Tim Eyman looks on from the gallery during a hearing regarding one of his initiatives in King County Superior Court, in 2016, in Seattle. Eyman is opposed to legislation this session that would require certain information be provided to the state regarding paid signature gatherers. (Elaine Thompson / Associated Press file photo)

Tim Eyman looks on from the gallery during a hearing regarding one of his initiatives in King County Superior Court, in 2016, in Seattle. Eyman is opposed to legislation this session that would require certain information be provided to the state regarding paid signature gatherers. (Elaine Thompson / Associated Press file photo)

Editorial: Bill would give state initiative law needed tweak

The bill would require paid signature gatherers to provide names and other information to the state.

By The Herald Editorial Board

Initiatives and referendums have an honorable history of more than 100 years in Washington state, offering voters one of the most direct methods of citizen lawmaking. It’s one of 24 states to allow such ballot measures.

As voters must choose to adopt or reject initiatives as presented on the ballot, they are not always the best avenue for lawmaking; the complexities of some issues are better handled in the Legislature where there is an opportunity to address potential problems and make improvements to legislation through debate and amendment by elected representatives.

Yet there’s little doubt that a compelling initiative or referendum can help to increase voter turnout in a particular year.

So the process — giving voters the opportunity to gather signatures for a proposed law in order to place it on the ballot for voters to adopt or reject as law — should be protected. But there remains a need to address concerns with the process, most recently the regulation of paid signature gatherers.

While state law has allowed campaigns to pay signature gatherers since 1994, there have been recent reports of aggressive signature gatherers, who are paid for each signature, harassing and pursuing people in front of supermarkets and retail stores.

It’s no surprise that most of those testifying in support of one bill this session, SB 5397, were representatives of the retail industry, concerned that some paid signature gatherers are driving off customers or putting shoppers in a bad mood.

Many voters will have their own stories where they have felt cornered by a petitioner.

The Senate bill is the survivor among three pieces of legislation that sought more regulation of signature gatherers and other aspects of the initiative process. The legislation, which has passed the Senate and is now under consideration by the House elections committee, seeks to improve public confidence in the initiative process by tightening the rules for paid signature gatherers and those that employ them. It would:

Require a ballot measure sponsor or campaign that employs signature gatherers to disclose to the state Public Disclosure Commission the names, addresses, phone numbers and email address of paid signature gatherers and a list of the measures for which they are collecting signatures.

Requires those employing signature gathers to keep on file the above information, as well as a recent photo, a copy of government-issued ID, documentation that the signature gatherer completed a training program that outlines state rules regarding petitions and signature gathering and confirmation that the signature gatherer has undergone a background check and has not been convicted of fraud, forgery, identity theft or a violation of election laws in the past five years. The information would be retained for two years and made available to the state as requested.

Not surprisingly, Mukilteo’s Tim Eyman, who has turned initiatives into a cottage industry, opposed this and the other bills, one of which would have increased the filing fee to $200 from the current $100, though it would have refunded $100 for initiatives that qualify for the ballot.

Eyman objected to what he believes are onerous hoops that ballot measure sponsors will have to jump through to collect enough signatures to qualify initiatives for the ballot. Eyman is backed in his concerns by the Institute for Justice Washington, a nonprofit public interest law firm that challenges laws it believes limit political speech. The institute criticized SB 5397 as imposing significant burdens on the First Amendment’s free speech rights, specifically in requiring background checks and training.

The concern for the First Amendment is appreciated, but state and federal lawmakers as well as the courts, have recognized the need for limited regulation regarding political speech. The proposed law makes no similar requirement of signature gatherers who are not paid.

And the information and records that would be provided to the Public Disclosure Commission and retained by those employing signature gatherers are very similar to the types of information that paid lobbyists are already expected to provide to the state. Paid lobbyists would seem to be a close cousin to paid signature gatherers.

Of the three pieces of legislation regarding initiatives this year, the surviving bill makes a reasonable request of those who employ signature gatherers — many of whom travel from state to state in a search for work — and should ensure that they know what Washington state law allows and what state voters expect when they are asked for their support.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

The City of Everett is set to purchase two single sidewalk restrooms from Romtec, a company based in Roseburg, Ore., for $315,000. (Romtec)
Editorial: Utilitarian but sturdy restrooms should be a relief

Everett is placing four stalls downtown that should be accessible but less prone to problems.

Schwab: What was lost when doctors stopped making house calls

More than just a convenience, a house call could inform a doctor about the patient’s care at home.

Dowd: Biden could take a lesson from Reagan on pace of travel

In his bid to look energetic, the president is jetting around the globe at a clip Nancy Reagan would not approve of.

Krugman: Public’s mood on economy shows a subtle positive shift

It might not provide much help to President Biden, but it may not be as much of a drag on him, either.

Goldberg: Attack on Pride in Colorado further splits the GOP

The state party president, who is running for Congress, is counting on homophobia to secure the base.

Editorial cartoons for Thursday, June 13

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Stephens: Only way that Biden can win is not to run

The president can only commit to managing threats; his best chance for victory is to leave the ticket.

Krugman: The wealthy’s support of Trump isn’t just about money

They’re also not crazy about those who — like Biden — don’t pay sufficient deference to them.

Bouie: Should wealthy and powerful again put trust in Trump

They stepped away after Jan. 6, but — ignoring their own need for democratic norms — are drawn to autocracy.

Everett principal Betty Cobbs served kids, community for 51 years

Education and community. Those words are the best America has to offer;… Continue reading

Artist Natalie Niblack works amongst her project entitled “33 Birds / Three Degrees” during the setup for Exploring The Edge at Schack Art Center on Sunday, March 19, 2023, in Everett, Washington. The paintings feature motion-activated speakers that play each bird’s unique call. (Ryan Berry / The Herald)
Editorial: For 50 years Schack Art Center there for creation

The art center is more art studio than museum, supporting artists and fostering creativity in kids.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.