Home
News
Biography
Contact Toby
Endorsements
Register to Vote

View Toby Nixon's page on Facebook
Follow Toby Nixon on Twitter
View Toby Nixon's profile on LinkedIn

Get My
Email Update!

Click Here!



Paid for by
Friends of Toby Nixon
12113 NE 141st St.
Kirkland WA 98034


News from 2006

News Archives


Message from Rep. Toby Nixon to his friends and supporters

Kirkland (November 17, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon sent the following message to his friends and supports this morning.

Dear Friends,

I received in the mail a couple of days ago the November edition of The Washington Newspaper, the monthly newsletter of the Washington Newspaper Publishers Association and Allied Daily Newspapers of Washington. It contains the following column, written by Rowland Thompson, who is executive director of Allied Daily Newspapers and the primary representative of the newspaper industry in Olympia. Rowland and I have gotten to know each other pretty well over the past five years as we worked together to strengthen Washington’s laws requiring government meetings and records to be open to the people.
Toby Nixon: A public servant for all seasons
by Rowland Thompson

     The 2006 Freedom’s Light winner Rep. Toby Nixon is a remarkable guy. His commitment to government service is admirable, and is made all the more so by the loss of income it causes him (he is a high-tech executive) and the time it takes away from his large and devoted family.
     He came by his devotion to his country and state not through some revelation in adulthood, but through a desire that began in childhood.
     An incident that occurred during his first year in the legislature illustrates the genesis of his drive to seek political office. Late one evening after the House of Representatives had adjourned, I needed to speak to him about a problem we had with a bill in a committee on which he served. I didn’t see him head back to his office after the end of the day’s session so I went back to the House Chamber to see if he was still there.
     He was. Two hours after the gavel had fallen and an hour after everyone else had left, he sat in splendid isolation at his desk in the next to the last row. He was working away on his computer and reading from sheets of paper on his desk.
     Being a lobbyist means sitting and waiting for people while they do things more important than talking to you, so I sat in the gallery about 50 feet away and 20 feet above his head. I hoped he’d look up and make eye contact.
     One of the doorkeepers came by and asked me if I was waiting for Toby, and when I said I was he said he’d go down and let Toby know I was up in the gallery. He said that if he didn’t, I’d have a long wait on my hands because Toby worked late on the floor most nights when there were House sessions.
     After he went down, Toby looked up and motioned me down and we had our conversation. At the end I asked him why he worked at his desk on the floor of the House, when it couldn’t be very convenient or conducive to getting much done. His answer surprised me both for its honesty and how it revealed the boy within the man.
     He said that in childhood, unlike most boys his age, he didn’t dream of heroics on the sports field or a career in one of the flashier professions involving sirens or side arms. His dream was being elected to government, and he had achieved it. He said he wanted to feel every moment of it because the voters who had sent him there could just as easily return him to private life in the next election and put someone else’s legs under the desk he had just gotten up from. He said that sitting at that desk in that beautiful and grand room made him feel the ambition to do more and the responsibility to do it right, but if it ended he would have experienced all that his time afforded him.
     He was so matter of fact and humble in his delivery of this revelation that I didn’t react much, but I have thought a lot about it since. The main thought I have about it today is that come January, after his successful run for the Senate, he will be tucking his toes under a new back row desk across the Rotunda.
     Congratulations on your well deserved award, Toby, and good luck, Senator Nixon.
I have indeed sat on the floor of the House many times late into the evening, just as Rowland describes. When I’d finish my work, I’d always take a few minutes to just look around the room, to study the beautiful ceiling and the exquisite trim work and the furnishings and even the light fixtures, taking in every detail. I’d think about the supreme honor and privilege it was for me –- me, from a poor family, a welfare kid, son of a disabled father, who nobody would have anticipated ever would be even allowed to enter into such a place –- to serve as a member of the legislature. Each time, I would contemplate the sacrifices that had been made by the Founders and our veterans and everyone else who had made it possible for that place to exist and for me to be there, and renew my commitment to do my best to uphold the principles on which our nation was founded and that made it great.

As Rowland wrote, however, the possibility always existed that the voters would “return [me] to private life in the next election and put someone else’s legs under the desk”. Rowland’s prediction notwithstanding (his deadline was obviously prior to November 7), the voters appear to have made just that choice. The first count on election night was distressing, but we had much hope that the later absentee and provisional ballots would favor me. While the percentage did improve, and in at least one daily count I did get more votes than my opponent, I would now need to get nearly 80% of the vote on the remaining uncounted ballots in order to win –- and that’s very unlikely to happen. I have already met with my opponent, acknowledged the likelihood that he will be certified as our next senator on November 28, and offered my assistance and advice to him as he undertakes this most important responsibility. I only hope he values it as much as I have.

I want to take this opportunity to publicly thank all those who devoted so much of their money, time, talents, energy, and hard work to this year’s campaign as well as previous campaigns. I always hesitate to try to name everyone, but I must thank Eric Rohrbach, my campaign manager and most trusted advisor; Gerri Kirchner, my campaign treasurer for the past seven years, close personal friend and neighbor; Terri Ryan, who for several years has contributed her graphic design skills in putting together many of our campaign mailings; Debbie Tainter, who labored many hours on mailings and other tasks; Jack and Maureen Richardson, for running the best darn sign shop in the world and for so much else; Dale Edmonds for handling all the requests from voters for signs; and to all those who delivered those signs and posted others including Mike Wert, Arthur Best, Ted Tax, Mark Isaacs, Lowell Bergseid, Brent Harlin, Dan Farrer, Rick Miller, Bill Dorsey, Ron Braun, Phil Murray, Mark Higginbotham, John Vasko, Pat Young, Dan Griner, Keith Breinholt, Erik Moseid, K-Y Su, and Dave Griffin. I appreciate the hard work by all the PCOs who knocked on doors and delivered literature. I appreciate the dozens of Inglemoor High School students who came out and waved signs with us in the closing days of the campaign. I appreciate the advice and counsel and friendship of our district chair Dollie Kosters, Senator Bill Finkbeiner, Councilmember Kathy Lambert, Scott Jewett, Brett Bader, Jeffrey Possinger, Tim Lee, and so many others. Thanks to the nearly 500 individuals, families, and organizations who donated nearly $200,000 to the campaign to help us get our message out. And of course I could not have done anything without the love and support of my wife Irene, who is so tolerant of the thousands of hours I spend away from home serving and campaigning, and who feels as strongly as I do about the need for principled leadership in government.

Many people have inquired about my future plans. First, let me dispel the rumor going around, that has made its way to me through several routes, that some are talking about me serving as state party chair –- that is not on the list for consideration. I’m looking forward to being able to spend more time at home with my wife and children during the coming Christmas season than I have for the past five. I have a lot of urgent work to do at Microsoft that will get more of my attention. I have many responsibilities at church, including directing one choir and singing in two others right now. I serve on the boards of three different non-profits, four if you count my homeowner association; I particularly plan to increase the work I do in the Washington Coalition for Open Government, and have volunteered to chair their Government committee, encouraging legislators and other government officials to strengthen and comply with our open government laws. I will continue to make my opinions known through blogs and newspaper columns whenever possible. I plan to continue working on the issue of annexation into Kirkland of Kingsgate, North Juanita, and Finn Hill. And I will be monitoring what goes on in Olympia, consulting with friends and advisors, and assessing future opportunities for service in elected office. I don’t know what the future holds, but I do know that I’m not done yet.

I look forward to sitting on the floor of the House at least one more time before my term ends on January 8.

Best regards,

        -- Toby

(return to top)


Nixon Responds to Further False Statements by Democrats

    Kirkland (November 5, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon, candidate for State Senator in the 45th legislative district, on Sunday responded to false statements regarding his positions on water pollution, stem cell research, vehicle emission standards, and other topics. His open letter, emailed to Senator Karen Keiser, chair of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee and controller of The Roosevelt Fund (the Senate Democrats' Political Action Committee), and to Eric Oemig, Nixon's opponent in the race for 45th District Senate, was copied to political reporters throughout the state. The text is as follows.

Dear Senator Keiser and Mr. Oemig:

     I cannot believe the lies you are telling to the voters of the 45th District. It is appalling that you are so desperate to win that you find it necessary to distort my record and positions on the issues, and twist the plain meanings of bills, to the extent you have. Here are the lies in your latest hit piece and the truth about those issues.

CLAIM: “Toby Nixon voted against having clean drinking water for Washington”

     This is a LIE. The bill you reference, HB 1458, has NOTHING to do with “drinking water”. It has to do with failing septic systems that might be potentially leaking into PUGET SOUND. Puget Sound is SALT WATER. We DO NOT DRINK FROM PUGET SOUND. This is intentional inflammatory misrepresentation of the subject of the bill.
     In addition, this statement is also a LIE because I voted for HB 1458, a plain fact that is right there in the bill history. You make reference to an early vote on the bill in March 2005, and, yes, I voted No on the bill at that time – because the bill as presented to us was FLAWED. It was flawed in that it would have turned over the job of inspecting all the septic systems in the 12 counties surrounding Puget Sound to the STATE Department of Health; I did NOT want to grow the state bureaucracy to that extent. The bill failed in the DEMOCRAT-CONTROLLED SENATE because of its flaws (it got to 2nd Reading, but couldn’t get the votes so it was never brought to the floor). We went back and fixed the bill so that the inspections are done by county health departments with reporting to the state. Once that was changed, I voted FOR the bill, on February 11, 2006, and the bill passed the Senate as amended. It’s right there in the bill history; I voted FOR the bill that you claim I opposed. You LIED about what the bill does, and you LIED in saying that I voted against it when I actually voted FOR the bill that passed.

CLAIM: “Toby Nixon believes that big businesses that operate these plants shouldn’t be subject to government testing”

     This is a LIE. This makes it sound like HB 1458 was about large privately-owned sewage treatment plants, and that I caved in to “big business” so those plants wouldn’t be regulated. That is NONSENSE. HB 1458 is about inspections of individual residential septic tank systems. Large wastewater treatment plants, whether public or private, have MUCH stricter standards than septic systems, and there has not been any finding that large public or private wastewater treatment systems are the cause of pollution in Puget Sound -- the water that comes out of them is nearly drinking-water quality. The issue is and always has been failing SEPTIC TANKS and SEPTIC FIELDS. These have nothing to do with big business. My vote on HB 1458 had NOTHING TO DO with who owns or operates the septic systems to be inspected. I SUPPORT THE INSPECTIONS, but I opposed hiring hundreds of new employees at the STATE Department of Health in order perform a task that has always been done by COUNTY health departments.

CLAIM: “Nixon voted against stem cell research, even though this could help fight diseases like Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s.”

     This is a LIE. Although Democrats like to characterize HB 1268 as a vote for or against stem cell research, IT WAS NOT. The bill did not authorize stem cell research. It did not ban stem cell research. It did not fund stem cell research. A vote against the bill was not a vote “against stem cell research” in any way. The bill would have created an advisory committee on stem cell research practices, and required owners of leftover embryos from in-vitro fertilization to be given information about their rights to those embryos. But the bill was FLAWED because while it bans human cloning for reproductive purposes, it would have allowed human cloning for organ harvesting. I think most people would be rightly appalled if they knew about that provision of the bill – and that Democrats support a bill that would allow fetuses to be killed so that their organs can be harvested. I voted against allowing human cloning for the purpose of organ harvesting. I would have voted FOR the bill if the provision related to human cloning had been fixed (because I supported everything else in the bill), but the bill sponsor refused even a minor amendment that would have corrected this flaw. HB 1268 FAILED in the DEMOCRAT-CONTROLLED SENATE because of its flaws. And even though the bill FAILED, stem cell research continues in Washington to this day.

CLAIM: “Nixon voted against a bill to crack down on methamphetamine producers.”

     This is a LIE. This language implies that I voted against increasing penalties on meth producers or something like that, which is false; whenever I’ve been presented with a bill that really cracks down on meth producers (such as increasing penalties for producing meth with children in the home), I have voted for it. But the referenced bill (HB 2266) had nothing whatsoever to do with any “crack down” on meth producers. What the bill does do is to limit the amount of COLD MEDICINE that you can buy, and it requires you to produce identification and a log be kept of who makes purchases of cold medicine – a log that itself is an easy source of information for identity theft. I oppose criminalizing the purchase of legal, beneficial substances, or treating customers like they are potential criminals, just because the substances MIGHT be used to produce drugs. There must be a stop to this hysteria of banning the possession of anything that just might be used in the production of illegal drugs. Most people I talk to think the restrictions on buying Sudafed are ridiculous, and they’re right.


CLAIM: “Nixon opposes safer, tougher vehicle emission standards”

     This is a LIE. I SUPPORT tougher vehicle emission standards, but I believe that those standards should be imposed at the FEDERAL LEVEL so that there is a level playing field between states – we should not impose higher costs on just our in-state businesses and cause them to be less competitive with rivals in other states (and vehicles meeting these standards are predicted to cost as much as $1,500 more than vehicles meeting current standards). Also, this bill does not actually SET any standards – what it does do is turn over the power to set Washington’s vehicle emission standards to an UNELECTED BUREAUCRACY IN CALIFORNIA (the California Air Resources Board) over which Washington citizens have ABSOLUTELY NO CONTROL – an unconstitutional abdication of the responsibility of the Washington State Legislature to control the laws of this state. The Washington State Administrative Procedures Act lays out very specific requirements for the rulemaking procedures that must be followed for rulemaking that is delegated by the legislature, and it is impossible for the California Air Resources Board to meet the requirements of the Washington state administrative procedures act. Any rules adopted by CARB would thus be illegal under Washington State Law because they were not adopted using our processes. Finally, the California emission standards are the subject of a federal lawsuit because the Congress has pre-empted all state regulation in this area (the area of fuel economy standards, and the fact is that a carbon dioxide emission standard IS a fuel economy standard); we should not reference a California rule that is at risk of being overturned until the legality of the rule is established. I support the PRINCIPLES behind HB 1397 (higher fuel economy), but not the way they are implemented in this bill.

CLAIM: “…as well as plans to encourage alternative energy research.”

     This is a LIE. First of all, you reference HB 1397 as the evidence for this statement, but HB 1397 has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with “alternative energy research”. The fact is, I cosponsored HB 1645, requiring school buses to use biodiesel. I voted for HB 1646 in committee, creating tax incentives for alternative fuels. I voted for HB 2393, creating a grant and loan program for establishment of alternative fuel research and development projects. I voted for HB 2775 in committee, creating the Washington bioenergy loan program. I co-sponsored HB 2847, extending the expiration date of existing clean fuel sales and use tax exemptions. I voted for HB 2437, collecting information needed to determine if state alternative fuel stations can be opened to the general public. I voted for or co-sponsored every alternative-fuel bill and program in the 2005-2006 legislature, with a single exception: the biofuel mandate bill, ESSB 6508 (which the piece does not reference). But even if you had referenced ESSB 6508, that would have also been a LIE, because 6508 had nothing to do with “alternative energy research”. SB 6508 mandates that once the in-state capacity exists to produce biodiesel equivalent to 2% of diesel used in the state, then it becomes mandatory that distributors in the state sell biodiesel equal to 2% of diesel sales, and once in-state capacity exists to produce biodiesel equivalent to 3% of diesel used in the state, then it becomes mandatory that distributors in the state sell biodiesel equal to 5% of diesel sales. I voted against 6508 because there is no price protection whatsoever – even if the spot market price of those last few gallons of biodiesel needed to meet the mandate were $100 per gallon, the mandate would still apply (there’s no price cap or off-ramp as there is in I-937 for renewable energy, which I endorsed). I voted against 6508 because, while it was touted as helping Washington farmers, there is no requirement that any biodiesel produced in Washington be used to meet the sales mandate (and there can’t be such a requirement under federal law). Because of quality and production consistency challenges inherent in any startup business, diesel distributors who are required to meet a hard mandate or face penalties are likely to enter into long-term supply contracts with huge Midwestern biodiesel producers such as ADM and Cargill, and our in-state producers could easily be LOCKED OUT of our own in-state market. This is especially true when the 3% in-state production threshold is met and the 5% sales mandate kicks in – it would be IMPOSSIBLE for in-state producers to fill the mandate at that point, and so supply contracts with out-of-state producers would be required. This has the potential to be terribly damaging to fledgling in-state producers, and we should not adopt feel good bills that have such potential to damage Washington businesses. It is absolutely clear from my voting record that I strongly support alternative fuel research, development, deployment, and encouragement of use by the consumer. I opposed this flawed mandate bill, but that just proves that I actually read the bills and understand what impact they would have rather than voting just on the basis of an attractive bill title.

     I do not know how you sleep at night knowing the extent to which you have lied. EVERY DECLARATIVE STATEMENT IN THIS PIECE IS A LIE, in one way or another. I am very disappointed, Senator Keiser, that as your colleague in the Senate I will never be able to trust a word you say to me, considering the extent to which you have repeatedly lied about what bills do and the way you have distorted my record. I expected more from a fellow board member of the Washington Coalition for Open Government, an organization which is dedicated to the TRUTH. It’s too bad the voters of the 33rd district don’t know the extent to which you have LIED to the voters of other legislative districts, so that they can consider the possibility that you have similarly lied to THEM.

        -- Toby

(return to top)


Nixon Demands Retraction of False Statements by Oemig

    Kirkland (October 24, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon, candidate for State Senator in the 45th legislative district, on Tuesday called upon his opponent Eric Oemig to retract false and misleading campaign advertisements.
     The first false advertisement, which has been circulating in the education community in the 45th district for about two weeks, claims to compare Oemig’s positions on education to Nixon’s voting record and positions on education, but the document is filled with misleading and outright false statements. The second advertisement, recently mailed to voters in the district, contains false and misleading statements about Nixon’s voting record and positions on education and other issues. Among the many faults in the documents are the following:
  • Falsely says Nixon voted against funding for I-728 class size reduction, when Nixon actually voted to preserve such funding.
  • Falsely says Nixon voted against teacher cost-of-living salary adjustments, when Nixon actually voted to preserve COLAs.
  • Falsely says Nixon voted against alternatives to the WASL, when Nixon actually co-sponsored two such bills himself (here and here) and voted for alternative measures bills in both 2005 and 2006.
  • Falsely says Nixon opposes medically-accurate sex education, when Nixon actually co-sponsored and voted for the 2005 bill.
  • Falsely implies that Oemig voted on bills, but he has never been a member of the legislature.
  • Falsely says Nixon is “rigidly anti-choice”, when Nixon’s long-posted statement on the issue is moderate and consistent with the positions of most Americans.
  • Includes data from the Project Vote Smart “National Political Awareness Test” (NPAT) in violation of Project Vote Smart rules, and falsely represents Nixon’s answers on the NPAT for five of the eight questions included.
  • Takes quotations from Nixon’s web site out of context and completely misrepresents their meaning (inappropriate use of ellipses).
“The plain and simple fact is that Eric Oemig is lying to the people of the 45th District,” said Nixon. “He violated the clear prohibition on using Project Vote Smart questionnaire responses in negative campaign advertising, and outright lied about what my responses are on the NPAT survey. He says I voted against bills on certain topics, while I voted for better bills on those same topics, which is extremely misleading. He says I voted against funding teacher salary increases and class size reduction, when my votes were to preserve such funding. I just don’t know how the people of the 45th district could trust a person who breaks legal agreements and outright lies in his campaign advertising.”
     Nixon published today an open letter to the voters of the 45th district explaining Oemig’s false statements and his true positions and voting record, and will be making the information available to voters in the 45th district by direct mail and other means. The letter is available at http://www.tobynixon.com/TobyNixonLetterOnOemigLies.pdf. Attachments to the letter include copies of Oemig’s two advertisements, a point-by-point rebuttal of Oemig’s education advertisement, a public statement from Project Vote Smart condemning Oemig for his use of NPAT data in negative political advertising and for his misrepresentations of that NPAT data, and a copy of Nixon’s web site statement on abortion and reproductive rights.

(return to top)


Heart of America Northwest Names Rep. Nixon “Hanford Clean-Up Hero of the Year”

from Heart of America Northwest “Citizen’s Guide”, October 2006

    Seattle (October 11, 2006) -- State Representative Toby Nixon (R-45, Woodinville) is our 2006 Hanford Clean-Up Hero.
     “Before everyone knew how popular Initiative 297 would be with Washington’s voters, Toby Nixon was working as a Sponsor and lining up other supporters,” said Gerry Pollet, Heart of America Northwest executive director. “That is just one small example of his willingness to stand up for what he believes in.”
     Nixon is actively engaged in defending Initiative 297, agreeing to be a named Defendant Sponsor in the suit to overturn the initiative, filed by the federal Energy Department and Hanford Contractors.
     With the federal Energy Department delaying the emptying of High-Level Nuclear Waste Tanks and building a vitrification plant, Toby’s work to implement the policies of I-297 by having state law require emptying of tanks make him a true “Hanford Clean-Up Hero.”

