The ads to reject Referendum 67 show attorneys at the firm of “Sooem, Settle &Kashin” discussing how they’ll use Referendum 67 to “make a killing” by suing for triple damages.

So I want to counter it with this scene at Multi-State Insurance Co.:

“We’ve got to hold off paying claims as long as possible.”

“That way we can earn interest on people’s money until we have to pay.”

“That’ll give them incentives to settle.”

“Many settle for 10 or 20 cents on the dollar.”

“Don’t most states have laws to let people sue for more money?”

“Not Washington state. People there can’t collect any more than their original claims, no matter how long we delay paying them. That forces them to settle for tiny amounts.”

“But, didn’t Washington’s legislature pass a law to let people sue us for more money if we delay payment?”

“Yes, but we got a referendum on the ballot that would repeal that law.”

“Maybe the insurance companies in Washington will help us defeat the law.”

“No, Safeco and Pemco are staying out of this. They want to work with the Governor and legislature to get a few amendments to the law.”

“We want to get rid of the whole thing, and we have nearly $8 million from out-of-state companies to fight it.”

“We can compare it to the law Californians rejected.”

“That covered suits by third party plaintiffs.”

“We’ll just hope that voters won’t see the difference.”

“We’ll talk about frivolous lawsuits and higher insurance rates.”

“That will happen only if we don’t pay on time.”

“But, that threat will scare people.”

Both sides of the transportation vote

I see both sides of the coming vote on a regional transportation plan.

On one hand, I know we’re often stuck in traffic, but, on the other hand, I don’t want to encourage far-flung sprawl.

I want to build mass transit, but I don’t want to give my money to Sound Transit, whose first visible project was a light-rail line from downtown Seattle to Tukwila. Now Sound Transit wants to build another light-rail line along Interstate 405, when they could put commuter rail on the Burlington Northern line faster and for less money.

I know we have unsafe bridges, but I don’t want a wider Evergreen Point Floating Bridge.

I don’t mind paying a motor-vehicle excise tax, which taxes the driver of a new Jaguar much more than my wife with her 12-year-old Subaru, but I don’t want to raise sales taxes, which already put too much burden on poor and middle-income people.

The writers of Proposition 1 have given almost everyone something to vote for and almost everyone something to vote against.

Evan Smith is the Enterprise Forum editor. Send comments to entopinion@heraldnet.com.