans will likely be united in favor of the initiatives while Democrats could be divided. But they know that the adoption of these measures means they won’t be on the ballot and won’t enjoy the protection of a two-thirds vote to repeal for two years.
NPI’s view
I have written many times here on The Cascadia Advocate that our loyalty is to our values, not to any donor, elected official, or political party. The initiatives proposed by Brian Heywood and Jim Walsh are all in conflict with our values and we are strongly opposed to them. As a matter of principle, our team cannot and will not support the adoption of any of them into law by the Legislature.
However, we will respect the decision our elected representatives make.
If legislators vote I‑2111, I‑2113, and I‑2081 into law — perhaps as soon as Monday — then we will work with them down the road to ensure they don’t harm our communities or our future, and turn our attention to defeating the remaining three that are assured of going to the ballot: I‑2117, I‑2109, and I‑2124. The Defend Washington coalition is re-forming to ensure that Washington is protected from this destructive trio, and we will continue actively participating to ensure it has the resources and effective strategies needed to win in November.