(return to top)


Nixon remarks on receiving Freedom’s Light Award from the Washington Newspaper Publishers Association

    Kennewick (October 6, 2006) -- At the 119th annual convention of the Washington Newspaper Publishers Association today in Kennewick, State Rep. Toby Nixon (R-45th District) was presented the Freedom’s Light Award, the highest honor for non-journalists given by WNPA. The award honors a Washington resident who has protected or advanced First Amendment interests in the state, a critical aspect of which is access to public information. He joins previous honorees including former Washington Chief Justice James Anderson; Washington Court of Appeal Judge C. Kenneth Grosse; Clyde Ballard, former Speaker of the House; Brian Sonntag, Washington State Auditor; state senators Cal Anderson and Adam Kline; former U.S. House Speaker Thomas Foley; Ronal Serpas, former chief of the Washington State Patrol; Michael Killeen, attorney for Davis Wright Tremaine; and Walt Woodward, former editor and publisher of the Bainbridge Island Review. Here is the text of the remarks made by Rep. Nixon upon receipt of the award:

     Thank you so much for this great honor.
     When I speak about my work in the legislature, especially with groups of schoolchildren, I’m often asked, “What got you interested in politics?” My answer is very simple: Mrs. Edelman and Judge Eaton.
     Mrs. Edelman was my 7th grade social studies and civics teacher at Sequoia Junior High School in Redding, California. She was not easy on us. To pass her class, you had to memorize the preamble to the Constitution, the first couple of paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence, the Gettysburg Address, and all four verses of the National Anthem. Most of the kids thought it was torture, but not me; I fell in love with it –- and I have either run for office myself or helped with some other campaign every year since.
     Judge Richard B. Eaton was a superior court judge in Shasta County, California, also while I was in 7th grade. He was my Boy Scout merit badge counselor for the “Citizenship in the Nation” merit badge.  Judge Eaton wasn’t satisfied with just memorization -– he wanted his scouts to know what the words actually meant. I learned from him that we have natural rights that belong to us by virtue of being human –- rights that aren’t given to us by the government or by the Constitution, but that predate the existence of government: the right to not be killed, the right to do what we wish with our lives so long as we respect the rights of others, the right to enjoy the fruits of our labor and to be secure in our property. I learned that we, the people, created the government to help us defend our rights; that is the purpose of government. I learned that we are all equal as far as the government is concerned:  none of us has God-given authority to rule over the rest, and none of us has any special dispensation of wisdom that entitles us to decide for other people how they should live their lives. I learned that we need to be ever vigilant, because if the government were to ever become destructive of our rights, it was not only our right but our duty to change the government and put it back in its place.
     Wouldn’t it be great if all of our young men and young women came out of seventh grade with such an education?
     These two great people instilled in me a passion that burns in me to this day to preserve what our founders created. Jefferson wrote, “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance”, and I feel that as a personal responsibility. Our founders’ creation was unique in the world at the time, and it is still special, even fragile, today.
     It wasn’t until later in my life that I thought long and hard about what it actually takes for us to be able to implement our duty to change the government if it goes down the wrong path. Now, here, I could give a discourse on the importance of the Second Amendment, but this is the NPA and not the NRA, and I think we’d all prefer to depend on the First Amendment rather than the Second. I think James Madison had the right answer when he wrote, “A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.”
     Having the trust of the people is essential to government being able to accomplish the very important purposes for which we created it. Such trust is not easily earned or retained, and is based on the ability of the people to verify that they, and not unseen forces, are in control of the government, and that public officials are acting in the interest of the people and not for personal gain. We have constructed a framework of laws that enable that verification, including strong ethics laws, campaign finance disclosure, transparent and verifiable elections, comprehensive independent financial and performance audits, open lawmaking and rulemaking processes, open courts, and, of course, open public meetings and records. Loss or erosion of any of these sets us on a course of losing the public trust. When that trust is lost, the people begin the process of changing the government. I am convinced that the success of initiative measures that have deprived the government of financial resources can be largely attributed to such a loss of trust, because it is by withdrawing financial support that the people can most immediately effect a change in the government.
     Unfortunately, legislative nibbling, court decisions and lax enforcement have, in fact, combined to erode the public’s ability to keep an eye on the government. We have had far too many cases of government waste and corruption covered up by officials concealing records, sometimes on a pretence that the matter was subject to attorney-client privilege. Technology allows records to come into existence and then disappear again in the blink of an eye with little left in the way of evidence, and technology also allows public officials to debate issues and make decisions without any public involvement or observation whatsoever. The penalties assessed for violations of our open government laws are so low that agencies just pay them as a cost of doing business. Personal accountability for those who break the rules, even knowingly and willfully, is unheard of.
     And who among the citizenry actually has time to pay attention to everything necessary to verify the integrity of those in government? To pore over PDC reports? To watch as ballot envelopes are opened and signatures verified, and examine voting machine audit reports? To make records requests and hold elected officials accountable? To sit through interminably boring city council or school board meetings and question the purpose of every executive session? The sheer volume of information and number of agencies to monitor makes it impossible for any of us to do it alone.
     That is why the news media are so important. That is why the freedom of the press is essential to the preservation of liberty -– and to fulfillment of the duty we each have as citizens to hold the government accountable and to keep it in check.
     And so, in addition to thanking you for this award today, I also thank you for your diligence, your persistence, and your hard work on behalf of the people of the state of Washington. Thank you for the investments you make in staff and technology and ink and all the other resources required to get the information citizens need and make it available to us. Thank you for your courage in the face of powerful forces that would conceal essential information from you and from all of us.
     When Benjamin Franklin emerged from the constitutional convention and was asked what form of government had been created, he replied, “A republic, if you can keep it.” I am committed to not only stopping the erosion of our open government laws and the freedom of the press, but to expanding and strengthening them. If we work together, we will keep our republic. Thank you very much!

(return to top)


Democrat complaint ruled “nonsensical” by Legislative Ethics Board

    Kirkland (September 29, 2006) -- The Washington State Legislative Ethics Board has dismissed a complaint filed on August 31 by the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee against Rep. Toby Nixon and a senate staff member regarding a campaign press release that had been published in the Woodinville Chamber of Commerce newsletter. In the order of dismissal, the board said that the SDCC complaint was not only unfounded but “nonsensical as well as unsupported by any facts”, and that “there are no facts or reasonable inferences there from which [to] support the allegations that Rep. Nixon or Rebecca Japhet utilized public resources with respect to the Nixon campaign release”.
     “I appreciate the Board’s quick action to dismiss this completely false and trumped-up complaint,” Nixon said in response to the dismissal. “Anyone with the slightest bit of sense would have assumed in a single glance that the text fragment in the Woodinville Chamber newsletter was a formatting error, and a simple phone call to the Chamber would have confirmed that. Either the SDCC does not have even that slight bit of sense, or they are so desperate to find something to attack me and support their candidate that they’re willing to ignore plain facts and waste scarce state resources on baseless charges for purely political purposes.”
     In an email to the SDCC on September 15, John Erdman, executive director of the Woodinville Chamber of Commerce, said that the news of the complaint “saddened me greatly. This is and was an obvious formatting error that slipped by both my printer and my staff. A simple call to my office would have gotten you the correct explanation and saved everyone the time and money spent to pursue this matter.” He went on to write, “I am disappointed in the fact that you didn’t even attempt to contact us about the situation and instead chose the low road to travel.”
     In an SDCC press release that had been briefly posted on the SDCC web site on September 14 but has since been removed, Senator Karen Keiser, chair of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee, was quoted as saying “It’s a shame that Representative Nixon is using Karl Rove’s worn-out tactic of blaming Democrats for his own ethical problems instead of taking responsibility for his actions.” In response to Keiser’s remark, Nixon said, “Since the Legislative Ethics Board has found that there never was an ‘ethical problem’ and that the Senate Democrats’ allegation was ‘nonsensical’ and ‘unsupported by any facts’, the only ‘worn-out tactics’ being employed here are the Senate Democrats’ filing of false ethical charges for political gain. I would hope that Sen. Keiser would take responsibility for her actions and issue a prompt apology to me and especially to the innocent and completely uninvolved Senate staff member, Rebecca Japhet -- but I’m not going to hold my breath. The people of the 45th district are already tired of all the negative campaigning that has occurred this year, and if these tactics by the Senate Democrats are any indication, the voters are in store for much more.”

(return to top)


Seattle Times Blog: Ethics complaint against Nixon dismissed as “non-sensical”

By DAVID POSTMAN
TIMES CHIEF POLITICAL REPORTER

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (September 27, 2006) -- The Legislative Ethics Board has dismissed a complaint against Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, that had been filed by the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee. Nixon is running for the Senate in the 45th District.
     The board called the complaint nonsense and found it “unsupported by any facts.”
     Democrats filed the complaint after seeing a press release about Nixon’s senate candidacy in the Woodinville Chamber of Commerce newsletter. At the bottom of the release it said for more information to contact Rebecca Japhet. She is a legislative employee and heads the Senate Republican communications office. She is barred by law from doing any campaign-related work.
     But she didn’t. It turns out that the attribution to Japhet was an error on the part of the chamber staff and she had nothing to do with Nixon’s release -- as Nixon has maintained.
     Last week the Democratic campaign committee asked the ethics board to remove Japhet’s name from the complaint because, “After further investigation, we are satisfied that Ms. Japhet had no role in her name appearing on Rep. Nixon’s press release in the May 2006 edition of the Woodinville Chamber of Commerce publication Off the Vine.”
     But Democrats wanted Nixon’s name to remain on the complaint. That made no sense to the ethics board. In its dismissal order today, the board said that recognizing that Japhet did nothing wrong means the entire complaint is without merit:

If that is true, and we conclude today after investigation there is no evidence to the contrary, the complainant seems to be left with only the inference that Rep. Nixon or his campaign staff would for some reason intentionally place a partial attribution to this legislative employee on the campaign release. That inference is nonsensical as well as unsupported by any facts.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to RCW 42.52.425, which grants the Board the authority to dismiss a complaint after investigation if it finds that the complaint is unfounded, that Complaint 2006 -- No. 9 is DISMISSED.

UPDATE: Here’s the board’s order.

David Postman is The Seattle Times’ chief political reporter. Reach him at 360-236-8267 or at dpostman@seattletimes.com.

(return to top)


Nixon to receive Freedom’s Light Award from Washington Newspaper Publishers Association

PRESS RELEASE

Washington Newspaper Publishers Association
12354 30th Ave. NE
Seattle, WA 98125
Contact: Bill Will, General Manager, (206) 634-3838; bwill@wnpa.com

Sept. 22, 2006

     State Rep. Toby Nixon will receive the Freedom’s Light Award, the highest honor for non-journalists given by Washington Newspaper Publisher Association, early next month at the association’s 119th annual convention. The award will be presented Friday, Oct. 6 in Kennewick.
     Nearly every year since the award was created in 1995, WNPA has honored a Washington resident who has protected or advanced First Amendment interests in the state, a critical aspect of which is access to public information.
     In announcing Rep. Nixon’s selection as the 2006 honoree, WNPA General Manager Bill Will said, “Rep. Nixon is that all too rare public official who backs up campaign rhetoric about open and accountable government with action in Olympia. Toby has grabbed the banner of open government, and his commitment to transparency and accountability has distinguished his legislative career.”
     The Kirkland Republican has represented the 45th legislative district in the Washington State House of Representatives since January 2002. Among his other responsibilities, he is ranking Republican member of the State Government Operations and Accountability Committee, which oversees the state’s open public records and open public meetings laws. He is the Republican nominee for a vacant state senate seat in the 45th District.
     “Having the trust of the people is essential to government being able to accomplish its purposes,” said Nixon. “Transparency and openness in government — open public records, meetings, courts, and rulemaking and legislative processes — are critical elements of earning and retaining that trust. We must stop the erosion of our open government laws.”
     Attorney General Rob McKenna, who has also championed public access, praised Rep. Nixon, “Representative Nixon is a champion of open government and accountable public process. Whenever my office and I have proposed strengthening our state’s sunshine laws, we have found in him an effective, passionate legislative voice for those proposals.”
     Another key player in government access issues, Allied Daily Newspapers of Washington executive director Rowland Thompson, said, “Toby Nixon has a better understanding of the Open Public Records Act and The Open Public Meetings Act than any other legislator in Olympia. He comes by that understanding both from the words written in the law books and the court cases, but also from the state and federal constitutional requirements that put those words on the page. Beyond his intellectual command of the principles is his deep philosophical commitment to rights of the people to hold their government accountable. He is deeply deserving of the Freedom’s Light Award,” Thompson added.
     In addition to his legislative responsibilities, Nixon works as a program manager in the Windows Networking and Device Technologies group at Microsoft in Redmond. He has held various positions with Microsoft since January 1993. His expertise is in communicating over the Internet, and he takes a special interest in communication for the disabled; his current assignment involves designing technology for the smart homes of the future.
     Nixon, his wife Irene, and their five children make their home in Kirkland.
     Previous winners of the Freedom’s Light Award are Washington Court of Appeal Judge C. Kenneth Grosse in 2004; Ronal Serpas, Chief of the Washington State Patrol, 2003, Sen. Adam Kline, 2002; Clyde Ballard, former House Co-Speaker, 2001; Brian Sonntag, Washington State Auditor, 2000; Michael Killeen, attorney, Davis Wright Tremaine, 1999; Walt C. Woodward, former editor and publisher, Bainbridge Island Review, 1998; former U.S. House Speaker Thomas Foley, 1997; former Washington Chief Justice James Anderson, 1996; and state Sen. Cal Anderson, 1995.
     WNPA represents 114 community newspapers across Washington state. WNPA promotes open government, defends the First Amendment, sponsors the state’s annual Better Newspaper Contest and offers continuing education for publishers and staff members. The organization was founded in 1887, two years before Washington was admitted to the United States.

(return to top)


Nixon responds to continuing false and reprehensible attacks by Senate Democrats

Kirkland (September 9, 2006)

Dear Friends,

     This past week, I received notification from the state Legislative Ethics Board that a second complaint has been submitted against me by the Operations Director of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee. In this new complaint, the Democrats alleged that a member of the Senate Republican communications staff wrote my press release on April 27 announcing my candidacy for state senator for the 45th district.
     These charges are entirely false.
     The false accusation is based on a document, the source of which the Democrats have not disclosed, which was crudely altered to make it appear as though it was prepared by the senate staff member. This is now the fourth instance of gutter politics being used by the Democrats to attack me, and is just the latest example of their desperation to come up with something, anything, to use to attack my record, even if they must manufacture false evidence to do it. The simple fact is that if any abuse of state resources has taken place during this campaign, it is this abuse by the Democrats of the Legislative Ethics Board staff and process for campaign purposes. The voters of the 45th District are intelligent and recognize reprehensible, even illegal, campaign tactics when they see them, and I trust they will hold the Democrats accountable.
     You may click here to see a scanned copy of the complaint as I received it, and judge its veracity for yourself. I have also attached below the text of my response to the counsel of the Legislative Ethics Board denying the charges and requesting quick and open action on them.
     As always, I appreciate your prayers and support, even more so as my family and I endure these continuing false attacks on my character.

     Best regards,

        -- Toby

Text of my email to the Legislative Ethics Board:

Date: September 9, 2006
To: Mike O’Connell, Board Counsel, Legislative Ethics Board
CC: Tim Sekerak, House Counsel
Re: Response to Ethics Complaint C2006 – No. 9

Dear Mr. O’Connell:

I have received your letter dated September 5 regarding the second ethics complaint filed against me by the Operations Director of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee, Kenneth Camp.

I completely and unequivocally deny that any ethics violation took place, by me or Rebecca Japhet, in this case or at any other time. The allegations made by Mr. Camp and the SDCC are false.

The press release issued on April 27, 2006, announcing my intention to seek the 45th District senate seat, was originally drafted by Stan Shore, a political consultant who works with me on my campaign who is also under contract with the Senate Republican’s Leadership Council. I still have in my possession the original draft of the press release in electronic form. The Microsoft Word File Properties of that document clearly indicate that the file was created using a copy of Word registered to Mr. Shore, at 6:07AM on April 27. It was emailed to me at 6:56AM that same day. The release was subsequently edited by myself and by my campaign manager, Eric Rohrbach, and returned to Mr. Shore by email. The release was then, at approximately 2:00PM, emailed by Mr. Shore from his private, non-governmental office to a variety of news media outlets, and I emailed additional copies of the release to my campaign email list and other contacts from my campaign email account. At no time were any state resources used in the creation or distribution of this release.

At no time did Rebecca Japhet or any other state employee have any involvement in the creation or distribution of this or any other campaign-related press release that I have issued -– ever. No version of this press release ever included Ms. Japhet’s contact information as alleged by the SDCC, even in draft form. It is astounding, even stupefying, that Mr. Camp and his supervisor, SDCC chair Sen. Karen Keiser, would imagine for a moment that the ranking member of the House committee with responsibility for state ethics laws would be so stupid as to not only use state resources for preparation of a campaign press release, but to actually send out a campaign press release with the name, legislative phone number, and legislative email address of a state employee attached!

There appear to be two possible explanations for the document that the SDCC discovered: it was a simple cut-and-paste of my release into the document sent out by Sen. Finkbeiner the same day announcing he was not running again, or this is a deliberate fabrication for campaign purposes by Sen. Keiser and her staff.

First, it is possible that the unidentified “community publication”, as the SDCC calls it, in its haste to publish the release “in its entirety”, made a simple cut-and-paste error in preparing their publication. Senator Finkbeiner had sent out a press release a short time prior to my release, announcing that he was not seeking re-election. Senator Finkbeiner’s release was written by Rebecca Japhet, legitimately so, and her contact information did appear at the bottom of Sen. Finkbeiner’s release. It is possible that the editor of the “community publication”, processing my release after Senator Finkbeiner’s release, inadvertently left behind a fragment of Senator Finkbeiner’s release when incorporating my release into their publication. This would explain why the document submitted by the SDCC contains only partial, fragmentary contact information for Ms. Japhet.

A second possible explanation is that the document presented by the SDCC was intentionally altered, or even created, for the purpose of establishing a basis for this ethics complaint. There are several characteristics of the document that could lead one to such a conclusion. First, the heading of the document is “Toby Nixon for State Senate”, while every copy of the release actually sent out by my campaign was entitled “Toby Nixon Announces for State Senate” (emphasis added). If this “community publication” truly has a practice of publishing press releases in their entirety, then why would the word “Announces” have been removed from the title? Second, the text of the document presented by the SDCC begins with “Kirkland (April 27, 2006) –” in boldface type. This text was not in any of the copies of the press release faxed or emailed by Mr. Shore or myself. However, this text does appear in boldface in the version of the release that was later posted by me on my campaign web site at http://www.tobynixon.com/news.htm#a169. That is the only place that boldfaced text has appeared. This leads to the conclusion that the document presented by the SDCC was not derived from an authentic copy of the original press release received by the “community publication” through normal means, but that the text they published was cut and pasted from my campaign web site after the fact. But Ms. Japhet’s contact information has never appeared as part of this or any other release on my campaign web site, and could not have been cut and pasted from that source; however, Ms. Japhet’s contact information could have been added to the version presented to you by the SDCC with the intent of establishing a basis for the present complaint. Finally, the fact that the document presented by the SDCC apparently was faxed from “HDCC” (presumably the House Democratic Campaign Committee) calls into question its origin, as does the fact that the SDCC refused to identify the “community publication” where the document was allegedly published. I cannot imagine any legitimate reason for not disclosing the identity and date of the alleged publication as part of the initial complaint so that the content of the document can be independently verified and the staff of the publication questioned regarding its authenticity.

Unfortunately, this latter explanation fits into the disturbing pattern established by Sen. Keiser recently. First, Senate Democrats or others acting on behalf of my opponent, Eric Oemig, placed phone calls to voters in the 45th district asserting that I had not paid my property taxes, when in fact the payment had been made but was not properly handled and recorded by King County. Senator Keiser later personally defamed me in writing to a group of lobbyists, alleging that there had been “erosion of [my] personal and professional standing.” She apologized for that action, but shortly thereafter her employees filed two legislative ethics complaints against me. It’s very disturbing to see campaigning conducted in the gutter.

Mr. O’Connell, I sincerely hope that the first explanation –- an innocent error by an inexperienced and careless editor –- is the correct explanation. I shudder to consider the ramifications of the second explanation, but would not be at all surprised if it is correct. The fact that the SDCC’s complaint omits essential information and is based on supposition and innuendo leads to the inescapable conclusion that the SDCC and HDCC are engaging in an orchestrated smear campaign against me, using the Legislative Ethics Board during a political campaign for political purposes.

In your letter, you indicated that you would like to meet with me for an interview. I would be happy to do so, at a time and place of your convenience, and look forward eagerly to the opportunity. I would like to undertake this as speedily as possible; the submitters of false accusations should not be rewarded for their nefarious actions by allowing them to use those false accusations for political purposes, claiming that the falsely accused is “under investigation for ethics violations”. Resolving this matter expeditiously, with full public disclosure of all materials and testimony, is in the interest of truth and justice.

Committed as I am to openness and transparency in government, I will be distributing copies of this letter forthwith to the news media and on my web site, including a scanned copy of your letter and its attachments. I also will want our interview to be on the record and open to the public for their perusal. The inevitable interview with Sen. Keiser about her foreknowledge of these events will also be on the record, I should hope. As Justice Louis Brandeis said, “Sunshine is the best disinfectant”, and open government is always the best solution to lies and false charges.

Best regards,

Toby Nixon
State Representative, 45th District

(return to top)


Republicans for Environmental Protection: REP Endorses Washington Legislative Candidates

     Seattle (September 5, 2006) -- The Washington chapter of Republicans for Environmental Protection, a national grassroots organization, is pleased to endorse the following Republican candidates for the state House and Senate.
     For State Senate:

  • Luke Esser, 48th District (Bellevue, Redmond)
  • Toby Nixon, 45th District (Kirkland, Redmond, Woodinville, Duvall, Carnation)
  • Dave Schmidt, 44th District (Mill Creek, Snohomish, Lake Stevens)
     For State House of Representatives:
  • Glenn Anderson and Jay Rodne, 5th District (Issaquah, Sammamish)
  • Fred Jarrett, 41st District (Mercer Island, Bellevue, Newcastle)
  • Skip Priest, 30th District (Federal Way, Algona, Pacific)
  • Chris Strow, 10th District (Whidbey Island, Camano Island)
     “These fine GOP candidates will bring a thoughtful approach to environmental policymaking in Olympia,” REP’s Washington Chapter President Jim Nobles said. “Washington citizens want our state’s great quality of life and its natural resources protected through pragmatic approaches that deliver solid results. That can only happen when Republicans are at the table, offering good ideas proving that conservation is conservative,” Nobles said.
     REP was founded in 1995 to restore the Republican Party’s great conservation tradition. REP, whose membership includes ordinary citizens and elected officials, has chapters in nine other states in addition to Washington.
     Visit REP on line at www.rep.org.

