Two powerful forces in public schools plus several teachers and Democratic state lawmakers sued today to erase rules requiring a two-thirds majority vote of the Legislature to raise taxes.
The League of Education Voters and the Washington Education Association are the lead plaintiffs in the suit filed in King County. A copy is attached as a PDF.
There are 21 additional plaintiffs including four with ties to Snohomish County — state Reps. Mike Sells, D-Everett, and Cindy Ryu, D-Shoreline, and public school teachers Ryan Painter of Arlington and Kim Bielski of Bothell.
The essence of the lawsuit is not new. Its authors consider the supermajority requirement to be unconstitutional. They contend it improperly bars the Legislature from even closing tax breaks to raise revenue – tax breaks created on a simple majority vote.
But voters like the rules and have supported them four times, most recently with the passage of Initiative 1053 in 2010.
Here’s an excerpt from the WEA press release.
The plaintiffs believe the statute in question, established through the passage of I-1053, unconstitutionally impairs the ability of state lawmakers to fund public schools, which is the paramount duty of the state.
“Washington’s constitution makes it clear the state’s paramount duty is to ‘make ample provision’ for the education of every child,” said Chris Korsmo, CEO of LEV. “This statute, and similar measures enacted in recent years, hamstrings our state’s ability to invest in the quality public schools our children need to succeed in life.”
WEA President Mary Lindquist said, “This lawsuit reinforces the priority that must be given to public education in the state of Washington. Students, educators, parents, and a group of courageous dedicated legislators are asking for Tim Eyman’s unconstitutional statute to be overturned by the Supreme Court so our public schools and communities can be stronger, and our students ready for 21st Century challenges.”
Jason Mercier of the Washington Policy Center, who has tracked this issue closely, wrote extensively on the suit in a blog post today. He concludes that the only way to resolve the debate is by letting voters decide whether to add the supermajority rules to the state constitution.
“It is time to put all the cards on the table and let the voters decide with a constitutional amendment in a winner take all pot – not try to deal from the bottom of the deck with the ever elusive judicial card,” he writes.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
