Author:  Tim Eyeman, August 2005
"Why We Need the Initiative Process"

Last Friday, I was a featured speaker at the National Conference of State Legislators in Seattle. It was a panel discussion on initiatives and whether the process was "destroying representative democracy" or was "a valid voice of the people" -- the other speakers, including the moderator, were openly hostile to the people's initiative while I passionately advocated for it. In a roomful of state house and state senate politicians from throughout the nation, I was clearly the skunk at the party. After my opening statement, which is reprinted below, I was verbally and persistently pummeled during the question and answer session. I loved every minute of it. The initiative process is not defended aggressively enough or often enough. Does my statement below reflect your views on the initiative process? Let me know. STATEMENT BY EYMAN AT CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATORS Without initiatives, government has a monopoly on public policy. Now as we all know, monopolies are inherently arrogant and unresponsive. You don't like what we're doing, you can't go anywhere else. Initiatives provide representative democracy with some healthy competition. And in that competition, representative democracy is monopolizing the marketplace of public policy changes. Think about it, 99.9% of all laws are made by elected officials at the state and local government levels. In contrast, just a couple of initiatives each year ever become law. Yet all we ever hear from elected officials is non-stop whining and moaning and complaining about how initiatives destroy representative democracy, how they make it impossible for elected officials to do their jobs, etc. Gimmee a break. It'd be like Bill Gates & Microsoft wailing about some kid in his garage building his own computer. It's laughable. If there's one thing I'd want to accomplish from today's presentation is to convince as many of you as possible that if you don't like a particular initiative, then pass your own law with your own solution. Accept the challenge. Welcome the competition that initiatives provide and use them to challenge the sacred cows using the legislative process. Because if you don't, if you sit idly by and allow a public policy problem to fester year after year after year, then you cannot legitimately complain about the initiative or the initiative process. Say what you will about initiative sponsors, at least we're trying. We're providing solutions to problems to the public that you've failed to address. INITIATIVES ONLY WORK WHEN ELECTED OFFICIALS FORGET WHO THEY WORK FOR. Over the past seven years, we've pushed and promoted 12 initiatives, 9 have qualified for the ballot, and 6 have been approved (when voters approve this year's initiative requiring performance audits of state and local governments, it'll be 7). Voters have twice approved lowering vehicle license tab fees, twice approved capping the growth of property taxes, rolled back government-sponsored affirmative action, and made it substantially tougher for elected officials to increase taxes and fees. Our initiatives have saved taxpayers over $6 billion so far. The reason we mainly focus on taxes is because in Washington, the average taxpayer is the least represented individual in politics. There are special interest groups for every other cause, business, labor, environmentalists, lawyers, etc. But there are no lobbyists representing taxpayers who are banging on the doors of elected officials. When hearings and votes on tax increases are being held, taxpayers are too busy trying to earn a living and taking care of their families to drive to a legislative hearing to say no to higher taxes. Initiatives are the only way for the average taxpayer to have an equal voice in the process. The initiative process treats everyone the same. With initiatives, my mom's vote in Yakima counts just as much as Queen Christine's vote in Olympia. I love that. One of the reasons I revere initiatives is because of their transparency and consistency. When voters approve an initiative that promises performance audits, or repeals gas taxes, or lowers license tab fees, the initiative delivers on that promise. Initiatives provide a pure, infiltered expression of voters' desire for a particular public policy change. And that policy change is clearly spelled out so the voters can make an informed decision. This is the main reason voters trust initiatives much more than their own elected officials. Think about the contrast: many politicians are anything but transparent and consistent. Take our state's Governor, Queen Christine, for instance: last fall, because she was running against a much more fiscally conservative opponent, she knew she had to promise no new taxes or else she'd lose the election. Her pledge to not increase any taxes clearly provided the margin necessary to be elected/selected Governor. Rightly, voters had a clear expectation that she'd have the courage to govern as she ran. She didn't. If, like any initiative, she had to put in writing her promised public policy changes, a minimum of 60% of voters would have rejected her at the ballot box. Her flip flops weren't courageous - they were arrogant, disrespectful, and dictatorial. She jammed through an agenda that voters never saw and certainly never voted for. It's not courageous to do exactly the opposite of what voters want. Such deception is impossible with initiatives -- there can be no clandestine agenda. With initiatives, what you see is what you get. Another benefit to initiatives is that they allow the voters to learn more about their elected officials. Many candidates for public office prefer to highlight their resumes, pictures of their family, campaign slogans like "Elect me because I'm for democracy, freedom, and the American flag." Gobblygook. Positions on issues are kept hidden from the public. But with initiatives, voters naturally ask candidates, "how are you going to vote on I-900 requiring performance audits of state and local governments?" or "There's an initiative on the ballot that rolls back government-sponsored affirmative action, will you be voting for it?" "Minimum wage, medical use of marijuana, lower gas taxes, $30 tabs, where do you stand on these issues?" Initiatives smoke out the hidden philosophies of candidates. That's a good thing. Now, when it comes to critics of the initiative process, there's always the standard voters-are-stupid argument. I've never understand that one. If voters are really as dumb as critics contend, then why do we let the unwashed masses vote for candidates for office? Under this elitist theory, the last thing we should do is let these supposed morons pick our elected officials, better that only the "smart people" choose them. I simply disagree with this view. I think the voters are smart, common sense folks. And when regular citizens vote on initiatives, they're not influenced by editorials, campaign contributions, or the desire to be reelected. This allows them to vote their conscience and do what's best for the state. I see nothing wrong with voters being given the chance to vote on issues that representative democracy has failed to address. Being an advocate for initiatives clearly makes me the skunk at the party here. But I have the absolute certainty that the voters appreciate and revere the initiative process as much as I do. Thank you.


©2002-2012 Northwest Business Club