(return to top)


Seattle Times: Free the press releases

By DAVID POSTMAN
TIMES CHIEF POLITICAL REPORTER

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (September 1, 2006) -- Partisan, taxpayer- funded public- relations workers produce hundreds of press releases each year touting the accomplishments of state legislators.
     But you won’t find the releases on the Legislature’s Web site. They have officially disappeared. What you see is something like this:
     “Election Year Notice: The information normally found via links through this page has been temporarily removed during the election season. The House Republican Caucus Newsroom will be restored at this site in December 2006.”
     The press releases were there June 30. But legislative rules deem July 1 too close to the election to allow incumbents to get any benefit from the material and mandate that it be removed from public view.
     Press releases cover everything from honoring legislative pages to announcing passage of a bill. The 55 Democrats who control the House issued about 274 this year. The 43 Republicans issued about 375.
     Two examples:
     “Not long ago State Representative Zack Hudgins was discussing safety concerns with soldiers on the front lines in Iraq. This year he’s addressing security concerns here on the home front.”
     And, “Expanding the use and development of alternative fuels in Washington could provide thousands of new jobs in the state while reducing reliance on foreign and domestic oil, Rep. Janéa Holmquist said today.”
     The ethics policy comes from a state law that says state officials, including legislators, can’t “use or authorize the use of” any public resources for campaigning.
     I understand the motive. But it seems sort of Soviet-like to have official publications disappear for half the year. Will we airbrush legislators out of official photographs, too? (No worry there. Legislators can buy reprints of “official” photographs that they are allowed to use in campaign brochures.)
     If the material is partisan, political puffery, it shouldn’t be done on my dime, even before June 30. If the press releases are of public value — and many of them are — they should be left up and legislators should be able to defend them.
     These rules are an outgrowth of the early 1990s, when there was widespread illegal use of legislative staff and equipment for campaigning.
     Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, put legislative releases on his campaign Web site until a complaint was filed against him with the ethics board.
     He said in a letter to the board that press releases help people judge lawmakers’ performance.
     “It could be argued that depriving voters and opponents of this valuable resource for evaluating the positions and actions of legislators is an inappropriate concealment of public records,” Nixon wrote.
     Nixon says he’s issued about 100 releases since being sworn in four years ago.
     Maybe it is time to rethink locking this information away.

David Postman is The Seattle Times’ chief political reporter. His column appears Fridays. Reach him at 360-236-8267 or at dpostman@seattletimes.com.

(return to top)


Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Deciphering ethics in the digital age

By KENNETH F. BUNTING
P-I ASSOCIATE PUBLISHER

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (September 1, 2006) -- Most lawmakers or legislative candidates facing an election-year ethics complaint would be doing everything possible to keep it quiet, not publicize it.
     But when it comes to openness and transparency in government, few lawmakers in Olympia, or any capital for that matter, bring along as much passion and fervor as Republican state Rep. Toby Nixon of Kirkland.
     Nixon, who is running for the open 45th District state Senate seat being vacated by Senate minority leader Bill Finkbeiner, is ready to do battle over a recent interpretation of a state ethics law that Washington voters put in place in 1972.
     Nixon is a Microsoft program manager with more than two decades experience as a computer software engineer. Since he took office in 2002, he has been sending out press releases from his legislative office to his personal e-mail lists and archiving them on his personal Web site.
     It seemed like a good idea, says Nixon. Those press releases are public records, available to anyone. They help the voting public know what their elected legislators are doing. And since it cost state taxpayers absolutely nothing for him to do it, Nixon says he was surprised to learn that it is considered a violation of state law for lawmakers to keep their legislative press releases on their own personal Web sites after June 30 of an election year.
     But Democratic Senate staffers, citing an advisory opinion issued by the Legislative Ethics Board in May 2004, filed complaints against Nixon and Sen. Dave Schmidt, R-Everett, saying the senators had violated ethics rules by having press releases on their Web sites after the election-year cutoff date.
     The Ethics Board has not ruled on either complaint and can’t publicly comment on them until a ruling is issued after a public hearing or a stipulated resolution. But in an advisory opinion two years ago, the board said using press releases on a legislators’ private Web site after the cutoff date, or using them on a campaign Web site “at any time,” amounts to “a direct use of public resources in support of a political campaign.”
     Nixon doesn’t agree. But he took down text and disabled links to his press releases after being notified of the complaint.
     The state ethics laws that forbid any campaign-related use of materials prepared at public expense haven’t changed much since Watergate-era Initiative 276 was overwhelmingly approved by Washington voters.
     But at the time, there was no such thing as e-mail, all public records were on paper and no one had heard of a thing called a Web site. Nixon, who has techie credentials far beyond that of the average person, other members of the Legislature or the ethics board itself, thinks the holding of the 2004 advisory opinion missed the mark.
     “As both government and elections move from being primarily paper-based to being primarily electronic, and as the public becomes increasingly accustomed to and rightfully expects unfettered and immediate access to all government information, we will undoubtedly go through periods of transition where our understanding of what is appropriate and inappropriate evolves over time,” he wrote to Legislative Ethics Board Counsel Mike O’Connell after being informed of the complaint.
     “I have no idea, how much testimony they took or how much time they took for it before coming to their conclusion,” Nixon said in an interview. His opponent can publish the same press releases and use them for attacks, he noted.
     But Senate staffers who brought the complaints and their boss, Sen. Karen Keiser, D-Kent, aren’t sympathetic.
     “The ethics rules are what they are. Our members have to abide by them,” said Chris Gregorich, executive director of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee.
     Keiser, also known as a strong open-government proponent, said the election-season prohibition on use of “vanity press releases ... has nothing to do with open government information.”
     While the issues Nixon raised are “worthy of discussion,” Keiser said the ethics panel has been thoughtful and careful in its contemporary interpretations of the ethics laws, although she at times has “quibbles as well.”
     How this will all play out is anyone’s guess. The Legislative Ethics Board has no statutory deadline for deciding whether a public hearing is merited or ruling on the complaints.
     There is a certain irony in the fact that the Public Records Act, which Nixon spends more energy trying to strengthen than any other legislator, and the Ethics Act he now stands accused of violating, stem from the same 1972 voter initiative.
     Nixon has no primary opponent in a district that has voted dependably Republican. And, if the ethics complaint becomes a campaign issue for his Democratic general election opponent, Eric Oemig, he will find Nixon eager to confront it.

Kenneth F. Bunting is associate publisher. E-mail: kenbunting@seattlepi.com.

(return to top)


Text of historical press releases redacted due to legislative rules

Kirkland (August 27, 2006)

Dear Friends,

     This past week, I received notification from the state Legislative Ethics Board that a complaint had been submitted saying that my practice of posting historical legislative press releases on this web site is a violation of legislative rules. While this matter is pending, I have decided to redact the text of the press releases in question from this site. That’s why you’ll see a lot of empty spots in these pages.
     For your information, I have posted below an email I sent moments ago to the counsel of the Board explaining my position on the issue and asking the Board to reconsider the policy. As you know, I am a strong advocate of open government. I believe every legislator has a responsibility to inform their constituents of their actions as a legislator. Making available to constituents the official statements a legislator makes in the form of press releases is a part of that. That is why I have always sent copies of my press releases to individuals who request to be on the distribution list, and archived copies of my press releases on this web site. Completely unknown to me, the Board in 2004 issued an “advisory opinion” that such postings are an inappropriate use of state resources. This new policy was not included in the Legislative Ethics Manual update issued prior to the 2005 legislative session. I disagree with the policy, and you can read why in the email below.
     I am firm and unwavering in my commitment to the public’s right to know, and you can count on me to work to change this rule so that legislators cannot hide behind it to prevent the press releases they issue during the legislative session from being easily available to their constituents and their political opponents. In the meantime, if you want copies of these press releases, they will need to be requested from the Office of the Chief Clerk, P.O. Box 40600, Olympia WA 98504-0600, 360-786-7750. I have left the titles and dates on this site to make it easy for you to identify the release to request.
     If you believe as I do that press releases issued by legislators should be available for viewing by voters during the campaign season, either through the legislature’s web site or through the legislator’s own sites, then I would encourage you to share your opinion with the Legislative Ethics Board. They can be contacted by email through their staff counsel, Mike O’Connell, at oconnell.mike@leg.wa.gov.
 
     Best regards,

         -- Toby

Text of my email to the Legislative Ethics Board:

Date: August 27, 2006
To: Mike O’Connell, Board Counsel, Legislative Ethics Board
CC: Tim Sekerak, House Counsel
Re: Complaint regarding posting of press releases on my campaign web site

Dear Mr. O’Connell:

I have received your letter dated August 17 regarding the complaint filed on August 16 by Mr. Kenneth Camp. In his complaint, Mr. Camp says that I have posted press releases on my campaign web site that were initially distributed through House Media at public expense, and indicates that he believes this is contrary to Legislative Ethics Board Advisory Opinion 2004-01.

When my very first legislative press release was prepared (“Nixon sworn in as 45th district representative”, 14 January 2002), I asked two questions of House media and House counsel: (1) am I allowed to send the text of the release on my personal email list, and (2) am I allowed to post the text of the release on my personal or campaign web site? At that time, I was told that once the release was sent out, it was public information that could be used by anyone, and that there was no clear prohibition in the law or in ethics rules to the uses I proposed. Since then, I have forwarded every press release that mentions me issued through House Media to my personal email list and posted them on my web site, at no cost to the state. By my estimation, just over 100 such releases have been so distributed during my tenure in the House.

I do not recall ever having received a copy of Advisory Opinion 2004-01, or being informed of its existence, prior to receiving your letter. To this day, the Legislative Ethics Manual (http://www1.leg.wa.gov/documents/leb/2005EthicsManual.pdf) says nothing about this prohibition on posting of historical press releases, and the current version of the manual was prepared after this advisory opinion was issued. There is in fact a section of this Manual entitled “Use of resources – Press releases”, and even that section, which is directly on topic, says nothing about any prohibition or limitation on historical press releases being posted to campaign or personal web sites.

Press releases issued during previous legislative sessions are historical information. They are a matter of public record. They are not campaign-related; because of limitations on the content of press releases (which the Manual does address), such releases are by their very nature not campaign materials; legislators are prohibited from using press releases, even before the June 30 election-year cutoff, to promote themselves, attack others, or in any way advocate for or against any campaign, and House staff, as directed by the majority caucus, has recently been quite strict in enforcing these rules. What such releases actually do is to help document what a legislator said and did during the performance of their official duties. They are therefore valuable information for constituents in evaluating the performance of legislators in office. They are likewise valuable information to election opponents. It could be argued that depriving voters and opponents of this valuable resource for evaluating the positions and actions of legislators is an inappropriate concealment of public records. While RCW 42.52 clearly prohibits use of state resources to prepare a campaign press release (such as announcing candidacy for re-election or otherwise directly related to a campaign), it is silent on whether information created during the course of normal legislative duties and made available to the general public can be subsequently made available, at no cost to the state, during a campaign.

The key question is whether the posting of historical press releases that, at the time of their creation, met strict content guidelines and were not considered campaigning, can become a use of public resources to support a political campaign because of how they are subsequently used. While the Board has, in Advisory Opinion 2004-01, taken the position that this is the case, I respectfully request that the Board reconsider this decision. A number of additional questions need to be addressed which apparently were not considered by the Board in formulating Advisory Opinion 2004-01, and I would like to share these questions and my views on them with the Board at the appropriate time. Suffice it to say now that as a strong advocate of open government, I firmly believe that legislators have no fewer rights than other citizens to access and use of public documents; the question should be the appropriateness under state law of the original content and purpose of a press release, not its subsequent use as a historical document. Nevertheless, in the interest of compliance with the policy as it currently exists, I have removed the text of press releases on my web site that were originally issued through House Media, pending such reconsideration.

As both government and elections move from being primarily paper-based to being primarily electronic, and as the public becomes increasingly accustomed to and rightfully expects unfettered and immediate access to all government information, we will undoubtedly go through periods of transition where our understanding of what is appropriate and inappropriate evolves over time. I look forward to having an opportunity to discuss this matter further with you and the members of the Legislative Ethics Board.

Best regards,

Toby Nixon
State Representative, 45th District

(return to top)


Representative Toby Nixon Files for State Senate

    Kirkland (July 25, 2006) -- State Representative Toby Nixon (R-45th District) officially filed today as a candidate for State Senator representing the 45th Legislative district. Nixon filed using the Secretary of State’s online filing option that was newly expanded to all legislative candidates as a result of legislation Nixon sponsored in the 2005 legislative session.
     Focusing on building a stronger state economy, safer communities and restoring trust, Nixon declared, “It’s been an honor representing my constituents as State Representative for the past five years. My experience and leadership in the House will enable me to be highly effective representing them as their new State Senator.”
     Nixon has worked to strengthen our state economy by reducing government red tape, promoting congestion relief, improving educational opportunities for our children and promoting private sector economic development and job creation. Nixon said, “We can have a job-friendly economy and still protect the natural treasures of our state. As senator, I will continue to be a leader in finding that balance.”
     Nixon has worked to make our communities safer, supporting better protection for children from sexual predators, tougher standards for homeless encampments, protection for social security numbers and increased penalties for identity theft, and cracking down on computer phishing and spyware. Nixon declared, “My 31 years of technical experience in the computer and communications industry enable me to effectively advance innovative solutions to many of the challenges coming from the growing impact of new technology on our every-day lives.”
     Nixon has also been recognized for his bi-partisan work to ensure accurate and fair elections, open public records and meetings, and implementation of comprehensive performance audits of government programs. Nixon pledged, “I worked hard to advance comprehensive performance audits and I’ll continue in the Senate to make sure these new audits are implemented to ensure taxpayers are getting effective use of their tax dollars.”
     “Voters have asked me to keep taxes low, spend tax dollars wisely and minimize government intrusion in our individual lives, “ Nixon declared. “I will continue to champion solutions that empower individuals, families and private enterprise to solve problems directly. I would like to keep my leadership skills working for my constituents as their new State Senator.”
     The 45th Legislative District includes Carnation, Duvall and Woodinville, and parts of Kirkland, Redmond and Sammamish.
     Visit www.tobynixon.com for more information.

(return to top)


Rep. Nixon responds to negative personal attacks

    Kirkland (July 13, 2006) -- State Rep. Toby Nixon issued the following statement in response to negative personal attacks leveled by his opponent in the race for State Senator in the 45th District:

     “It was recently brought to my attention that the campaign of my opponent, directly or indirectly, has been making telephone calls to voters in the 45th District, claiming to be taking a poll, and then using leading questions as a way to make accusations and influence the voters –- a practice known as “push polling”. While this practice is widespread and is hardly surprising in this age of negative campaigning, I was very surprised indeed to learn that my opponent was telling voters that I was past due on the property taxes on my home, since to the best of my knowledge the taxes had been paid in full and on time. I checked the King County web site, and, sure enough, the county treasury is claiming that the first half 2006 taxes on my home have not been paid. This was a complete surprise to me!
     “What happened, as far as we’ve been able to determine so far, is this. In mid-April, my wife and I refinanced the first mortgage on our home to take advantage of low fixed interest rates, as have tens of thousands of other families in the area. As part of that process, the bank said that their policy was to require the title company handling the closing to make the tax payment to the county, instead of us making the payment ourselves as we have for many years. This didn’t seem negotiable with them, so we consented. The title company has the records to prove that they printed the tax payment check and mailed it to King County before the due date. However, King County claims to have not received the check. The check has not been cashed, and has also not been returned to the title company in the mail. Nobody knows where it is. The title company has committed to stopping payment on the previous check and issuing a new check to King County. Even though the past due payment is not directly the fault of Irene and me, it appears that we will be the ones paying the interest and penalties. It’s not fair, but it’s the most expedient way to resolve the situation.
     “Unfortunately, King County does not send out notices to property taxpayers when their tax payment checks are not received -- all the county does is post a notice on their web site that the payment is past due. The title company doesn’t double-check to make sure their check has been processed until six months later when it is flagged as “stale”. Perhaps I should have remembered to check the county web site to make sure the payment was credited to our account, but have never had to do that before with my tax payments and have never had a problem until now. So this is an interesting lesson learned –- just as many of us now check the county elections web site to confirm that our absentee ballots have been received, perhaps now I and many others will be checking to make sure our property tax checks are received and properly posted. I’m sure we’re not the first family this has ever happened to, and as a result I will be drafting legislation requiring counties to send out reminder notices for past due property taxes.
     “I have provided this explanation to my opponent. Now that he is aware of what has actually happened in this situation, I’m sure he’ll stop his scurrilous, personal, mudslinging attack on my character, and instruct his campaign and supporters to either provide a complete description of what actually happened or refrain from mentioning it at all. If he continues to try to profit politically from an unfortunate accident, I’m sure the educated and understanding voters of the 45th district will treat his activities as the petty, spiteful, and desperate moves that they are.”

(return to top)


Thoughts on Independence Day

     Kirkland (July 1, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon emailed the following remarks to his friends and supporters in recognition of the 230th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence:

     I find too often that when you ask people to enumerate the “self-evident truths” mentioned in our Declaration of Independence that, if they even have a clue what you’re asking, they too often stop at “pursuit of Happiness”. That’s a shame, because it is in the remainder of that paragraph that we find the most important principles -- principles which we must be reminded of, since, in the words of Article 1 Section 32 of our Washington State Constitution, “a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is essential to the security of individual right and the perpetuity of free government.”
     Here’s a slightly edited statement of those self-evident truths, with punctuation and the numbers before each truth inserted to highlight them (the words are all the original):
We hold these truths to be self-evident:
  1. that all men are created equal;
  2. that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness;
  3. that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;
  4. that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
     These self-evident truths were revolutionary in 1776, and are just as important today. Our founding fathers asserted that we are all equal –- that there is no “elite ruling class” with a divine right to govern that knows better than we do how we should live our lives. Our rights come from God, and existed before the establishment of government rather than being granted to us by the government in the Constitution or otherwise. We created the government for the purpose of helping us to defend our rights, and if the government infringes our rights rather than protecting them, it is not only our right, but our duty, to change or replace the government.
     Today, our government too often assumes for itself the power to take from us our lives, our liberty, and our property. It may be in the form of a “critical areas ordinance” that takes from each rural landowner the use of 65% of their land, or a U.S. Supreme Court decision that says any local government can take our home from us if they think some other private landowner would pay them more in taxes for it, or a state legislature that says the government should take ownership of a significant part of our assets when we die instead of them being inherited by our children or that uses spurious declarations of “emergency” to eviscerate the people’s right of referendum, or any of a number of other incremental and insidious infringements. Whatever form it takes, we should each be continuously asking ourselves whether government has become destructive of the ends for which we created it.
     The Declaration goes on to say “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” In other words, we are a patient people and will put up with a lot of abuse, but eventually enough is enough.
     Thomas Jefferson also wrote “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance”. Are we willing to pay that price? Are we willing to step up on this Independence Day and commit, as did our founding fathers, “our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor” to the task of protecting our rights? Will we contribute our time, talents, and money to restoring government to its proper role and place, as a protector rather than a destroyer of our fundamental rights? If we’re not willing, then who will?
     Many of us have family traditions of reading from the second chapter of the Gospel of Luke on Christmas Eve. Would it not be a great tradition to read the Declaration of Independence on July 4th each year? It only takes about 10 minutes to read aloud the entire document. If you can make time on Tuesday to do it, I think you would be blessed for it; here’s a link. Take a few minutes to think about the marvelous creation our Founding Fathers blessed us with 230 years ago, and how our lives would be different if those principles were to be cast on “the ash heap of history” through our own neglect.
     May we each have a safe and happy Independence Day with our families!

