Terror penalty debate begins

By Susanna Ray

Herald Writer

OLYMPIA — Terrorism could become a felony punishable by the death penalty under a new bill state legislators began considering this week.

But doubts about the bill’s effects on terrorism and post-Sept. 11 issues of melding security and freedom mean even more drafts of the bill are likely in addition to the 15 already written.

The anti-terrorism bill, requested by Gov. Gary Locke and Attorney General Christine Gregoire, is intended to discourage terrorism in Washington state by drastically increasing the punishment for acts targeting civilian populations.

"But you know, these guys (terrorists), they are passionate, they’re willing to die for a cause, and when you’re that passionate, you’re not going to pay attention to the penalties of some state law," Rep. Al O’Brien, D-Mountlake Terrace, said Thursday.

O’Brien is a member of the House Select Committee on Community Security, which met Wednesday night for a public hearing on the act, House Bill 2314. "As I walked out of there, I thought, we’re missing the target on this thing. So we’ve got some work to do."

O’Brien and the committee’s chairman, Rep. Christopher Hurst, D-Enumclaw, said the goal of any new law should be to give law enforcement officials the tools they need to prevent terrorism, not just prosecute perpetrators.

"Of course, that gets dicey, because then you’re talking about wiretapping and things like that," O’Brien acknowledged.

Those "dicey" concerns were exactly what worried Jerry Sheehan of the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington.

Nothing happened in Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that wouldn’t have been covered under state or federal law if they had happened here instead of on the East Coast, Sheehan said.

"We’re in a state of national shock. We’re in a state of national post-traumatic stress disorder," Sheehan testified at the meeting. "That’s particularly the time, I believe, that we should step back, take a deep breath, think about what we’re saying and analyze the facts in black and white."

Gregoire agreed with the need for balance.

The state has a duty to protect its citizens from terrorists, but it has a "sacred duty" to protect them from anything that would infringe on their civil liberties, she testified.

"This bill does not criminalize anyone’s political beliefs" or the nonviolent expression of those beliefs, said Dick Van Wagenen with the governor’s office.

Still, Gregoire said, there are gaps in the law that must be filled in to "make sure Washington is not a haven for terrorists."

Under current law, if someone were to send an anthrax-laden letter to a lawmaker, infecting and killing a mail-room employee in Olympia, prosecutors would have a tough time proving first-degree murder because the intent was probably to intimidate rather than to kill, Gregoire said.

Bill supporters want hoaxes covered under the law, too, increasing penalties to make them felonies.

Van Wagenen said the final version of the bill will distinguish between someone with terroristic intent and someone who aims just to be disruptive, such as a student who sets off a stink bomb in school.

While most states are grappling with the same issues that Washington lawmakers are delving into, the concept of terroristic intent is unique to this state’s proposal, said Elaine Rose with the Attorney General’s Office.

Bill supporters want to make sure the penalties won’t be applied to people who are exercising their First Amendment rights.

"Many other states are trying to define terrorism, and they’re running into problems," Rose said.

So rather than attempt to define and punish specific acts of terrorism, bill writers came up with the idea of defining and punishing acts committed with terroristic intent — basically those committed against society as a whole rather than individuals.

But committee members also had some question about that angle.

"It seems to me that, as a public, we really don’t want anthrax letters dropped in the mail, and we don’t care what the person’s intent was," said Rep. Kelly Barlean, R-Langley.

The committee will meet again Tuesday morning.

"We’ll probably work this thing for a couple of weeks before we come up with something solid," O’Brien said. "That hearing raised a lot of questions, frankly."

A birthday frog: Rep. Mike Cooper, D-Edmonds, happily sported a plastic frog on a scooter during Wednesday’s meeting of the House Transportation Committee. Cooper said Rep. Ruth Fisher, D-Tacoma, gave him the frog as a birthday present — he turned 50 that day — because of his efforts to legalize motor scooters. "She calls me Scooter now because I’ve been working on that bill," he said. "I’ve been called worse."

Students push bills: A group of Snohomish High School students lobbied in Olympia on Thursday for bills they had drafted. The seniors did the work as part of their American Government class and then pleaded their bill’s case to local lawmakers, including Sen. Val Stevens, R-Arlington. Among the bills: Brianne Hair, Marissa McLeod and Cora Munson wanted certification of horseback-riding trainers; Kevin Crossman and Jed Hieronymus hoped to legalize marijuana; and Nicole Carlson, Erin Bligh and Nikki Bristol lobbied to make it illegal to sell over the counter diet drugs to kids 17 and under.

You can call Herald Writer Susanna Ray at 360-586-3803 or send e-mail to ray@heraldnet.com.