(return to top)


Nixon remarks on environmental protection at 2006 Campaign Kickoff

     Bellevue (June 14, 2006) -- At the campaign kickoff breakfast for his 2006 campaign for State Senate in the 45th District, before an audience of nearly 300 people, Rep. Toby Nixon made the following remarks:

     When I first came before you six years ago and asked for your support to represent you in the legislature, I told you that I was committed to the fundamental principles that made this country great: individual liberty, personal responsibility, limited government, and the free market. Some other legislators seem to just drift with the current of public opinion, but I still hold fast to these principles today, and I always will.
     My legislative priorities have been and will remain the same: to keep our communities safe for our families, and help people protect their lives, liberty, and property; to enable private-sector economic development and job creation; and to restore trust in government.
     Some people have made note of the fact that I’ve been an active participant in the ongoing debates on protecting our Northwest environment. I’m a member of the state executive committee of Republicans for Environmental Protection –- which is not an oxymoron, by the way. I helped found a new group called the “Washington Environmental Roundtable” to try to reach bipartisan consensus on environmental issues. But as you know, the environmental community doesn’t always see eye to eye with Republicans and they certainly doesn’t base their positions on the same principles we do, some people might wonder why I’ve focused on the environment as an issue.
     Ever since my younger slimmer days when I hiked 100 miles through the Trinity Alps in California and spent a lot of other time in the outdoors as a Boy Scout, I’ve had a great love for our natural environment and a desire to protect it.
     The fact is, people shouldn’t be surprised that Republicans care about the environment. Just look at history; Republicans have a proud legacy of conservation and environmental leadership. The national park system was created by a Republican president -– Teddy Roosevelt. Another Republican president, Richard Nixon (no relation), signed into law the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act, among others. The root word of “conservative” and “conservation” is the same. True conservatives take to heart the scriptural admonition to be wise stewards, to take care of the earth so that we can pass it down to our posterity.
     Clearly, we and our liberal friends share an interest in protecting the environment. Where we disagree is on how best to accomplish it. If nobody speaks up and offers solutions that are consistent with our principles, then their way of doing it gets implemented, almost by default. But their way carries a great risk of destroying our way of life. Let me tell you why.
     It is only by respecting property rights and the free market that we can protect the environment in a sustainable way, for the long term. Why is that? Caring about the environment is a luxury that only a prosperous society can afford.
     If you doubt me, think on the images you’ve seen of poor countries around the world. Do they look like places where protection of the environment is a high priority?  Every waterway is an open sewer –- but people get their drinking water there anyway. The land is stripped bare as people collect wood to burn or to make room to grow crops. The air is polluted with the burning of that wood and animal dung.
     People who are living on a subsistence level, who spend every waking hour just trying to find their next meal, don’t have time to care about the environment!
     If you look at the United States and other wealthy countries, you can see the benefit to the environment of having a robust economy. As a society, we have so much excess wealth that we pay for swarms of government agents to look after the environment for us. Millions of people use their free time to enjoy the natural environment and to voluntarily work on projects to improve and preserve it.
     Can you imagine the extreme irony if, in the name of protecting the environment, we were to destroy our economy, and with it the very engine that enables us to care about protecting the environment?
     So what does it take to have a robust economy that generates enough wealth so that both we as individuals and as a society can afford to care about the environment?
     In a recent article in Imprimis, published by Hillsdale College, Steve Forbes outlined five basic principles of economic growth.
     The first is the rule of law. Due Process. Equality before the law. Without it, you have a dictatorship in which those in power help their friends, and barriers are placed in the way of starting new businesses that compete.
     The second is property rights. People simply will not invest in a business, or a home, or anything else, unless they believe their investment is secure and won’t be taken from them by whoever has a bigger gun.
     The third principle is low taxes. Taxes that are too high are a disincentive to work, to success, and to risk-taking. We’ve seen again and again that when taxes are too high, the economy stagnates, and when taxes are lowered, the economy takes off again. Our problem is not that our taxes are too low, but that government spends too much!
     The fourth essential principle is limited regulation. Economic growth depends on it being simple to start and operate businesses; we don’t need bureaucrats meddling in every detail.
     And the fifth principle is free trade. Expanding markets and creating greater opportunity for trade benefits everyone.
     Too often, liberals in Olympia and Washington DC ignore the rule of law, ignore our property rights, tax everything in sight at exorbitant rates, and impose burdensome regulations and trade restrictions that make it almost impossible to operate a business at a profit and to create jobs. They say they care about the environment, but they don’t seem to understand the essential link between a robust economy and environmental protection. It is our responsibility to teach them.
     We can’t “Just Vote No” on their proposals. We must be creative, step up and propose solutions that protect the environment and protect our property rights, that protect the environment and enable job creation, that protect the environment and keep the government in check and hold it accountable.
     So why am I involved in environmental issues? I refuse to just stand back and throw stones. What I will do is step into the middle of the debate, bring people together, and find common-sense solutions that accomplish everyone’s goals in a way that is consistent with our fundamental principles of individual liberty, personal responsibility, limited government, and the free market. That is called leadership. We need more of it today. Send me back to Olympia, and that is what you will get.
     My friends, the thing to remember is this: freedom works. The free market works. Whatever problems face us –- transportation, education, health care, creating jobs, economic development, housing, the environment, I could go on and on –- the answer in every case is to turn away from the path toward bigger government that we’ve been on, and return to the divinely-inspired principles that guided our founding fathers.
     With your help, I will return to Olympia and continue that fight on your behalf. Thank you very much!

(return to top)


Nixon applauds AG’s opinion on initiative declaration

     Olympia (May 31, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon today called on the secretary of state to immediately rescind the requirement that the declaration printed on the reverse side of initiative, referendum, and recall petitions be signed by the petition circulator. He also asked the secretary of state’s office to inform all initiative and referendum petition sponsors that petition forms will be accepted even if no name or signature is provided on the declaration.
     Nixon’s request was in response to the publication today of Attorney General Rob McKenna’s opinion (Attorney General Opinion No. 13) that House Bill 1222, passed in 2005, does not require the declaration to be signed. The opinion also said that the secretary of state’s office does not have authority to reject petition forms that are not signed. The AG’s opinion cited substantial research into the legislative history of HB 1222 and a previous version of the bill, HB 1660 from the 2003 and 2004 Legislative sessions.
     “I greatly appreciate the fine work done by the attorney general’s staff in researching the legislative history of HB 1222 and the requirements associated with the statement that is printed on the back of initiative, referendum, and recall petition forms,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “I’m pleased that the attorney general shares my opinion that the Legislature did not intend to require petition circulators to sign the statement on the back of each form.”
     Nixon, who was a co-sponsor of HB 1222, is the ranking Republican member of the House State Government Operations and Accountability Committee. That committee has responsibility for consideration of bills related to Washington election laws, including initiative, referendum, and recall petitions.
     “The original legislation, HB 1660 introduced in 2003, would have made it much more difficult to get an initiative or referendum qualified for the ballot, because it would have required every petition form to be signed by the petition circulator in front of a notary public,” Nixon said. “I worked hard to amend that bill and its successor, HB 1222, to keep the citizen’s right of initiative and referendum as unencumbered as possible, while fully informing petition circulators of the penalties for falsifying signatures or paying people to sign petitions. HB 1222 would not have passed the Legislature with stronger requirements, and I’m glad the attorney general agrees that the secretary of state’s office cannot create additional or stronger requirements on its own.”
     The 45th Legislative District, which Nixon has represented since 2002, includes Woodinville, Duvall, Carnation, and portions of Kirkland, Bothell, Redmond, and Sammamish.

(return to top)


King County Journal: Running for hot state legislative seats takes more than the job pays

by NOEL BRADY
Journal Reporter

(Click here for the original article)

Note: The article below says that I am "One of Microsoft’s original 300 employees". This is incorrect; I am actually Microsoft employee number 31,522. Noel Brady misread an earlier article that said Ross Hunter is one of Microsoft's original 300 employees, and thought it referred to me. The King County Journal subsequently printed a correction. -- Toby

     Bellevue (May 29, 2006) -- When Kirkland lawyer Roger Goodman got the tap on the shoulder earlier this month, he didn’t have much time to ponder how he was going to afford a six-figure campaign for one of the priciest seats in the state House or Representatives.
     Six years ago, Kirkland’s 45th District broke the House record for the high cost of reaching voters, when Republican Toby Nixon and Democrat Laura Ruderman spent more than $500,000 combined.
     This year the stakes might be even higher, say officials from both parties. A growing pool of registered voters and teetering Democratic majorities in both the Senate, 26-23, and the House, 55-43, add up to stiff competition and expensive campaigns.
     “I didn’t have a lot of time to think about how much it was going to cost,” said Goodman, a Democrat. “I certainly wasn’t going to run if the party wasn’t fully behind me. I don’t want to go into debt for it.”
     Party officials told Goodman it would probably cost in excess of $200,000 to win the seat held by the GOP.
     If that holds true, he’ll more than double the average campaign cost of $86,168 in 2004 for Republicans and Democrats who won House seats, according to the state Public Disclosure Commission.
     Major party candidates who lost campaigns in the House four years ago spent $47,487 on average. Although he never made it to the general election, 48th District Republican contender David Doud spent nearly twice that -- more than $87,000 -- for the primary alone.
     In the Senate, the 2004 election cost winners an average $142,164 and losers $100,820. Incumbents who were challenged in the Senate on average spent nearly $160,000.
     Between the House and the Senate, three Eastside districts -- the 41st, 45th and 48th -- accounted for nearly half of the state’s eight most expensive Legislative races in 2004.
     In that year’s priciest campaign, Democrat Brian Weinstein spent more than $367,000 to unseat Republican state Sen. Jim Horn in the 41st District, which includes Mercer Island, Newport Hills and Newcastle.
     The most expensive campaign in the House was Rep. Ross Hunter’s, a Democrat from Medina who spent more than $208,000 to keep his 48th District seat.
     State legislators earn only about $35,000 a year, but they spend many times that amount to get the job.
     The money is critical, especially in the Central Puget Sound districts, said Tony Yuchasz, executive director of the Democratic House Campaign Committee. Candidates must fight for the attention of a growing pool of registered voters.
     In 2004, slightly more than 1 million voters were registered in King County. This year there are more than 1.2 million.
     “There are more and more registered voters in these districts,” Yuchasz said, “and that’s a good thing.
     “Being in the Seattle media market increases the difficulty of breaking through with a campaign message. It’s hard, and what it forces us to do is contact voters through the mail three or four or five times.”
     Yuchasz said he won’t be surprised to see House races this year top out at more than $225,000.
     The price tag on some Senate seats will likely grow even higher, beyond $300,000 in the most competitive races, experts say.
     “Getting your message out is not cheap,” said Mark Smith, associate professor of political science at the University of Washington. “The parties tend to devote their resources to the most competitive races. People don’t get into politics unless they can learn to ask for money.”
     Despite the national polls leaning away from the GOP, he said, Washington’s Democrats are still nervous about losing their edge in Olympia, particularly in the Senate, which will see this year’s most expense races.
     After his 2000 defeat to Ruderman, Nixon wound up getting appointed to the district’s other House seat in 2002, but he had to spend another $110,700 to fend off a Democratic challenger for his first full two-year term. In 2004, he spent another $70,000 to fend off a challenger who had no major campaign funding.
     This year, Nixon is going after his district’s crucial Senate seat, which is being vacated by Bill Finkbeiner. A Republican, Finkbeiner broke the party line when he supplied the key vote needed to pass a gay-rights bill earlier this year. Nixon suspects his campaign will cost $150,000 to $200,000.
     “I think what causes races here to be so expensive is simply (that) the electorate is so divided,” Nixon said. “Relatively speaking, though, the amount of money at the state legislative level is a drop in the bucket compared to campaigns in general.”
     One of Microsoft’s original 300 employees, Nixon still draws a paycheck from Bill Gates, but he downplays the importance of campaign contributions from Microsoft. In 2004, Microsoft donated $925 to his campaign, but Paul Allen’s Vulcan Northwest Inc., Boeing, Weyerhaeuser and Bellevue Square Managers Inc. all donated more, $1,300 each.
     In the 45th District’s other House position, Rep. Larry Springer, a Democrat, received nothing from those companies in 2004. Most of his $186,500 came from the state Democratic Party, the House Democratic Caucus, labor unions, citizen groups and other political action committees.
     Boeing and Microsoft did, however, contribute to other Democrats, such as Hunter, who retained his 48th District House seat.
     “I do have a number of Microsoft people who support my campaign, but they aren’t the majority,” Nixon said. “I tend to focus more on issues than trying to leverage my professional relationships for campaign contributions.”
     Poised for his debut run in the state House, Goodman said he won’t rely on big corporate contributions. Although he’s never had to ask his friends and associates for donations, he said he’s ready to do whatever is necessary to win a seat in the House.
     “I’m reaching out to friends and colleagues,” he said. “It’s a first-time bid, and there seems to be a lot of generosity.”
     Fortunately, he said, he doesn’t expect the fundraising to be as difficult as it was when he worked on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., for congressmen Bob Wise, D-W.Va, and Rick Boucher, D-Va. Washington’s campaign finance laws take off some of the pressure, he said.
     Under the law, individuals can contribute up to $1,400 to a legislative candidate. The state parties can pitch in about $45,000, or 70 cents for each registered voter, and the party caucuses can contribute about half that amount.
     “I like how we actually have to reach out to people here, people like our family, friends and neighbors,” Goodman said.

Noel Brady can be reached at noel.brady@kingcountyjournal.com or 425-453-4252.

(return to top)


Woodinville Weekly: Brightwater stinks – and it’s not the sewage you’re smelling

by TOBY NIXON

(Click here for the original article)

     Woodinville (May 22, 2006) -- As a Republican environmentalist, I’ve never thought of the environment as a partisan issue. But I’m baffled when environmental advocates seem uninterested in what may turn out to be, after Hanford, the second biggest man-made environmental disaster in our state’s history.
     I’m talking about Brightwater.
     Environment groups regularly intervene to keep cows away from stream banks, but acquiesced to Ron Sims over building a 36-million-gallon-a-day sewage treatment plant on top of a sole-source aquifer serving more than 10,000 customers and adjacent to an important salmon-bearing stream.
     It’s argued Brightwater is needed to accommodate growth in our region, but we should not abandon common-sense environmental protections in the process. And that’s what we appear to be doing.

Kobe can happen here

     Brightwater is wedged between major branches of the South Whidbey Island Fault, on a site prone to liquefaction. Other potential plant sites were rejected because of proximity to faults that were much farther away.
     King County did seismic trenching to confirm the fault location at the north end of Brightwater, and moved structures south as a result. However, it has refused to trench the potential fault to the south. Why is that?
     Because the county knows that if that fault were confirmed, it would become illegal to build Brightwater on that site.
     International Building Codes, now state law, don’t permit any structure, including sewage tunnels, to be built across known surface faults.
     The 1995 earthquake in Kobe, Japan, showed why that’s good policy. In that disaster, sewage lines like Brightwater’s ruptured where they crossed a surface fault. The entire contents of Kobe’s sewage system -– over 100 million gallons -– emptied into Osaka Bay.
     If that happened here, where would all the sewage and toxic chemicals go? Directly into the aquifer, polluting it for decades. Erupting to the surface, millions of gallons of raw sewage would devastate Little Bear Creek, flow through downtown Woodinville, down the Sammamish River, and into Lake Washington.
     King County claims it can shut off the pumps and stop that from happening. But in a major earthquake, would human operators remember to, or be able to, turn off the pumps and valves?
     They also say such an earthquake is unlikely during the plant’s 50-year design lifetime. Are you willing to take that bet?
     King County is now determined to make it impossible to find the fault at the south end of the site. Claiming it’s doing “grading,” it’s about to dig a hole 90 feet long, 24 feet wide and 54 feet deep for a conveyance tunnel portal. Such deep soil disturbance would prevent seismic trenching from verifying faults on the site.
     Why the rush to dig this hole? When the evidence is unfavorable, bury it.
     After the Katrina disaster, you’d think we’d have learned to be more careful about siting and designing public facilities involving great risk to people and property, and to listen to the USGS and internationally recognized geology experts like Dr. Robert Yeats who has repeatedly warned against this Brightwater site.
     Nope.
     Instead, King County wants to terminate public review of Brightwater. It recently changed the rules to end appeals of its flawed and incomplete environmental impact statements.
     Under the new rules, such appeals can’t occur in King County because the project is being built in Snohomish County. But the appeals can’t occur in Snohomish, because King paid Snohomish $70 million in exchange for an agreement to rubber-stamp the EIS and declare it adequate.
     Something smells, and it’s not the sewage.

There are better alternatives

     There’s no need to rush ahead with Brightwater anyway.
     King County’s own figures show that average daily flows into existing sewage plants are trending downward as people conserve more water.
     They also show that the main problem is stormwater getting into the sewage system. King County’s plan for reducing inflow and infiltration indicates that up to 22 million gallons per day could be kept out of the system by spending less than $100 million on fixes. We can free up existing capacity equivalent to 60 percent of Brightwater for less than 7 percent of the cost.
     Even if we agree that more sewage treatment capacity is needed, why build one huge plant with long conveyance lines vulnerable to earthquakes, when we could build compact plants and distribute them around the area? Such plants built with the latest technology are relatively inexpensive, don’t stink, wouldn’t need long conveyance lines that cross faults, and wouldn’t be a single point of failure.
     We stopped the monorail when we decided it didn’t make sense. It’s not too late to do the same with Brightwater.

     State Representative Toby Nixon (R-Kirkland) represents the 45th Legislative District, which includes Woodinville, Duvall, Carnation, and parts of Kirkland, Bothell, Redmond, and Sammamish. He also serves on the executive committee of the Washington state chapter of Republicans for Environmental Protection.

(return to top)


The Washington Newspaper: Friends of openness look to legislative session

By BILL WILL
General Manager, Washington Newspaper Publisher’s Association

(Click here and go to page 2 for the original article)

     Seattle (May, 2006) -- In a strict political sense, the start of the next Legislative session is light years away, Jan. 8, 2007. But elephants purportedly have long memories and one — Republican Rep. Toby Nixon of Kirkland — will have a recent history lesson ready for his legislative colleagues.
     Nixon is a fervent believer in open government, and not just on the campaign trail. Openness and accountability on the part of public officials are never far off his radar screen, and he backs that up each session with a flurry of legislation. And, like most ideas floated in Olympia, most go directly from a statehouse copy machine to the closest waste basket — with a cursory glance (if we’re lucky) by the legislative leadership.
     One of Nixon’s proposals this past winter was to make a willful, deliberate violation of the state open records law a gross misdemeanor, packing a fine that hurts. The idea is simple — make a public employee accountable for the consequences when they ignore a law. The measure was not designed to punish an innocent mistake or an interpretation of the finer points of the records law. It would punish that tiny handful of public officials who refuse to honor a records request even when their own counsel or a judge orders them to do so.
     There’s now a new poster child for this type of abuse: Acting Spokane Police Chief Jim Nicks. (We sincerely hope the “acting” portion of the title remains accurate and he’s just keeping the chair warm.) Nicks last month refused to turn over some routine documents to The Spokesman-Review, because, as a spokesman termed it, the chief was “upset” by the Spokane daily’s coverage of a couple of high profile investigations. He backed down a few days later, facing a lawsuit he would quickly lose.
     If the public records law had some teeth, Nicks would never have attempted such a stunt. Look for Nixon’s thwarted attempt to give it some to return come January.
     Just southeast of WNPA headquarters here in Seattle sits Key Arena, sometime stomping grounds of the latest group of millionaires seeking to pick the pockets of Washington taxpayers to keep their private sporting venture profitable. While this latest drama unfolds, it’s also noteworthy that the dust has finally settled from an earlier bailout of a Seattle sports franchise.
     That would be the 1997 deal that gave Paul Allen a pile of public funds to raze the Kingdome and build what’s now known as Qwest Field in its place. In the nine years hence, a lot of nosy taxpayers and reporters have been wondering just how lucrative this deal turned out to be for Allen.
     Despite terms of the financing package that required the Allen-owned Seattle Seahawks to disclose a profit and loss statement annually, the Allen folks stonewalled — and the state let them. In 2003, then-Attorney General Christine Gregoire wrote a non-binding opinion that said the Seahawks needed to open their books to the public. The Hawks continued to balk and, last year, State Treasurer Mike Murphy and State Auditor Brian Sonntag , both of whom argued the agreement with Allen demanded disclosure, asked new Attorney General Rob McKenna for a formal opinion. It arrived last month. And the result? Touchdown, Seahawks!
     In tortured prose that only, well, an attorney, could love, McKenna opined that Allen need only disclose the financial statements of First and Goal, a shell company that was created strictly to serve as Qwest Field’s leaseholder. The books of the Seahawks themselves remain off limits.
     First and Goal was created for one reason: to create a firewall between the Hawks and frustrate the financial disclosure requirement of the financing plan. In short, that scheme, McKenna agrees, meets the legal niceties of the agreement.
     It also completely ignores the intent. “This is a close question on which reasonable minds can disagree,” McKenna wrote.
     The final score remains Paul Allen $300 million, taxpayers zero accountability. Let’s remember those numbers as the Sonics come looking for a handout.

(return to top)



Dear Friends -- Some of you have commented that the “black helicopters” comment in the article below is out of character for me. And you’re right, it is -- because the quote was taken complete out of context by the reporter. I made a general reference to the many people who have concerns about national ID cards and the influence of the United Nations on U.S. domestic policy and how they are sometimes pejoratively characterized as the “black helicopter crowd”, and that got transposed and edited into what you read in the article. Sometimes you might think it would be safer to just not talk to reporters at all, but you know I’ve never been one to keep my opinions to myself! While Real ID would certainly help us ensure that only citizens are registered to vote, there are legitimate concerns about the potential for misuse of such a database (such as for identity theft) and about the immense cost. There’s never a simple answer. -- Toby

New York Times: Mandate for ID Hits Resistance Among States

By PAM BELLUCK

(Click here for the original article)

     New York (May 6, 2006) -- Reacting to the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress passed the Real ID law last year, intending to make it tougher for terrorists to obtain driver’s licenses and for people without proper identification to board planes or enter federal buildings.
     But with the deadline for setting up the law two years away, states are frustrated.
     They say the law — which requires states to use sources like birth certificates and national immigration databases to verify that people applying for or renewing driver’s licenses are American citizens or legal residents — will be too costly and difficult to put in place by the May 2008 deadline. Another issue is the privacy impact of the requirement that states share, through databases, the personal information needed for driver’s licenses.
     Concerns are so great that last week, the National Governors Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures, and the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators issued a report saying that the states have not been given the time or money to comply with the law and that they need at least another eight years. Two states have considered resolutions calling for the law to be repealed, the New York City Council passed a resolution opposing it, and New Hampshire is considering opting out entirely.
     “It’s absolutely absurd,” said Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, chairman of the National Governors Association, which takes a stand on issues only when it has a broad consensus. “The time frame is unrealistic; the lack of funding is inexcusable.”
     Another concern, he said, is “whether this is a role that you really want to turn over to an entry-level, front-line, desk person at the D.M.V.”
     “If we’re at a point that we need a national ID card, then let’s do that,” Mr. Huckabee added. “But let’s not act like we’re addressing this at a federal level and then blame the states if they mess it up. There’s not a governor in America that wants that responsibility.”
     Some of the law’s defenders, noting that some of the Sept. 11 hijackers had driver’s licenses, say the states’ complaints are unfounded.
     “We passed a very workable, reasonable, common-sense piece of legislation,” said Jeff Lungren, a spokesman for the law’s main sponsor, Representative James F. Sensenbrenner Jr., the Wisconsin Republican who heads the Judiciary Committee. “The American people will not stand for and should not have to allow for some state bureaucracies that do not want to try and address this gaping security hole we have.”
     But critics among state lawmakers say problems with the law outweigh its value against terrorists and illegal immigrants. Grumbling has been quite loud in New Hampshire, where the state House overwhelmingly passed a bill to opt out of Real ID and the Senate voted Thursday to form a commission to study it. The chambers will reconcile their bills in coming weeks. Gov. John Lynch supports rejecting Real ID.
     “There are unanswered concerns about privacy,” said Pamela Walsh, a spokeswoman for Mr. Lynch, a Democrat. “There are a lot of questions about cost to states for implementing this, and there are the potential unintended consequences of turning our Department of Motor Vehicle workers into agents for the Department of Homeland Security.”
     Many states had raised objections before the law was passed, and some say there was too little debate about the law, which was attached to a large Iraq spending bill.
     The National Conference of State Legislatures says that no state is currently in complete compliance with the law because the Department of Homeland Security will not issue rules for putting it in place until later this year. A few states have introduced preliminary legislation to achieve compliance, but most are waiting for the rules to be issued.
     Governor Lynch and others hope New Hampshire’s action, along with complaints from other states, will encourage Congress to “look at how to revise” the law, Ms. Walsh said. Resolutions were introduced in Kentucky and Washington State urging repeal of the law. Neither made it to a full vote, but the sponsors want to try again.
     “We’ll be back,” said Toby Nixon, a Republican representative who sponsored the Washington resolution.
     He said that the law would cost his state $50 million a year and that linking data from each state would create “effectively a national citizenship database. I can just hear the black helicopters arriving now.”
     The sponsor of Kentucky’s resolution, Representative Kathy Stein, a Democrat, said: “New Hampshire — is their state slogan ‘Live Free or Die’? We’re more of a guns, God, gays and gynecology state. But this is one of those issues where the extreme left, which I’m always characterized as, and the extreme right meet.”
     Indeed, in New Hampshire, those testifying in favor of rejecting Real ID included the Cato Institute and the American Civil Liberties Union.
     In Virginia, a governor’s commission said that “Congress must further act” to strengthen Real ID’s privacy protections, limit paperwork and increase financing. It said Virginia’s start-up costs could be up to $169 million, with annual costs of up to $63 million. That compares with $40 million in federal money allocated for all states combined, said Jarrod Agen, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security.
     Mr. Agen said his department was considering states’ concerns in writing the rules. But financing, timing and other major issues could be changed only by Congress. The law’s Congressional supporters say that is unlikely.
     “The bill will not be opened up,” said Representative Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican, adding that if a state rejects Real ID, its residents will need passports to take domestic flights. “Any state that’s opting out is opting out in doing their part in solving these national challenges, and I don’t have any sympathy for them.”
     Mr. Lungren, the aide to Mr. Sensenbrenner, said complaints that Real ID could imperil privacy or lead to a national identification card are “not even worth responding to,” because states would share information through electronic queries to one another, not a central database.
     Mr. Lungren, citing a Congressional Budget Office estimate of a $100 million total cost, said states’ estimates were “baseless” and “pie in the sky.” And he called states’ concerns about the 2008 deadline “completely ridiculous.”
     Real ID has defenders at the state level, even in New Hampshire.
     The Senate president, Theodore L. Gatsas, a Republican, supports Real ID, saying the state already adheres to many of its requirements, is slated for a $3 million federal grant to set it up, and “I’d hate to see the people from New Hampshire heading to Florida in the week of vacation and not be able to get on the plane.”
     The state’s two congressmen support Real ID as does Senator Judd Gregg. Senator John E. Sununu, a Republican, like the other delegation members, opposes it.
     It has clearly touched a nerve in a state where independence is so valued that New Hampshire’s Constitution includes a “right of revolution.”
     Supporters of New Hampshire’s bill include State Senator Margaret Hassan, a Democrat, who said that she worried Real ID could lead to a national ID card and that “the more you centralize data, the easier it is for someone to break into it.”
     State Representative Neal Kurk, a Republican who quoted Patrick Henry in a speech that helped sway the House, said Real ID would not demonstrably improve security because terrorists would find ways to get the cards, and the law would mean too many compromises.
     “If you say you can’t board a plane without a Real ID driver’s license, it’s not that far of a stretch to say you can’t do other things unless you have this type of identification,” like get a job, he said. “It reminds us all of ‘1984’ and more importantly ‘papers, please’ in the Nazi era.”
     Supporters of New Hampshire’s bill staged a rally with Nazi regalia and fake checkpoints. The cause has been embraced by some evangelical Christians, who say Real ID sets the stage for a number for each citizen, which, according to the Book of Revelation, presages the apocalypse.
     Some New Hampshire residents showed sympathy for the uprising. “I’m really against the federal government getting any more information from me,” said Jeffrey Rabinowitz, 41, of Franklin.

(return to top)


KIRO TV: Lawmakers Push To Ease Smoking Ban

By CHRIS HALSNE
KIRO 7 Eyewitness News Investigative Reporter

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (May 5, 2006) -- The state has nailed a Bremerton nursing home with an emergency safety inspection.
     This comes after we showed you video on Thursday night of elderly and disabled residents, risking their lives, shuffling across a busy street. On the other side was the new designated smoking area.
     Investigative Reporter Chris Halsne discovers our video has revved-up interest in scaling back the state’s tough smoking ban.
     Our new law clearly says you can smoke inside your residence, but there is not an exemption for people residing at assisted living centers.
     As our cameras found out, that means smokers, already in poor health, may have to brave dangerous conditions to light up. Some legislators say that has to change.
     It’s tough to out-race a car going 40 miles per hour when you’re confined to a walker.
     If you’re a smoker who wants to follow the new rules at the Bremerton Health and Rehabilitation Center, your choices are limited. Smokers were kicked off the property a few weeks back, pushed across the street to an uncovered cement bench.
     State Representative Toby Nixon watched our investigation with dismay.
     “I’m shocked, but not surprised. It’s an ongoing problem we have with initiatives, frankly,” Nixon said.
     Rep. Nixon says disabled nursing home residents shouldn’t have to “make a break for it” or stand in the freezing rain to smoke at what’s essentially their home.
     “It’s a politically sensitive issue. Legislators are reluctant to go against what they see as the ‘will of the voters,’ even if it’s a case where the voters may not have understood all of the ramifications of what they were passing,” Nixon said.
     Next fall, Nixon says he will re-introduce a bill to make sure nursing homes make reasonable accommodations for smoking residents.
     The lawmaker wasn’t the only one watching our investigation. Elaine Odom is in charge of inspecting safety conditions at all Washington nursing homes.
     “It bothers me to see people going across a street that busy, especially with walkers and wheelchairs,” Odom said.
     When we told her of unsupervised, mobility-impaired clients, traveling over uneven terrain, Odom personally visited the Bremerton Center. She cited it with a safety violation after observing the same thing we had videotaped. To fix the problem, the Center is now building a covered smoking area on a flat surface near the building.
     “I believe it’s safe now. We did cite them and we will get a plan of correction from them,” Odom said.
     Donald Pike says he understands why taxpayers want to see him quit smoking, but he also hopes lawmakers see his point of view.
     “This is my home, ya’ know. Why do we have to go across the road to smoke? This is my home!”
     Lawmakers also tell KIRO Team 7 Investigators they would like to soften the smoking ban in two other situations: smoking indoor for religious purposes and allowing cigar stores to let buyers light up there to sample products.

(return to top)


Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Legislative races get costlier: Nearly $150,000 for state Senate run

By CHRIS MCGANN
P-I Capitol Correspondent

(Click here for the original article)

     Olympia (May 4, 2006) -- High-stakes politics make for expensive elections, and this year the price tags on legislative campaigns are making Olympia look like Rodeo Drive.
     As politicians and the folks who pay for their campaigns ramp up for this fall’s election season, they’re bracing for what could be record spending on key races that could shift the balance of power in the Statehouse.
     The cost of running a successful legislative campaign has more than doubled in the past decade; the average cost of waging a successful bid for the state Senate, for example, has grown to nearly $150,000.
     Several open seats in east King County could easily generate campaigns fueled by more than twice that amount.
     “It does seem that every year it sets new records,” said Sen. Karen Keiser, chairwoman of the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee.
     Fierce and expensive battles to change the 26-23 majority Democrats hold in the Senate will likely be waged for open seats in the 45th and 47th Districts in east King County and the 26th District in Kitsap County.
     What looks like a three-vote majority for Democrats in the Senate is not enough to carry the day on some social issues because two members routinely side with Republicans.
     “We need to have an effective majority. To reach that ... we need to add three new members to our caucus,” Keiser said.
     “There are going to be highly contested races, and they are in very expensive areas in terms of media costs,” she said. “So it’s quite likely that we will be approaching $300,000.”
     Keiser said Democrats won’t be outspent this election.
     Neither will Republicans.
     “It’s all about political control,” said Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, who is vying for the open 45th District Senate seat. “I never have understood people who compare the salary of an office to how much gets spent on the campaign. What you should be comparing is how much gets spent on the campaign with how much money is at risk in a state, the total state budget.”
     State lawmakers make about $35,000 annually, but control a biennial state budget of $27 billion.
     Nixon is no stranger to expensive campaigning.
     “When Laura Ruderman and I ran against each other in 2000, we set the record, at that point, for the most money ever spent on a state House race,” Nixon said. Combined the two spent more than $500,000 on the race Ruderman won.
     The next year, Democrats had a chance to take control of the state House for the first time in seven years when a 21st District seat in Snohomish County came into play. When the dust settled, more than $700,000 had been poured into the race, setting a record.
     Tony Yuchasz, executive director of the House Democratic Campaign Committee, said House races likely won’t cost as much as Senate races -- but they won’t be cheap. Democrats hold a 55-43 majority in the House.
     “I think that on the high end, House races could go up as high as $250,000” per competitive candidate, Yuchasz said.
     Competitive races such as the open seat in Bellevue’s 48th District could easily cost as much as $225,000, he said.
     “Things have just gotten more competitive on the state legislative level,” he said.
     University of Washington communications professor John Gastil said several factors have led to increased interest and investment in state government.
     “The ‘Republican revolution’ wasn’t just rhetoric,” he said. “One of the things that was accomplished was a greater emphasis on state government, which became more valuable in both practice and perception.”
     He said the heightened use of state initiatives also has raised expectations for what state government can do.
     Likewise, the federal government’s ineffective handling of issues such as national health care and energy policy has shifted the search for solutions back to the state level.
     “The average contributor has come to expect a higher return on their investment in state government than they did 10 years ago,” Gastil said.
     “Essentially more is perceived to be at stake, consequently more money goes to it,” he said.
     Yuchasz said that trying to get a message out to more people is driving up campaign costs.
     “There’s a lot of people to communicate with,” he said. “I don’t think having a high number of registered voters is a problem per se, but having a large number of registered voters drives up the cost of a campaign because candidates want to communicate with as many registered voters as they possibly can.
     “When you look at the Seattle media market, which is almost all of the swing district races, it’s very expensive, and it’s expensive to try to break through with your campaign message.”
     Washington’s 49 legislative districts grew by more than 12,000 registered voters on average between 1994 and 2004, according to election records provided by the Secretary of State’s Office. In the 45th District, where Sen. Bill Finkbeiner, R-Kirkland, is stepping down, voter registration increased by more than 17,000 during that period.
     Finkbeiner said campaign financing did not contribute to his decision to leave the Legislature.
     But he has seen the cost of running for state office skyrocket since he first ran in 1992.
     “It’s like an arms race,” he said. “The parties are part of it, the organizations have gotten more organized. The amazing thing is, in 1992 we passed campaign finance reform. They thought that would decentralize power but in a lot of ways it centralized more power into the political parties.”
     This year individuals can contribute up to $1,400 to a legislative candidate, but the state party can contribute about $45,000 (70 cents per registered voter) and the individual caucuses can contribute a little less than half that amount. Not surprisingly, the parties are the biggest contributors by far.
     In the 2004 state legislative races, the Democrats’ Central Committee donated just over $1 million to candidates. The state Republican Party gave $726,000.
     By way of comparison, the biggest contributor that wasn’t a political party organization was the Washington Restaurant Association, which gave $131,000 to candidates.
     Finkbeiner said it’s getting harder for an outsider to break into politics. He got financial help from his parents when he ran for office 14 years ago.
     “It wasn’t cheap at the time, but it’s nothing like what people are seeing now,” he said.
     That’s not an issue with many candidates because their party will back them if they have a good chance of winning.
     “It makes it prohibitive if you’re not in lock-step with the party -- or independently wealthy,” Finkbeiner said. Otherwise, “it’s really difficult.”
     It’s important to keep campaign spending in a broader perspective, Nixon said.
     “More money is spent on potato chips every year in the United States than is spent on political campaigns,” Nixon said. “And yet, what’s the relative importance to the fate of the nation?”

P-I reporter Chris McGann can be reached at 360-943-3990 or chrismcgann@seattlepi.com.

(return to top)


Woodinville Weekly: Toby Nixon announces run for State Senate

by JEANETTE KNUTSON
Staff Writer

(Click here for the original article)

     Woodinville (May 1, 2006) -- State Rep. Toby Nixon (R-45th District) announced last week that he is vacating his seat in the House and running for the State Senate. State Sen. Bill Finkbeiner (R-45th District) is not seeking re-election and he endorses Rep. Nixon for the Senate.
     Nixon said that since there are fewer State Senators, 49 compared to 98 Representatives, Senators’ votes carried more weight, making their votes twice as influential.
     “Generally, Senators do more work across the aisle,” said Nixon, “and that’s the way I like to work. My heart is in policy and coming up with solutions in a bipartisan fashion. In addition, the margin between parties in the Senate is much closer. And because of the closer margin, Senators have to build bipartisan support if they want a bill to pass.”
     His top three concerns are public safety, restoring trust to voters, and enabling job creation in the private sector.
     Public safety was also Nixon’s focus in the House. In the past two years, he sponsored legislation to stop e-mail fraud, penalize computer crimes, and improve accountability for state patrol troopers involved in multiple at-fault vehicle accidents. He served as the sole legislator on Attorney General Rob McKenna’s advisory council on identity theft for the past year.
     “It is the core responsibility of government to defend the lives, liberty and property of its citizens,” said Nixon. “That can mean anything from making sure that sex offenders are locked away, to making sure that meth labs are cleaned up, to stopping identity theft, to seeing to it that the state is prepared for emergencies.”
     Restoring trust in government, making it more open, honest and less intrusive also ranks high on Nixon’s agenda.
     He said, “I’ve worked hard in a bipartisan way to restore trust in government by making it open and accountable to the voters. The people on the Eastside want the government to provide essential services efficiently, but not to overreach and over-expand. We cannot afford a government that tries to solve all of our individual problems.”
     He also said that trust was important because if citizens are skeptical of the motivations behind legislators’ actions and proposals, it becomes difficult to govern, difficult to get anything done.
     Enabling job creation in the private sector, Nixon said, is tied to many things. It means providing essential infrastructure and transportation, quality education, affordable and accessible health care, low tax rates, defense of property rights, and minimal but necessary business regulations – all necessary for a growing job base and an expanding economy.
     Nixon has served in the legislature since January 2002. He is ranking Republican on the House State Government Operations and Accountability Committee, which considers state government functions such as performance audits and election laws. He took the lead in the House on election reform this biennium, including perfecting key legislation on voter registration, election processes, auditing of voting machines, and voter challenges.He is also a member of the House Transportation Committee and the Technology, Energy, and Communications Committee. He is a member of the Board of Directors of the Washington Coalition for Open Government and on the executive committee of the Washington state chapter of Republicans for Environmental Protection. In 2004, he was endorsed by the Washington Conservation Voters, the state’s key environmental group.
     Nixon is a 13-year veteran of Microsoft, where he works as technology advocate, promoting Microsoft innovations to worldwide industry. He is vice chair of the Steering Committee of the UPnP Forum (www.upnp.org), an industry organization of over 780 companies developing standards for networked devices and smart home technology. Nixon, 47, has been married to his wife Irene for 23 years. They and their five children make their home in the Kingsgate area of Kirkland.
     He is endorsed by Secretary of State Sam Reed, King County Councilmember Kathy Lambert, and many other local leaders.The 45th legislative district covers areas of northeast King County including Woodinville, Duvall, Carnation, and parts of Kirkland, Redmond, Bothell, and Sammamish.

(return to top)


Toby Nixon announces for State Senate

     Kirkland (April 27, 2006) -- 45th District State Rep. Toby Nixon (R-Kirkland) today announced he is running for the State Senate with an agenda to restore trust in government, making it more open, honest – and less intrusive.
     “The people on the Eastside want the government to provide essential services efficiently, but not to overreach and over-expand. We cannot afford a government that tries to solve all of our individual problems,” said Nixon.
     Sen. Bill Finkbeiner has just announced he is not seeking re-election, and that he endorses Rep. Nixon for the Senate.
     “I’m grateful for the opportunity the people of the 45th District have given me to serve them in Olympia, and the trust and confidence they’ve placed in me,” said Nixon. “I’ve worked hard in a bipartisan way to restore trust in government by making it open and accountable to the voters.”
     Nixon is a very independent legislator, who judges each issue by his personal principles and by how it will affect his district. In 2004 he was endorsed by the Washington Conservation Voters, the state’s key environmental group.
     Nixon has focused much energy on improving public safety. In the past two years, Nixon sponsored legislation to stop e-mail fraud, penalize computer crimes, and improve accountability for state patrol troopers involved in multiple at-fault vehicle accidents. He served as the sole legislator on Attorney General Rob McKenna’s advisory council on identity theft for the past year.
     Nixon is endorsed by Secretary of State Sam Reed, County Councilmember Kathy Lambert, and many other local leaders.
     Nixon has served in the legislature since January, 2002. He is ranking Republican on the House State Government Operations and Accountability Committee which considers state government functions such as performance audits and election laws. He took the lead in the House on election reform this biennium, including perfecting key legislation on voter registration, election processes, auditing of voting machines, and voter challenges.
     He is also a member of the House Transportation Committee and the Technology, Energy, and Communications Committee.. He is a member of the Board of Directors of the Washington Coalition for Open Government, and the executive committee of the Washington state chapter of Republicans for Environmental Protection.
     Nixon is a 13-year veteran of Microsoft, where he works as technology advocate, promoting Microsoft innovations to the worldwide industry. He is vice chair of the Steering Committee of the UPnP Forum (www.upnp.org), an industry organization of over 780 companies developing standards for networked devices and smart home technology.
     Nixon, 47 years old, has been married to his wife Irene for 23 years. They and their five children make their home in the Kingsgate area of Kirkland.
     The 45th legislative district covers areas of northeast King County including Woodinville, Duvall, Carnation, and parts of Kirkland, Redmond, Bothell, and Sammamish.

(return to top)


Nixon chosen to represent House on select committee

     Olympia (April 19, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon was selected by the Speaker of the House to be the only member from the state House of Representatives on the recently created Homeowners’ Association Act Committee. The committee was formed by legislation to study homeowners’ association statutes and to examine other issues surrounding homeowners’ groups.
     “I appreciate the confidence of the Speaker of the House in appointing me to represent all 98 members of the House on this committee,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “I have served as a homeowner association trustee and officer for most of the past 16 years, including serving as founding president of one association and president of another, and I currently serve as vice president of my homeowner association in Kirkland.”
     Senate Concurrent Resolution 8423 passed the Legislature this year and calls for study of the Homeowners’ Association Act (RCW 64.38) and review of other issues, such as the manner of amending restrictive covenants, dispute resolution mechanisms, communications between board members and residents, budgeting, conflict resolution, and the need for reforms.
     “Homeowner associations are the most local of all our local governments, providing a number of services that, if they had to be provided by cities or counties, would require significant tax increases,” Nixon said. “We must recognize the value and importance of homeowner associations in the overall system of delivering services and protecting the property values of our citizens. We must also ensure that associations respect the property rights of homeowners, and that they operate with transparency, accountability, high ethical standards, and due process.”
     The committee is also tasked with deciding whether changes need to be made to the statute and must deliver a report to the Legislature by Sept. 1, 2007.
     “The associations I’ve been involved with, while they’ve had their challenges as all do, have generally functioned very well. Part of my goal in serving on this Homeowners’ Association Act Committee is to ensure that any changes proposed won’t interfere with associations that are working well. At the same time, I know that many people around the state have concerns with the operation of their homeowner associations, and I invite them to send me their issues and concerns so they can be considered by the committee,” Nixon said.

(return to top)


45th District Lawmakers Announce Town Hall Meetings for April 22

     Olympia (April 5, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon, Rep. Larry Springer and Sen. Bill Finkbeiner, the three members of the 45th District legislative team, invite the residents of the district to one of two town hall meetings in Duvall and Kirkland set for Saturday April 22nd.
     The 45th District legislators will discuss issues dealt with during the last legislative session– as well as listen to citizens’ concerns and ideas, and answer questions about state government.
     Here are the details of the Town Hall meetings:

Glen Kuntz WRECK Youth Center
26512 NE Stella St.
Duvall
10:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m.

Juanita Elementary Library
9635 NE 132nd St.
Kirkland
1:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.


(return to top)


45th District Lawmakers laud signing of annexation tax measure

     Olympia (March 30, 2006) -- Sen. Bill Finkbeiner, Rep. Toby Nixon, and Rep. Larry Springer, the three members of the 45th District legislative team, were pleased to see the governor sign Senate Bill 6686 today in Olympia. The measure removes one of the last major obstacles to the proposed annexation of unincorporated areas into the city of Kirkland.
     Finkbeiner was a co-sponsor of the measure and ushered it through both chambers. “There are unincorporated areas like Juanita, Kingsgate and Finn Hill that would like to be incorporated into a larger city like Kirkland,” Finkbeiner said. “The difficulty is that Kirkland would need to provide services to nearly twice the number of residents. This bill eases the financial burden without placing an additional tax onto residents.”
     The language of the measure is narrowly crafted to address a small number of large annexations that are required under Washington’s Growth Management Act but that have been held back because the cost of providing city-level services in the annexation area substantially exceeds the tax revenue the city would obtain from the area. It allows the city council to impose a citywide temporary sales tax of up to two-tenths of one percent after annexation is complete.
     However, a tax credit of an equal amount is granted from the state general fund to cover the tax, so the net effect is that the total sales tax rate within the city remains unchanged. The amount of tax transferred from the state to the city each year is capped at the amount needed to close the gap between the cost of providing services in the annexed area and the revenue the city receives from the annexed area, and the tax would expire after a maximum of ten years. Only annexations larger than 10,000 people qualify, and only cities with a population less than 400,000 that are in counties with a population over 600,000 qualify. The annexation must take place prior to January of 2010.
     Rep. Nixon, a resident of Kingsgate and leader of a homeowner association in the annexation area, has worked for several years to find a way to annex the area into Kirkland – a matter that gained renewed urgency with the opening this year of a casino close to his neighborhood.
     “This measure is aimed squarely at facilitating specific annexations in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties, such as the Kingsgate area where I live” Nixon said. “Many of these areas want to annex into adjacent cities in order to get improved police, fire, and other services, but the cities can’t afford it. The cities understandably don’t want to either increase taxes citywide or reduce services citywide in order to complete these annexations. Since completing the annexations is a key part of state growth management policy, it makes sense for the state to help with temporary funding while the city absorbs the increased population and equalizes taxes and services across its entire area.”
     Rep. Springer worked for many years on the Kirkland city council and as Kirkland mayor to find a solution to funding the proposed annexations. He introduced several solutions in the House before the legislature settled on the funding mechanism in SB 6686.
     “I am pleased after two years of trying and four different bills we have passed legislation that will allow cities to fully meet their obligations mandated by the state GMA,” said Springer. “The City of Kirkland has been trying to solve the annexation problems since 1995. This legislation is a win-win that will allow the residents of Kingsgate, Finn Hill and North Juanita to receive much needed services without having to raise taxes.”
     Because Kirkland bans cardrooms within its boundaries, completion of the Kingsgate annexation would likely result in closure of the cardroom at the Casino Caribbean. All three legislators have publicly opposed the cardroom, including arguing against issuance of its liquor license and gaming license.

(return to top)


IEEE-USA Today’s Engineer Online: Q&A With Washington State Representative Toby Nixon

by RUSSELL HARRISON

(Click here for the original article)

Washington State Representative Toby Nixon (R-45) is an IEEE Senior Member and a program manager at Microsoft in Redmond, Washington. After a 26 October Town Hall meeting hosted by the Seattle Section’s Computer Society, Representative Nixon agreed to discuss his career and how politics and engineering intersect.

Q. What is your background in engineering?
A. I have been involved with the computer industry for 30 years. I was the principal engineer for Hayes Microcomputer Products for nine years starting in 1984, and have been a Program Manager with Microsoft since 1993. My work has focused primarily on microprocessor devices, modems and telephony, and now voice over IP. I hold four patents in the field of computer communications.

Q. How did you get started in politics?
A. I have always been interested in history and civics. I became involved in my first political campaign in seventh grade, and have been active ever since. I first ran for office in Georgia, when I ran for a state-wide party office. I lost. Actually, I lost my first four races. I wasn’t successful until 2001, when I was appointed to complete the term of another politician who had won election to a higher office. Since then, I have been re-elected twice.

Q. What advantages have you enjoyed being an engineer in politics?
A. I have been involved in standards work, both within the United States and internationally, for 20 years. The skills you need to develop a successful standard are very similar to those needed to pass successful legislation. In both cases, it is essential that you receive input from as many affected parties as possible. These diverse viewpoints help ensure that the standard or bill works for as many people and interests as possible. They also help eliminate unintended consequences. Because you have to take so many interests into account, the end product is frequently not anyone’s first choice. Everyone’s second-best solution is often better than one person’s perfect solution that can’t be passed. The communication and diplomacy skills that standards work develops have also proven to be invaluable.

I have also found that, because so few legislators have a technical background, that I am listened to when I comment on the technical implications of a bill. Because I have a background in something few other legislators do, my comments are given additional weight by my colleagues.

Q. What advantages has being a legislator been to your professional work as an engineer?
A. My political experiences and relationships help me better understand how engineering projects fit into the broader community. Engineers need to understand that the work they do has political and societal implications, especially if they are, or want to be, managers. Ignoring these concerns limits your effectiveness as an engineer.

I have been fortunate that my employers understand that being a legislator makes me a better engineer. They have been very supportive of my political career and my need to be in Olympia for several months each year.

Q. What was the biggest surprise for you once you took office?
A. How much help is available to me. Crafting legislation and the political compromises they require to become law is difficult. Washington State’s professional legislative staff, and my own personal staff, are invaluable to me when it comes to researching and analyzing legislation. Outside groups and lobbyists are also extremely helpful in understanding the effects a given piece of legislation will have.

I have also learned that Ronald Reagan’s philosophy is true: you can get more done when you don’t care who gets credit. I am in the minority in Olympia, so it is very hard for me to pass my own legislation. This last session, seven of my bills were enacted into law — the most of any Republican (by two). The only way I can do that is by working with Democrats to help improve their legislation. We need to cooperate to get things done.

Q. What is your relationship with professional lobbyists?
A. A good lobbyist provides me with honest, accurate information. They make sure I understand important points of view and ensure that I have seen all sides of important issues. I see lobbyists as a conduit through which I can communicate with groups of my voters.

Q. What advice would you give to engineers about interacting with politicians?
A. Engineers need to be aware of how public policy affects them and their profession. Too many engineers don’t understand how much of an impact government has on their day-to-day life, or how they can influence government decisions.

The best way for engineers to communicate with legislators is to explain how laws (existing or proposed) impact their lives. Anecdotes help legislators understand how their decisions affect real people. Hypothetical examples are not helpful and my staff can provide me with big-picture data and analysis. I need my voters to help me identify problems that legislation could solve. Personal experiences cannot be provided to me by staff or lobbyists, but without these stories, I cannot really understand the needs of my voters.

Computer Society Seattle Section Hosts Legislative Town Hall

The IEEE Computer Society Seattle Section hosted three prominent Washington State legislators at a Town Hall meeting on 26 October. Representatives Ross Hunter (D-48), Toby Nixon (R-45) and Fred Jarrett (R-41) joined IEEE members in a public event to discuss technology policy.

Held in the main council chambers of the Bellevue City Hall, the meeting gave technology engineers an opportunity to ask their legislators about technology policy. The responses from all three Representatives were unusually frank, perhaps reflecting their comfort level with the IEEE community.

All three legislators represent districts near Seattle and have connections with the technology sector. Rep. Jarrett currently works for Boeing as a finance, manufacturing and computing manager, and he previously served as a finance director for a non-profit technology company. Rep. Hunter is a former program manager with Microsoft and a former IEEE member. Rep. Toby Nixon is an IEEE Senior Member and Microsoft program manager. All three have been involved with technology policy for many years.

The three legislators faced questions on a variety of subjects, including offshore outsourcing and job losses. All three agreed that states could not do much to directly slow the flow of jobs overseas. They pointed out that federal laws and international trade agreements tie the states’ hands in most cases. Rather, they wanted to focus on making Washington a more attractive place to do business, so that there would be less of an incentive for companies to leave.

Rep. Hunter believes that much of the effort to boost Washington’s allure must focus on primary and secondary education. He cited, and the other Representatives agreed with, numerous statistics showing that Washington State does a poor job preparing its students to function in a high-tech world. He was especially disturbed by how few Washington state students complete four-year degrees. Rep. Jarrett ascribed the shortfall to the state’s decision several decades ago to invest in community colleges that give primarily associate degrees.

All three welcomed further input from engineers into the public policy process. The IEEE Computer Society Chapter Co-Chair Jim Hood and Chapter Secretary Maury Miller arranged the town hall.

(return to top)


Seattle Times: The faux emergencies

SEATTLE TIMES EDITORIAL BOARD

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (March 16, 2006) -- Fewer state emergencies were declared in Olympia this year, but still too many.
     The state constitution defines an emergency as “such laws as may be necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety,” or for “support of the state government and its existing public institutions.” The declaration of an emergency ought to be an extraordinary event.
     According to a tally by the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, 31 bills were introduced this year invoking that language, and several passed.
     These included the bill of Rep. Lynn Kessler, D-Port Angeles, removing the $5 fee at state parks. Many appreciated that measure and this page supported it, but it was hardly necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety.
     Nor was the bill by Rep. Kathy Haigh, D-Shelton, to host the National Conference of Lieutenant Governors.
     An ordinary law goes into effect in 90 days; declaring an emergency makes its effect immediate.
     The Kessler and Haigh bills each had a reason not to wait. But declaring an emergency also makes the law immune to a petition for referendum.
     It is like a voter initiative, except that a referendum requires only half as many signatures as an initiative. It is an important right of the people, and a declaration of emergency freezes it.
     The abuse of the emergency power concerns the second effect: taking away the right of referendum.
     Last year, Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, proposed a constitutional amendment to remedy the abuse.
     His amendment would allow a law to go into effect immediately. But it would require a two-thirds approval of both houses for a nonspending bill to take away the right of referendum.
     Nixon’s proposal did not pass, but raising the issue had a good effect. From 19 percent last year, the percentage of bills with emergency clauses declined to 9 percent.
     It would be even better to pass his amendment.

(return to top)


Evergreen Freedom Foundation: Legislature improves voter challenge process

     Olympia (March 8, 2006) -- Today the Senate concurred with the House version of Substitute Senate Bill 6362 (introduced by Senator Kohl-Welles), which establishes uniform standards for filing a voter registration challenge. Representative Toby Nixon (R-45th District) offered several key amendments to the bill in the House.
     Jonathan Bechtle, director of Evergreen Freedom Foundation’s Voter Integrity Project, released the following comments on the passage of SSB 6362:

     “While the Democratic leadership has shown little interest in election reform this session, the bipartisan passage of this voter challenge bill is to be commended.
     “Citizens should now be able to confidently file voter challenges when they have good evidence of an improper registration. The common sense changes made by SSB 6362 will help make this possible, while still protecting the rights of legal voters.
     “In its original form, the bill would have had the opposite effect, politicizing the process and opening up new avenues for voter fraud. Representative Toby Nixon should be commended for his efforts to amend the harmful provisions of this bill. His work ensured that SSB 6362 would be a step forward for Washington voters.

     For more information, please visit the Voter Integrity Project website.

(return to top)


King County Journal: Letter to the Editor: Sex Education - Age-appropriate info helps

(Click here for the original letter)

     In a front-page Journal article Monday regarding sex education in the public schools, Associated Press and Journal staff writers wrote that I believe “public school is the last place children should study this subject.” This statement does not accurately reflect my position.
     In fact, all of my own children have taken the full gamut of sex education courses in public school. I personally believe it is beneficial for students to receive age-appropriate information about human reproduction and birth control. I also believe whatever children are taught must be medically accurate, to the extent the course material is objectively and scientifically testable.
     Concerns arise, however, when schools go beyond factual information and undertake teaching moral principles that might contradict what children are taught by their parents or in church. It is for that reason that I strongly believe in preserving and strengthening the ability of parents to review sex education materials and to decide for themselves whether they want their children to receive comprehensive sex education, abstinence-only education, neither or both.
     One of my goals for the 2007 legislative session is to facilitate a discussion between proponents of comprehensive and abstinence-only sex education and school districts to try to reach consensus on the issues of medical accuracy, parental control, and availability of both programs.

TOBY NIXON
State Representative, 45th District (R-Kirkland)

(return to top)


Nixon tries to amend operating budget to restore priorities

     Olympia (February 24, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon introduced an amendment to the state operating budget today that would have redirected funds to help sexual assault victims. The amendment was defeated by the majority and kept the money directed at the Pacific Science Center for a Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit. The amendment to ESSB 6386, the state operating budget, was defeated on the House floor, 52-44.
     Here’s the full text of Nixon’s floor speech:

     “When I read through this bill, I could not find a juxtaposition of appropriations that more perfectly highlights the misplaced priorities in the budget. Subsection 24 would provide a quarter of a million dollars to help promote a museum exhibit. Subsection 25, right next to it, provides funding to help victims of sexual assault.
     “I must ask: Where are our priorities, Mr. Speaker?
     “The tax revenue that flows into this government does not come from some endless artesian well of dollars. It is not pennies from heaven raining down on us like magic. What money we have is the blood, sweat and tears of the people of the state of Washington.
    “Every dollar we spend is a dollar that a young family doesn’t have to make the rent.
     “Every dollar we spend is a dollar one of our seniors doesn’t have to meet a prescription co-pay.
     “Every dollar we spend is a dollar one of our small business owners doesn’t have to provide a family-wage job.
     “Every dollar we spend is a dollar taken from someone in this state, either by force or with the knowledge that it would be taken by force.
     “Every dollar we spend represents a substitution of our judgment of how it should best be spent, for the judgment of the person who earned it.
     “If we are going to use that awful power of government, then, Mr. Speaker, we have a moral responsibility to insure that every dollar we spend is spent wisely, and for an essential public purpose.
     “No matter how great a contribution the Pacific Science Center makes to our community, and no matter how interesting the Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit might be, it simply doesn’t rise to the level of importance that we should be expending the confiscated blood, sweat, and tears of the people of this state for it.
     “On the other hand, Mr. Speaker, we have focused a great deal this session on sex offenders and putting them in jail for a long time. We are investing in the prison space to accommodate them. But I don’t think we’ve done enough to help the victims of sexual assault with their recovery and to regain some normalcy in their lives.
     “If we must spend this quarter of a million dollars on something, then I think it is far more important that we spend it to help victims of sexual assault than it is to help a museum exhibit.”

(return to top)


Evergreen Freedom Foundation: EFF releases report on election reform and our state’s top election officials

73% of Washington voters say “comprehensive election reform is a top priority.” 85% want issue addressed at the ballot this fall.

     Olympia (February 22, 2006) -- The Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) and the Building Industry Association of Washington (BIAW) today released a report on the condition of election reform and the job performance of our state’s top election officials. Representative Toby Nixon (R-Kirkland) also remarked on legislation aimed at restoring integrity to Washington’s elections process.
     “As it stands today, voters in every political party are disenfranchised by ballots cast illegally by people who have no right to vote,” said Bob Williams, president of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation.
     Williams outlined the serious flaws in Washington’s elections system that have yet to be addressed by Reed and state elections officials, including the recently released statewide voter registration database. “The database is only as good as the data it contains,” Williams said. “Right now, over 15 percent of voter files in this database have major errors.”
     Williams said, “People look to Sam Reed, as our state’s chief elections officer, as the voice of authority on election reform. And they look to their county auditors to run clean and fair elections. Voters know our state election officials have let them down, and, as a result, they have lost trust in our elections system.
     “Every American citizen legally qualified to vote—regardless of party, race, age or gender—needs to know his or her vote will be counted and counted accurately. Every person who casts a ballot illegally needs to fear the consequences of doing so.”
     Representative Nixon also outlined his efforts to introduce legislation designed to restore integrity to state elections.
     “The people of Washington have expressed very clearly that they want security, accuracy, and integrity in our elections, and these bills will continue to move us in that direction,” said Nixon.
     “So far, the legislature has failed to enact meaningful reform. I urge all members of the legislature to join me in restoring trust to the voters,” said Nixon.

     BIAW spokeswoman Erin Shannon said that Reed has consistently changed his story on voter data.
     “BIAW asked Reed to let us help him weed out the duplicate voters from the database,” Shannon said. “But his response was that it was an easy task and no help was needed.”
     “Now Reed is telling us that cleaning our voter rolls takes ‘considerable time to work through all the needed corrections.’ We can’t expect integrity in our elections when the chief elections officer keeps changing the story,” said Shannon.
     “A database can only maintain a clean voter roll, it cannot create one,” said Williams. “Our state’s top election official seems willing to grandfather in illegal voters, and we think that sends a terrible message to all the people who have worked so hard to come to America and become citizens.”
     “When Judge Bridges issued his decision on the controversial 2004 gubernatorial race, he noted that the court could not fix what he said were ‘the deficiencies in the election process.’ The judge went on to add that ‘the voters of this state are in a position to demand of their executive and legislative bodies that remedial measures be instituted immediately.’”
     EFF also announced the formation of Grassroots Washington, a 501 c(4) organization that will operate independently of the Evergreen Freedom Foundation. Grassroots Washington intends to run an initiative on election reform in this year’s fall elections. A poll taken by the new organization revealed that “comprehensive election reform to eliminate voting fraud” is among the top issues most important to Washington voters. When asked, seventy-three (73) percent of registered voters responded that election reform is one of the state’s top priorities.
     As it stands, the current statewide voter database provides no refuge to those seeking better election practices in Washington. The initiative, if passed, would require all voters to reactivate their registrations in order to vote a regular ballot in the next election. Williams said this is a necessary step for restoring integrity to Washington’s elections.
     The press conference also featured a George Washington look-alike. Commemorating the 274th birthday of the nation’s first president, Washington added his two-cents worth: “I would like to thank Sam Reed for all he has done with the elections process,” said the Washington impersonator. “After all, as a dead Virginian, even I can in this state!”

(return to top)


Nixon joins call for voters to reregister

     Olympia (February 22, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon joined with the Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) today in support of asking every state voter to reregister. Nixon and the conservative think-tank also take issue with the integrity of the state’s new $6 million voter registration database.
     “If the people of this state don’t trust the security, accuracy, and integrity of our elections, then they will question whether the government is legitimate,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “Election officials must be held accountable for following our laws and that’s why I’ve made improving our election laws and holding state officials accountable my top priority.”
     Nixon introduced 12 bills this session to strengthen the election system, including HB 2532 that would require random audits of optical scan voting machines to verify their accuracy. That bill stalled in the House Rules Committee.
     Nixon said that many voter groups, including groups whose members are mostly Democrats, supported these bills and wondered why the majority party was satisfied with the status quo. “My bill on the optical scan audits was declared to be the most important election reform bill by many of these voting rights groups,” Nixon said. “Why does the majority turn a deaf ear to its party faithful? What do the Democrats in Olympia know that their own supporters don’t? The citizens of Washington continue to have serious concerns about the integrity of our voting system.”
     Some of the other bills that Nixon introduced are summarized below. None of these bills were allowed to the House floor for a vote.
  • HB 2531 strengthens the statutory standards for matching signatures on ballot envelopes to registration forms.
  • HB 2529 makes it illegal to use a nontraditional address for voter registration if the voter has a traditional address and requires the Secretary of State to match the statewide voter database against a list of nonresidential addresses.
  • HB 2523 requires verification of randomly selected batches of signatures declared to match the registration signature.
  • HB 2518 requires that if the number of illegal votes exceeds the margin of victory, the election is declared void and a special election will be held.
  • HB 2526 allows a voter registration to be challenged if the voter has duplicate registrations or when the voter’s address doesn’t exist.
Grassroots Washington, a new political action committee created by EFF, is expected to file an initiative on voter reregistration today in Olympia.

(return to top)


Everett Herald: Students getting sweet lesson in civics, politics

HERALD EDITORIAL WRITERS

(Click here for the original article)

     Everett (February 21, 2006) -- The students from Kirkland Junior High who lobbied for a bill declaring the Walla Walla Sweet Onion the state vegetable deserve commendation for their civic and culinary zeal.
     For three years, current and former students of teacher Toni Miller have written letters, testified in committee and all-around carried the onion torch. Last week, they saw the fruits of their labor: Rep. Maureen Walsh’s House Bill 1964 was passed by a 95-1 vote. “Sweet” is old slang by now, but it’s still the name of the finest onion known to humankind.
     In these days of abundance and availability, very few foodstuffs are so closely associated with a specific geographic area. Which is why making the Walla Walla sweet the state vegetable is such genius. They are only available from mid-June through September, making them precious and summer delicious. Raw or grilled, they are the onion champs. Fans are known to eat onion sandwiches - simply bread, mayo and the sweets. Fanatics are known to just munch an onion like an apple.
     So we should be celebrating this wonderful food as our state vegetable. There’s just one hitch - the bill needs to pass in the Senate. A similar bill that originated in the Senate was defeated last week due to opposition from ... potato growers. This is why the students are getting such a good civics lesson. They were never trying to disrespect the potato, or any state-grown vegetable, just championing Washington’s unique Walla Walla sweets. Even though Idaho promotes and is known for its “Famous Potatoes,” the fact is Washington farmers grow more potatoes than Idaho does. However, “potatoes” say Idaho to most people, no matter how many spuds Washington happens to grow. Just as “apples” say Washington to most people, “sweet onions” are associated with Walla Walla, Washington.
     The students at Kirkland Junior High simply want recognition for the state’s most distinct vegetable (which happen to be better than Maui sweet onions and Vidalia onions from Georgia combined).
     Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, beautifully peeled the onion this way:
     “I’m happy this bill passed,” he said. “I know the kids learned a lot about economics, politics, and certainly the sometimes crooked path that a bill takes through the Legislature. They were patient and persistent over the three years that it took for this bill to pass the House. And now they’ll get to see how hard it is to pass a bill through the Senate!”


(return to top)


King County Journal: A Nixon that Democrats actually like

Kirkland Republican says he isn’t bound by conservative line

By NOEL S. BRADY
JOURNAL REPORTER

(Click here for the original article)

     Bellevue (February 18, 2006) -- His surname may forever be linked to the GOP, but one look at a few of the 46 bills Rep. Toby Nixon of Kirkland is sponsoring in this year’s state Legislature suggests he isn’t a typical Republican.
     Telling the federal government to back off on medical marijuana and forming a commission to take a critical look at the war on drugs and possibly legalize some drugs are just two measures Nixon championed this year. Though they didn’t survive in the House, the measures sparked serious debate on a topic that until recently was considered political suicide.
     A Microsoft program manager, a husband and father of five, Nixon says he isn’t bound to his party’s conservative line. In fact, he said he disagrees on many points with the Bush administration and the national direction of the Republican Party.
     He opposes elements of the Patriot Act that infringe on privacy. He’s critical of the overall Republican response to environmental issues, and he says President Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” education initiative is misdirected because it unfairly and inaccurately brands schools as failures.
     “I never pay attention to the party of the person who comes up with an idea,” Nixon said in his office inside the John L. O’Brien building on the Capitol campus in Olympia.
     “I’m not focused on the politics at all. I’m focused on the policy and finding solutions that work, rather than partisanship.”
     In stark contrast to his GOP counterparts in Washington, D.C., Nixon faces no easy task working on the Republican side of the aisle in Olympia, where Democrats control both houses of the Legislature as well as the governor’s office.
     That has made for a difficult and frustrating session, Nixon said. Several of his personal highest priorities this year, including bills clarifying attorney-client privilege in public documents and two measures to limit the government’s use of eminent domain, hit brick walls in the House Judiciary Committee.
     “I’m disappointed. We put a huge amount of effort into what I think were very substantial, well thought-out measures,” he said. “All of our greatest ideas end up dying in committee.”
     Even Nixon’s drug policy reforms failed to reach the House floor this year. He introduced legislation that sought to create a commission to conduct a “performance audit” on drug-control policies and recommend more effective approaches for controlling street drugs. Among the alternatives that would be considered include treatment instead of incarceration.
     Like a growing number of local political, legal and health-care leaders in recent years, Nixon concluded that the war on drugs has failed. Much like the prohibition on alcohol in the 1920s, he says, the drug war has been a burden on society that, he believes, surpasses the drugs themselves.
     “The concern we should have most about drugs is the impact it has on others,” he said. “We must protect our neighborhoods from drug dealers. But our policies do not seem to be reducing the impact of drugs on our communities.”
     Nixon said he hopes the measure goes further next year. He’s even interested in examining and hearing debate on legalizing some or all street drugs.
     In the current session, he also introduced a measure to pressure Congress and the Bush administration to let voters in each state decide whether to legalize medical marijuana. Voters in Washington state did just that by passing Initiative 692 in 1998, but users of doctor-prescribed pot still can be convicted on the federal level.
     Both bills failed, Nixon said, because the majority Democrat committee chairs feared they would send a message that Democrats are soft on crime.
     As head of the King County Bar Association’s Drug Policy Program, Roger Goodman has been heralding the failure of the drug war for several years. The Kirkland attorney worked closely with Nixon on the legislation.
     And even though it stalled in this session, Goodman said, Nixon’s bill opened the conversation and set the stage for a second attempt next year.
     “He was a critical figure this year for getting our proposals regarding the drug war moving in the House,” Goodman said.
     Nixon said his support for such issues as drug-war reform and repeal of the Real ID Act’s move to federalize state driver’s licenses, not to mention pressuring the government to stop interfering in chronic pain management, all are rooted in his value for the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
     That’s the part that states “... powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the states respectively.”
     “Republicans in general question growth in the scope and size of government,” Nixon said. “In my discussions with many grass-roots Republicans, I find that many agree with my strong support for individual liberty and smaller government, and especially support for local control and reducing federal interference in state affairs.”
     Despite his opposition to certain hot-button issues such as abortion, Nixon has had success promoting bipartisan cooperation for many of his legislative endeavors. Rep. Kathy Haigh, D-Shelton, said Nixon worked closely with her and other Democrat allies to produce a bill ensuring equal access to voting for disabled people.
     “I’ve developed a great deal of trust and respect for his work, and it has made it easy to bring difficult and sometimes controversial issues to a compromise,” Haigh said.
     Other Democrats, however, say Nixon isn’t afraid to show his Republican stripes when necessary.
     One insider in Olympia describes him as a “virulent partisan” when it comes to election reform.
     Among other measures, one of Nixon’s bills would strengthen standards for matching signatures on ballot envelopes to registration forms. Another would set a limit on votes. If they exceed the margin of victory, the election would be tossed out void and a special election would be held.
     Despite that, Haigh credits Nixon with being willing to work across the aisle.
     “I believe Toby is more of a centrist on many issues, and I can relate to his position,” she said. “But on some issues he has a very Republican viewpoint, although some say he is more of a Libertarian.”
     That conservative side of Nixon appeared in one of this year’s most heated debates. He said he did not support the gay rights bill, which passed in both the House and Senate.
     A devout Christian who oversees Sunday school at seven Eastside churches, Nixon said he found himself in conflict with the measure, which has been signed into law by Gov. Chris Gregoire. It adds “sexual orientation” to a state law that bans discrimination in housing, employment, insurance and credit.
     “I would’ve supported that bill if it was focused on the government” rather than the free market, Nixon explained. “Individuals have natural rights (to freedom of religion and association) that predate the existence of government. Any bill that would infringe on these natural rights should not be supported.”
     To understand Nixon’s progressive take on conservatism, one must begin at his childhood in Southern California. His father served in the U.S. Air Force during the Korean War and later worked as a rocket engine inspector, until an on-the-job injury put him out of work.
     After Nixon’s parents divorced, his father’s disability compensation ran out, and his father raised his three sons on welfare, food stamps and Medicaid.
     After 13 years with Microsoft, Nixon now balances his work with his religious faith, political career and his family. He said he’s wanted to be a legislator since the seventh grade, when his civics teacher made her students memorize the Preamble to the Constitution.
     He said he won’t consider national politics until the last of his five children, who range from 13 to 21 years of age, is grown.
     “There are guys who joined Microsoft at the same time I did who are now senior vice presidents, but they gave their lives to Microsoft,” he said.
     “That’s not for me. When I think about where I can have the greatest impact on people’s lives on a day-to-day basis, it would be in the state Legislature.”

(return to top)


Vancouver Columbian: In Our View - No Right to Walk Out

COLUMBIAN EDITORIAL WRITERS

(Click here for the original article)

     Vancouver (February 13, 2006) -- Sixty days is not enough time to pass the thousands of laws and amendments proposed in a legislative session. Thank heavens, in many cases. But as bills died by the hundreds earlier this month due to a lack of committee action, we grieved the loss of House Bill 2808.
     The bill, sponsored by Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, would establish maximum penalties of $10,000 for each day a union violates state law with an illegal public employee strike.
     That’s the least the state can do to punish a labor organization that is willing to disrupt learning, families and workplaces because it has failed to accept a work contract in the allotted time. To understand the devastating impact a teachers’ strike can have on a community, Washingtonians need only go back two years in their memory. In 2004, Marysville teachers staged the longest strike in state history (49 days) before ultimately accepting a contract that left many teachers grumbling. No one won. Everyone especially teachers and certainly students lost. The strike was a miserable failure.
     Public school teachers don’t have a legal right to strike in Washington. They do have every right to quit their jobs if they believe the work conditions are unacceptable. But don’t expect to see that happening anytime soon.
     The reality is that school employees have a decent gig. Go to www.salary.com to compare salaries in a variety of careers in the region. And the hours worked by school employees are another reason people continue to be drawn to the profession, despite union claims to the contrary.
     The Washington Education Association should be willing to count educators’ perks along with the punches in order to gather credibility and greater support for teachers’ unacceptable middle- and end-career wages. Instead, the union insists on crying poor and lobbies to jack up the entry pay for people who have no experience or track record in the profession, threatening to strike when school districts refuse to offer more than they can or should.
     Even though public employee strikes are illegal, school employees walk out on the job. Why not? Holding communities hostage by refusing to teach kids is an effective bargaining chip and there is no fixed penalty for the illegal activity. Nixon’s law would have changed that.
     The representative’s efforts were not in vain, however. While the WEA continues to argue that state law is ambiguous when it comes to public school employee strikes despite convincing case law and statements from former attorney general Chris Gregoire and several judges state Attorney General Rob McKenna has now weighed in on the matter, clarifying that school teachers have no right to strike.
     The opinion was recently released in response to a request from Nixon.
     Such clarification is not at all what the WEA wants which is why we needed a law such as Nixon’s House Bill 2808. Zero penalty means zero incentive for the union to comprehend the law.


(return to top)


Kirkland teens pass onion bill through House

     Olympia (February 13, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon praised the enthusiasm and hard work of over 160 students from Kirkland Junior High who succeeded in their quest to pass a bill declaring the Walla Walla Sweet Onion as the state’s official vegetable.
     “These kids took this on as a civics project and wrote letters, testified in committee, and generally championed this bill for three years,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “It’s wonderful that today they see all their hard work come to fruition.” House Bill 1964, sponsored by Rep. Maureen Walsh, R-Walla Walla, passed the House 95-1 today.
     The classes of Kirkland Junior High were led by teacher Toni Miller, who took it on as an exercise in the legislative process. “These kids had little knowledge of state economics beyond Boeing and Microsoft,” Miller said. “So it was a way for them to study the importance of agriculture, tourism, and international trade in generating state revenue. And they could learn about the legislative process at the same time.”
     Over 60 of the students were in the House gallery to witness the floor debate and the final vote on the bill, then enjoyed a lunch of Walla Walla sweet onion sausages immediately thereafter.
     Miller said that the students chose the Walla Walla Sweet Onion because it’s unique to the state and makes a more appropriate state symbol than some of the other vegetables grown in the state.
     “I’m happy that this bill passed,” said Nixon. “I know the kids learned a lot about economics, politics, and certainly the sometimes crooked path that a bill takes through the Legislature. They were very patient and persistent over the three years that it took for this bill to pass the House – and now they’ll get to see how hard it is to pass a bill through the Senate!”
     HB 1964 is headed to the Senate for consideration. A similar bill originating in the Senate was defeated last week due to opposition from potato growers.



Rep. Toby Nixon, Rep. Larry Springer, Rep. Maureen Walsh, and Rep. Bill Grant
with the students, parents, and teachers of the Kirkland Jr. High 9th Grade
in the State Reception Room in the Legislative Building


(return to top)


Nixon’s bill to detail vehicle taxes being paid passes House

     Olympia (February 11, 2006) -- Legislation that would reveal and itemize all taxes or fees citizens are paying when they renew their vehicle licenses, sponsored by Rep. Toby Nixon, overwhelmingly passed the House today. House Bill 2534 would require the Department of Licensing’s vehicle license tab renewal notices to itemize all fees and taxes due, which jurisdiction imposed the charges, and whether or not the charges were approved by voters.
     Prior to 2006, vehicle license tab renewal notices included details of all included charges. After the 2005 transportation funding package added new weight fees and other charges, the Department of Licensing decided to omit the itemization of charges from renewal notices, claiming that there was insufficient space on their existing forms. Vehicle owners are instead directed to the Department’s internet web site in order to view the details of what they’re paying to renew their vehicle tabs.
     “Not everyone has ready access to the Internet, and they shouldn’t need to in order to know exactly what they’re paying for and where their tax money is going,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “We require in statute that property tax bills be itemized so that the public is fully informed, and we should do the same with vehicle license bills.”
     The bill passed the House 95-0 today.
     “The bill would also force DOL to outline whether each tax or fee was approved by voters,” said Nixon. “We as taxpayers need to know not only where our tax money is going but whether we have a say in how much we’re paying and if we agreed to the tax with a vote, so we know who to contact if we disagree.”

(return to top)


45th District Lawmakers Announce Town Hall Meetings for Feb. 18

     Olympia (February 9, 2006) -- Sen. Bill Finkbeiner, Rep. Toby Nixon and Rep. Larry Springer, members of the 45th District legislative team, invite the residents of the district to two town hall meetings in Sammamish and Woodinville set for Saturday Feb. 18.
     The legislators will discuss issues that are before the Legislature –- which is in session until March 9 –- as well as listen to citizens’ concerns and ideas, and answer questions about state government.
     Here are the details of the Town Hall meetings:

     Sammamish Library
     825 228th Ave. NE
     Sammamish
     10:30AM-12:00PM

     Woodinville Library
     17105 Avondale Rd. NE
     Woodinville
     1:30PM-3:00PM

(return to top)


Nixon concerned by report of possible election law violation

     Olympia (February 8, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon is upset over a report alleging supporters of a Bethel School District levy were too close to a polling place at Graham Elementary, which is prohibited by state law. Supporters of the levy were reportedly set up outside the school building and inside the polling place wearing “Vote Yes for Bethel Schools” t-shirts, in clear violation of election laws.
     “There are good reasons why this state prohibits campaigning within 300 feet of a polling place,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland, Ranking Republican on the House State Government Operations and Accountability Committee that handles election law legislation. “This activity at Graham Elementary appears to be a particularly egregious example of prohibited campaigning. If there’s a loophole in this law, as lawmakers we need to resolve any problems this may create. Otherwise, the organizers of this activity must be held accountable.”
     Nixon was informed of the alleged illegal activity by voters in the school district and wrote letters to the Secretary of State, Pierce County Auditor, and state Attorney General. This behavior would be a violation of RCW 29A.84.510 and is punishable as a gross misdemeanor.
     “If the school board is found to have known about the activity, approved it, or stood by and allowed it to happen, they should be held accountable as well,” said Nixon. “The Pierce County Auditor should tell us why her poll workers did not object to this violation of the law. Poll workers should have asked the campaigners to move at least the required 300 feet away from the polling place.”
     According to the Bethel School District, both ballot measures are failing after neither achieved the 60 percent “supermajority” required for levy and bond measures.

(return to top)


USA Today: News from Washington

(Click here for the original article)

     Olympia (February 3, 2006) -- State Rep. Toby Nixon is sponsoring a bill that would establish penalties for teacher strikes. Attorney General Rob McKenna notes that public school teachers have no right to strike, but current law imposes no penalties for a walkout.

(return to top)


Nixon pushes for teacher strike penalties after AG opinion

     Olympia (February 2, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon has redoubled his efforts to enact penalties for teacher strikes after an attorney general opinion affirming they have no right to strike. Nixon introduced House Bill 2808 last month that would impose penalties of up to $10,000 per day on labor unions that incite illegal strikes.
     “I asked the Attorney General’s Office to give me an opinion on whether public employees have the right to strike and whether there are penalties for striking,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. Attorney General Rob McKenna released his opinion on Jan. 31.
     “The opinion expressly says that state and public employees have no right to strike and currently no penalties exist in statute. That’s why I introduced HB 2808 to impose penalties. If they choose to strike and try to intimidate school districts during contract negotiations, that action will have consequences.”
     The bill was sent to the House Commerce and Labor Committee, but has not yet received a hearing.
     “Parents and students have had to helplessly stand by while the teacher’s union has pressured their members into an illegal strike, disrupting learning, college plans, and family life,” said Nixon. “I’ve had enough of this tactic. Previous attorney generals refused to take a stand on the issue; I appreciate that Rob McKenna had the courage to stand up to the unions and make a clear statement that public employee strikes, including teacher strikes, are illegal.”

(return to top)


Seattle Post-Intelligencer: State AG says public school teachers have no right to strike

By DONNA GORDON BLANKINSHIP
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (February 1, 2006) -- Public school teachers have no right to strike in Washington, but state law imposes no penalties for such walkouts, the state attorney general said this week.
     Attorney General Rob McKenna clarified the issue in response to a request from state Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, who is sponsoring a bill that would establish penalties for teachers’ strikes.
     Charles Hasse, president of the Washington Education Association, respectfully disagreed with McKenna and said neither the Legislature nor state courts has ever established a definitive rule concerning teachers’ strikes.
     In his opinion, McKenna mentioned several state laws prohibiting public employee strikes but Hasse, whose organization represents K-12 teachers statewide, said each of those laws specifically targets a certain kind of state employee, such as police or firefighters, and K-12 teachers have never been mentioned in anti-strike laws.
     “It just seems to us that people do have a right to collectively withhold their labor in the absence of a fair agreement. The Legislature repeatedly has chosen not to directly address the issue in the law,” Hasse said Wednesday.
     Nixon, who received the opinion Wednesday afternoon, said he appreciated the attorney general’s opinion because he shared the opinion that teachers should not be allowed to strike because they play such a vital role.
     “We don’t let police go on strike or the firefighters ... our schools are just as important to our community and our economy,” Nixon said.

     Alex Bohler, a labor policy analyst with the conservative Evergreen Freedom Foundation, applauded the decision, saying, “This AGO (attorney general opinion) should make it clear that when unions pressure teachers to strike, they are pressuring them to break the law.”
     The last teachers’ strike in Washington was three years ago in Marysville and Hasse said he sees no strikes on the horizon. A bill similar to Nixon’s proposal was discussed in the Legislature right after the Marysville strike but did not become law. Hasse remembered similar bills being discussed about four other times over the past 30 years.
     In the opinion, McKenna said the Legislature could legally outlaw teachers’ strikes and establish penalties for such actions. He added, however, that state courts already have the power to punish strikers who ignore an injunction against a strike.
     McKenna cautioned against legislation that would prohibit advocating for the right to strike, on First Amendment grounds.
     Nixon said he didn’t expect his strike penalty bill, HB2808, to get a hearing in the House Commerce and Labor Committee this year.
     The bill would specifically prohibit strikes by educational employees and would establish maximum penalties of $10,000 for each day an employee organization does not comply with a court order not to strike.

(return to top)


Evergreen Freedom Foundation: Attorney general issues opinion on legality of teacher strikes

No right to strike; legislature can enact penalties

(Click here for the original article)

     Olympia (February 1, 2006) -- Responding to a request from Representative Toby Nixon (R-45), Washington state Attorney General Rob McKenna released a formal opinion yesterday clarifying the illegality of public school teacher strikes.
     This is the first time that the Attorney General’s office has issued an official opinion on teacher strikes, and the opinion makes crystal clear that teachers, in fact, do not have an affirmative right to strike: “In Washington, state and local public employees do not have a legally protected right to strike. No such right existed at common law, and none has been granted by statute.”
     “The Washington Education Association consistently uses illegal strikes to intimidate school boards during contract negotiations over wage and benefit issues,” said Alex Bohler, a labor policy analyst with the Evergreen Freedom Foundation. “This AGO should make it clear that when unions pressure teachers to strike, they are pressuring them to break the law.”
     In addition, the attorney general opinion (AGO) views legislative efforts seeking to establish penalties for striking teachers and their union representatives as constitutionally permissible.
     HB 2808, sponsored by Representative Nixon, would codify the state’s case law and impose penalties on unions that initiate strikes. Under the proposed law, judges could fine striking unions up to $10,000 a day for violations.
     The AGO also reaffirmed that other state and local public employees do not have the right to strike.
     “The Washington Federation of State Employees has asked members what issues they should strike over. This AGO should serve as a warning for the union,” said Bohler.
     Legislators have until Friday, February 3 to pass the bill out of committee. This date is the formal “cut off” that marks the halfway point in the legislative session.

Attorney General Opinion 2006 No. 3

Additional Information

History of Washington teacher strikes
Can teachers’ union spell I-L-L-E-G-A-L?
British Columbia enforces teacher strike law

(return to top)


Nixon’s bill asks DOL to detail vehicle taxes being paid

     Olympia (February 1, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon announced a Feb. 1 public hearing for his bill that would reveal and itemize all taxes or fees citizens are paying when they renew their vehicle licenses. House Bill 2534 would require the Department of Licensing’s vehicle license tab renewal notices to itemize all fees and taxes due, which jurisdiction imposed the charges, and whether or not the charges were approved by voters.
     Prior to 2006, vehicle license tab renewal notices included details of all included charges. After the 2005 transportation funding package added new weight fees and other charges, the Department of Licensing decided to omit the itemization of charges from renewal notices, claiming that there was insufficient space on their existing forms. Vehicle owners are instead directed to the Department’s internet web site in order to view the details of what they’re paying to renew their vehicle tabs.
     “Not everyone has ready access to the Internet, and they shouldn’t need to in order to know exactly what they’re paying for and where their tax money is going,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “We require in statute that property tax bills be itemized so that the public is fully informed, and we should do the same with vehicle license bills.”
     The bill is set for public hearing before the House Transportation Committee on Feb. 1 at 3:30 in House Hearing Room B in the John L. O’Brien building.
     “The bill would also force DOL to outline whether each tax or fee was approved by voters,” said Nixon. “We as taxpayers need to know not only where our tax money is going but whether we have a say in how much we’re paying and if we agreed to the tax with a vote, so we know who to contact if we disagree.”

(return to top)


Nixon calls on feds to allow states to decide medical marijuana use

     Olympia (January 31, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon introduced a measure this month that calls on the President and Congress to allow the voters of the state to decide whether to authorize the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. It’s scheduled for a hearing today.
     “One of federalism’s chief virtues is allowing for the possibility that a single state may, if the citizens choose, serve as a laboratory to try novel social and economic experiments,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “Our federalist system, properly understood, should allow states to decide for themselves whether marijuana should be used for medicinal purposes and how best to safeguard the health and welfare of their citizens.”
     House Joint Memorial 4033 asks the President and Congress to give states the power to decide for themselves on the merits of medical marijuana use. The measure also asks that this issue be put on the ballot in November for a vote of the people.
     “The people of Washington passed Initiative 692 authorizing medicinal use of marijuana with a 59 percent approval vote,” said Nixon. “Putting this request to Congress on the ballot in November will give the people an opportunity to once again weigh in on the issue of medical marijuana and provide the additional impetus needed to get Congress to act.”
     The measure is scheduled for a public hearing in the House Health Care Committee today at 1:30 in House Hearing Room A in the John L. O’Brien building.

(return to top)


Nixon’s bill clarifies and tightens sexual misconduct crimes

     Olympia (January 30, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon announced a Jan. 31 public hearing for his bill that would clarify the law on sexual misconduct with a minor. House Bill 2533 would remove the provisions in current law that require the perpetrator to have a special supervisory relationship with the victim for the sexual misconduct law to apply.
     “We must protect our children from so-called family friends who are skirting the law and getting little or no punishment for their crimes,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “This law would help people like Patty Carson’s 16-year-old relative who was taken advantage of by a scheming pedophile.”
     Patty Carson of Woodinville has been speaking to legislators about deficiencies in the state pedophilia law. Carson believes the law allowed a 45-year-old “friend of the family” to take advantage of her 16-year-old relative and lure her into a sexual affair for two years behind the backs of the girl’s parents. Carson will be testifying at Tuesday’s hearing.
     “Situations like we hear from Ms. Carson shouldn’t be allowed to happen,” said Nixon. “HB 2533 will simplify the sexual misconduct law and close the loophole these pedophiles are sneaking through. Her family had no recourse for this predatory abuse and we can’t let other victims suffer this way just because the law is deficient in its language.”
     The bill is set for public hearing before the House Criminal Justice and Corrections Committee on Jan. 31 at 1:30 in House Hearing Room E in the John L. O’Brien building.

(return to top)


Nixon calls on feds to stop interfering in chronic and end-of-life pain management

     Olympia (January 27, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon introduced a measure this week that calls on the President and Congress to allow Washington’s laws to control and guide physicians in the area of pain management.
     “Our laws include a Medical Practice Act that recognizes that pain management is a part of accepted medical practice,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “However, many physicians in this state are afraid of being branded as ‘drug pushers’ by the Drug Enforcement Administration just because they prescribe enough pain relievers to help dying patients feel comfortable in their last days. This is a matter that should be between doctors and patients. Federal bureaucrats and drug agents should butt out.”
     House Joint Memorial 4037 asks the President and Congress to stop interfering with a state’s right to define legitimate medical practice and not expand the Drug Enforcement Administration’s authority over a physician’s best medical judgment.
     “This state has developed and adopted guidelines for the management of pain in order to acquaint practitioners with recognized national standards in the field of pain management,” said Nixon. “We need to halt federal interference and let the treating physicians feel free to treat patients who need this kind of help.”
     The measure has been sent to the House Health Care Committee.

(return to top)


Vancouver Columbian: Feds urged to repeal new ID law

by KATHIE DURBIN
Columbian staff writer

(Click here for the original article)

     Olympia (January 26, 2006) -- Big changes are coming to your Washington state driver’s license, thanks to language Congress added to a mammoth defense and disaster appropriations bill last year that makes driver’s licenses into federal identification cards.
     And some state lawmakers are not happy about it.
     The REAL ID Act of 2005, signed into law by President Bush in May, sets a May 2008 deadline for states to add detailed personal information to driver’s licenses and guarantee that licensed drivers are U.S. citizens or legal immigrants.
     The requirement will cost the state Department of Licensing an estimated $250 million over the next five years and hike the cost of a driver’s license by as much as $25, said department spokesman Brad Benfield.
     A resolution sponsored by Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, heard by the House Transportation Committee this week, calls on Congress and President Bush to repeal the REAL ID Act, saying it infringes on civil liberties, creates a huge burden for the Department of Licensing and could make identity theft easier.
     “This is the worst kind of unfunded mandate from the federal government on the states,” Nixon said at Monday’s hearing. “This is the wrong way to implement a national ID.”
     Nixon said Congress added the language to a bill funding relief for Hurricane Katrina victims and funding the war in Iraq “in the dark of night” and without any notification to the states.

     The Bush administration has defended the move to federalize state driver’s licenses, noting that many of the 9/11 hijackers had multiple driver’s licenses and used them as ID.
     But Nixon said that if the federal government wants everyone to carry a national ID card, it should develop the card itself. He said it should be up to the states to decide who is licensed to drive on their roads.
     The new federal law prohibits using a driver’s license as ID to enter a federal building, board an airplane or for any other federal purpose unless it has been certified by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
     Under draft rules implementing the law, state licensing agencies would be required to verify all information applicants give to provide proof of identity, residence and citizenship status by contacting the agency where the information originated. They would be required to obtain digital images of all source documents used to verify that information and maintain those images for at least 10 years.
     Benfield said the department estimates it would have to hire as many as 400 employees statewide to implement the law over a five-year period as licenses come up for renewal.
     “It will slow things down,” he said. “They’ll have to present documents and we’ll have to scan them. They’ll get a temporary license while we are verifying the information.”
     Under the draft rules, ID cards that do not conform to the federal standard would have to indicate that fact with a written statement on the license itself and a unique color or design.
     States would have to ensure the physical security of the locations where ID cards are produced and those involved in producing them would be subject to security clearances.
     Nationwide, a survey by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators found that the costs to states will far outstrip the $100 million in federal reimbursement recommended by the Congressional Budget Office last year.
     Jennifer Shaw, a lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington State, said the ACLU is hoping to create a groundswell for repeal of the act through state resolutions like the one introduced in Washington, though she said no other state has gone as far as introducing legislation.
     “We and every other state are saddled with a mandate that has nothing to do with the war on terror,” she said at Monday’s hearing.
     Shaw said the ACLU is particularly concerned that under the law, databases for each state will be integrated into a national database. She said that will require U.S. citizens to provide more private information to the government and lead to increased crime.
     “Identity theft in Washington state will now be identity theft nationally,” she said. “Wrong information in Washington state will be wrong information nationally.”
     A coalition of civil libertarians and conservative groups is fighting a proposal by the Department of Homeland Security to require that driver’s licenses contain machine-readable technologies such as magnetic strips, bar codes or Radio Frequency Identification chips. The department is expected to release its guidelines soon.
     Representatives of the tourism industry in Whatcom County on the Canadian border did not take a stand on the resolution, but said that both U.S. and Canadian citizens need a simple way to prove citizenship when they cross the border and that the new driver’s license might provide an answer.
     Under another new federal law, the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, everyone including U.S. citizens must show a passport to enter the U.S. after January 2008. The State Department announced last week it will issue a secure, less expensive passport card for U.S. citizens by late this year, but no one knows whether that card will be accepted by foreign countries.
     Currently, Americans returning from Canada or Mexico without a valid passport may be required to prove residency by presenting a photo identification card such as a driver’s license and a U.S. state or federal government-issued birth certificate, Certificate of Citizenship or Certificate of Naturalization.

(return to top)


Nixon proposes studying effectiveness of drug-control policies

     Olympia (January 26, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon introduced legislation yesterday that would create a commission to investigate and recommend approaches to controlling psychoactive substances, chemicals that alter brain function. Drugs such as “ecstasy”, marijuana, and cocaine are examples of psychoactive substances.
     “We must protect our children from those who would sell or give drugs to them, protect our neighborhoods from drug dealers who would endanger them with drug production using hazardous chemicals, and protect our society from criminals and from those who would drive under the influence or engage in behaviors that endanger others,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “But our policies do not seem to be reducing the impact of drugs on our communities. This commission will conduct what amounts to a ‘performance audit’ of our drug-control policies, and examine whether there are more efficient and effective ways of tackling the problem using the scarce public resources available.”
     House Bill 3171, which has several co-sponsors from both parties, calls for the appointment of experts in the field and four members of the Legislature to a commission for psychoactive substance control. The state Department of Health would staff the commission.
     More than a dozen groups around the state have been calling for such a commission. “I’ve heard from the bar association, the medical association and many other groups about the importance of creating this commission,” said Nixon. “It’s time we had an open and objective study of this issue and find the best way to deal with the impact of drugs on our families and communities.”
     The bill has been sent to the House Health Care Committee.

(return to top)


Nixon joins bipartisan environmental effort

     Olympia (January 25, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon joined ten members of the state House and ten members of Northwest environmental groups in a new coalition intended to advance environmental legislation this session and in the future.
     “All of us, regardless of party, share common goals of protecting habitat and being good stewards of the environment,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “We need to leave a better state for our children. We may not initially agree on the best solution, but by working together we can find common solutions among these disparate groups.”
     The group, called “Environmental Roundtable,” was founded by Rep. Jay Rodne, R-Snoqualmie, Gail Twelves of Sammamish, a member and leader of the Sierra Club, and Scott Hamilton, a member of Eastside Transportation Choices and the Sammamish Planning Commission.
     Members of the Environmental Roundtable include ten House representatives, comprising six Republicans and four Democrats, and eight members representing environmental organizations.
     “This group begins as a coalition of Republican and Democrat legislators in the crescent districts around Seattle, and Puget Sound-based environmental groups, but our goal is to expand participation as quickly as possible to Eastern Washington,” said Hamilton. “We all recognize that Eastern Washington is different from Western Washington—and the suburban and rural areas around Seattle are different than Seattle. It is critical to the future of our state that we build a bipartisan coalition that includes voices from these areas from all political, economic and environmental spectrums.”

(return to top)


Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Capitol Watch: A simple gesture

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (January 25, 2006) -- When the state Legislature passes what’s called a “joint memorial,” it has no real legal impact. No statute is changed. No money is appropriated. It’s perhaps best described as a gesture.
     The Legislature is being asked to make such a gesture this session. It’s House Joint Memorial 4029. If approved by the House and Senate, the joint memorial would call on Congress to repeal the Real ID Act of 2005. The act carries the controversial federal mandate that all states retrofit their driver’s license programs to produce what amounts to a national identification card. The uncompensated costs to state governments run into the hundreds of millions of dollars. The potential threats to privacy and individual civil liberties have been raised across the ideological spectrum.
     Real ID passed Congress literally in the dead of night, attached to funding for the war on terrorism and tsunami relief.
     According to a staff bill analysis of HJM 4029, sponsored by Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, Real ID was “passed with insufficient deliberation, without a hearing or vote on its own merits, and in lieu of a negotiated process involving decision makers at all levels of government.”
     The memorial also states that “there is no inherent conflict between national security and the preservation of constitutional rights and liberties.”
     We encourage both House and Senate to approve Nixon’s memorial. It may be a gesture, but it’s a worthy message decrying overreaching federal authority.

(return to top)


Nixon’s package of election audit bills get hearing

     Olympia (January 24, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon, ranking Republican member on the House committee on State Government Operations and Accountability, announced public hearings on House Bills 2523 and 2532 that would mandate additional election audits to increase public trust in Washington state elections.
     “The 2005 elections demonstrated that the work of reforming our election processes is not done yet,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “The people of Washington demand security, accuracy, and integrity in our elections and these bills will continue to move us that direction.”
     Current signature matching procedures require verification only when signatures are declared to not match, meaning that quality checks are never done on matching signatures. HB 2523 would require verification of randomly selected batches of signatures declared to match the registration signature. It would also require keeping records of which election worker declared signatures to match, so they can be held accountable if errors are later found.
     HB 2532 would require random audits of votes counted by optical scan counting machines. Precincts would be selected at random to represent a statistically-valid percentage of the votes cast, and three races or ballot measures would be selected at random in each of those precincts for a manual audit count. If any discrepancies occur that can’t be explained except as a machine counting error, it would be possible to request a full manual recount of any race on the ballot at no cost to the candidate or committee requesting the recount.
     “As we saw in King County, there are still problems with identifying voters and making sure that every vote cast is a legal one. Public confidence in our election systems continues to be low,” Nixon said. “The audits established last year for touch-screen machines are now largely moot. With the growing number of counties voting entirely by mail, we must have audits of the signature matching process and of optical scan vote counting machines.”
     Both bills are scheduled for public hearing on Jan. 25 at 1:30 p.m. Hearing Room D in the House State Government Operations and Accountability Committee.

(return to top)


Woodinville Weekly: Statewide initiative seeks to set rules for forming new counties

Twin bills to be proposed in House

by JEANETTE KNUTSON
Staff Writer

(Click here for the original article)

     Woodinville (January 23, 2006) -- Last week, Northshore resident Steve Pyeatt submitted required paperwork for a statewide initiative that would set out procedures to combine or split counties. State Rep. Toby Nixon (R- 45th District) plans to introduce a bill with similar language in the Legislature.
     Their tag-team approach means that if the Legislature does not move forward to establish procedures for merging existing counties or creating new ones, the people, through Pyeatt’s initiative, might be able to.
     Pyeatt said, “I realize the topic is not sexy like $30 car tabs. But all it is, is a set of rules. If the Legislature wants to pass it, fine. If not, the people can.”
     Washington has small counties that are teetering on bankruptcy. According to the 2003 Washington State Data Book Web site, Ferry County, for example, with an estimated 2005 population of 7,400, had a total county revenue of $8,497,622 in 2002. County expenditures for that year were $7,950,808. Garfield County, with an estimated 2005 population of 2,400, had a total county revenue of $4,772,882 in calendar year 2002. County expenditures that year were $4,801,088.
     The belief is that the purpose of particular county boundaries as originally drawn may have changed over the years. The question becomes why not change them.
     Once the paperwork for the initiative is vetted by the Secretary of State’s Office, backers of the initiative will need to gather 225,000 signatures to get the measure on the ballot. According to Pyeatt, they plan to spend a lot of time getting signatures in Eastern Washington.
     Rep. Nixon said in an e-mail, “The people reserved to themselves in the state constitution the power to create new counties by petition, but required the legislature to define the details of the process. The legislature has had over 115 years to pass a bill defining the process, and has failed to do so. This bill would fulfill that responsibility of the legislature to enable the people to petition for creation of new counties (either by removing territory from one or more existing counties or merging existing counties). Similar bills have been run many times previously without success; this time, if the legislature fails to act, the people will have an opportunity to pass the legislation themselves through an initiative.”
     Nixon introduced legislation that would set rules for splitting a county last year. That bill, House Bill 1500, said Nixon, “is currently stuck in the Appropriations Committee, so I might not have an opportunity to get the updated text amended into the bill there. By introducing a new bill, the Local Government Committee (headed by Rep. Geoff Simpson, who supports the bill) would get a fresh crack at it.”


(return to top)


King County Journal: New law would crack down on sex with minors

by NOEL S. BRADY
Journal Reporter

(Click here for the original article)

     Bellevue (January 23, 2006) -- In a year when more than a dozen bills in the state Legislature seek to stiffen the penalties for sex crimes, a Woodinville woman is celebrating the inclusion of one bill that would simplify a law aimed at pedophiles.
     For more than a year, Patty Carson has been speaking to state lawmakers about deficiencies in the state’s pedophilia law that she believes allowed a 45-year-old “friend of the family” to take advantage of her 16-year-old relative and lure her into a sexual affair for two years behind the backs of the girl’s parents.
     When Carson, who has two grown children in their 20s, began researching the case, she thought the age of consent for sex in Washington state was 16. But she said the way the law is written creates a gray area of consent for children ages 16 and 17.
     Current law says a person is guilty of sexual misconduct with a 16- or 17-year-old if they are at least five years older than the child and hold a position of supervision or authority over the child. That includes parents, foster parents, teachers and coaches, but it excludes “family friends.”
     That meant Carson’s young relative and her family had no recourse for the predatory abuse she went through while she was still in high school.
     “I think a 16-year-old is dealing with a lot of stuff, and there’s so much they haven’t learned yet,” Carson said. “They just don’t have the experience, and if they do have the experience it needs to be with someone close to their own age.”
     Carson eventually teamed up Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, and the two of them worked out a simple solution.
     House Bill 2533 proposes to strike language from the law that specifies an adult must have a supervisory role over a 16- or 17-year-old in order to be convicted of sexual misconduct.
     It still requires that the adult be more than five years older than the child. Carson said she doesn’t want to make a law that brands teenagers as sex offenders for being intimate with other teens.
     Nixon said the bill streamlines the law and clarifies what it means to be involved in criminal activity with a 16- or 17-year-old. The bill has been introduced, and a hearing is scheduled for the week of Jan. 29.
     But Nixon doesn’t anticipate smooth sailing.
     “I do think it will face opposition,” he said. “A lot of folks, especially on the other side of the aisle, think that if you’re 16 or 17 you’re adult enough to decide who to have sex with.”

     Nixon’s bill isn’t the only new sex offender legislation in the crosshairs this year. After a year of high-profile child abduction cases, lawmakers want to increase penalties for sex crimes and improve the way the state tracks sex offenders.
     A group of Republicans have sponsored one bill they call “Jessica’s Law Plus,” named after a child abducted and murdered in Florida. The bill sets a minimum 30-year sentence for any rape of a child under 12 years old. If a weapon was used, the law would demand a life sentence.
     Democrats who say that’s too extreme wrote their own version of the bill, which would require a minimum 25-year sentence, but only if the perpetrator was a stranger or used force.
     Rep. John Lovick, D-Mill Creek, introduced two bills that would use Global Positioning Satellite technology to monitor the worst of the state’s registered sex offenders and establish a program for homeless sex offenders to be monitored by GPS as well.
     Other bills would extend the statute of limitations on the use of DNA evidence for sexual assaults and force those caught with child pornography to register as sex offenders.

(return to top)


Spokane Spokesman-Review: Open records abuse must stop

SPOKESMAN-REVIEW EDITORIAL BOARD

     Spokane (January 22, 2006) -- Washington state lawmakers have some unfinished business to attend to regarding public records.
     Last year, they tightened the rules on when records requests can be rejected because they are deemed “overly broad.” But they couldn’t resolve issues related to attorney-client privilege, a much abused concept routinely invoked by agencies trying to conceal uncomfortable information.
     In a 2004 case involving a resident’s request for records related to a pending light-rail project, the state Supreme Court liberalized attorney-client privilege by accepting Seattle’s invocation of the “controversy exemption,” which traditionally had been limited to ongoing litigation.
     This sets the stage for agencies withholding records whenever it deems a matter controversial and a staff attorney has been apprised.
     The prospect of abuse has prompted Rep. Toby Nixon, R- Kirkland, to introduce a package of public records bills. Among them is HB 2515, which would limit the attorney-client exemption to those records where specific legal questions or advice are conveyed. No longer could agencies dodge records requests by merely copying information to lawyers or inviting them to attend meetings.
     Two other necessary bills – HB 2547 and HB 2548 – would hold public officials accountable for intentionally violating public records laws. Penalties would increase to a maximum of $5,000 and a year in jail. The current penalties, which Nixon says “are kind of a joke,” are $100 per incident or day of delay. Idaho allows for a $1,000 penalty.

     Stiff penalties are important because when public officials violate the law, we all pay. For example, the taxpayers of King County are on the hook for $425,000 because courts have ruled that public officials wrongly withheld information related to sports stadiums.
     If public officials face tough penalties, they’re more likely to comply with requests. As it is, many will gladly risk the token fine or slap on the wrist to conceal embarrassing information.
     It’s sad that these bills are even necessary, but lawmakers have adopted 70 exemptions to the public records law passed by citizen initiative in 1972.
     This cloaking of government activity is an invitation to corruption and an affront to the wishes of the people for open government.
     We expect that various public agencies will quietly lobby the Legislature to water down or scuttle these reforms. They figure the public won’t notice or won’t care.
     That’s precisely why these laws are needed.

(return to top)


Seattle Times: Three ideas for cleaner government

SEATTLE TIMES EDITORIAL BOARD

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (January 20, 2006) -- Three bills introduced by Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, deserve special attention. The topics are different, but they have two things in common: Each protects a fundamental right of the people; in each case, the Washington Supreme Court should have protected that right, but didn’t.
     The first bill is about government records. Our public-disclosure law is based on the rule that government records are open to the people. There are exceptions, such as when government is a client seeking advice from an attorney. In a 2004 case, the Washington Supreme Court allowed the Seattle Monorail Authority to withhold virtually any document if a copy had been sent to an attorney. Nixon’s bill would narrow that privilege to documents containing legal advice for a court case, which is how the law was interpreted before 2004.
     Nixon’s second bill is a constitutional amendment about taking private property for public use. It says government can take only the amount of property it needs, and no more; and that if it decides later it doesn’t need the property, the previous owner has the right to buy it back at the seizure price plus interest. This issue comes from the monorail experience, particularly the taking of the “Sinking Ship” garage in Seattle, in which the Monorail Authority condemned three times the amount of property it needed.
     A third bill is a constitutional amendment on the right of referendum. This is the right of the people to challenge a new law by immediately petitioning to put it on the ballot. A referendum is like an initiative, except that it requires only half as many signatures. In the state constitution, the people have the right of referendum except for laws “necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, support of the state government and its existing public institutions.”
     That is the emergency clause. Before the battle over the Mariners’ stadium, courts used to examine declarations of emergency to determine whether the emergency existed. But when the state Supreme Court accepted the Legislature’s declaration that baseball was “necessary for the public peace, health or safety,” it walked off the job. Since then, the justices have accepted every emergency presented to them, including an “emergency” to create a parking garage.
     Legislators now declare emergencies more than 100 times a year, wiping out the people’s right of referendum on each of those bills. The practice is abusive, and should be stopped.
     Nixon’s amendment would require that any bill with an emergency clause require two-thirds approval in each house to pass. That should stop the abuse.

(return to top)


Rep. Nixon wants to put a stop to the sale of public information

     Olympia (January 18, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon, ranking Republican member on the House committee on State Government Operations and Accountability, has introduced a pair of bills that would put a stop to the use of information gleaned from public records for direct marketing purposes.
     “It’s come to my attention that a group of lawyers from Colorado is actively scanning and capturing large numbers of traffic accident reports at the Redmond Police Department,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “I believe they are violating state law by accessing this information without proper interest and by selling this information for profit. The states of Arizona and California stopped this same group of lawyers from operating in their states, and we should stop these violations of victims’ privacy in Washington as well.”
     Nixon introduced House Bill 2530, which would require law enforcement agencies to redact personal information from accident reports when a non-interested party requests the reports. A companion bill, HB 2831, would prohibit the use of any collection of similar public records for direct marketing purposes, making it a gross misdemeanor for someone to use information obtained by the Public Records Act for such purposes.
     “These lawyers are violating the law by requesting accident report data that is not supposed to be released to people who don’t have ‘proper interest’,” Nixon said. “Further, lists obtained through public records are not supposed to be used for commercial purposes. Yet, these lawyers are relying on shaky case law to justify their right to look at the accident data. My legislation clarifies the law and prevents this kind of misuse.”
     Nixon said that the lawyers are requesting the data by asking for an “inspection” of the public records rather than copies. “They don’t pay for copies of the records because they know asking for an ‘inspection’ exempts them from being charged. They set up a scanner at the police department and scan each and every accident report, imposing on the department to provide them the space and electricity to do so. When they’re done, they have information on dozens or hundreds of accidents and victims, which they sell for profit—all for the use of marketing by medical practitioners. This is absolutely wrong.”
     The bills are being considered by the House State Government Operations and Accountability committee.

     For additional background information, click here: http://hrc.leg.wa.gov/members/nixon/newsreleases/011806supplemental.htm

(return to top)


Rep. Nixon moves to rein in government’s use of property takings

     Olympia (January 16, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon today introduced two measures that would limit the government’s use of eminent domain –- the taking of private property for public use. House Joint Resolution 4217 would amend the state constitution by putting stricter limits on the taking of property for public use and gives previous owners a first right to reacquire their former property. HB 2854 would flesh out the constitutional limitations, defining detailed processes for implementing the strengthened constitutional protections. The measures are co-sponsored by more than two dozen other members of the House.
     Eminent domain is the power governments have to confiscate or “take” private property as long as it is for a legitimate “public use” and they pay “just compensation.” Traditionally, public use has meant taking property for such things as roads, schools, or parks, and also public utility requirements such as pipelines and power transmission lines.
     “This country’s founding principles are grounded in the idea of private property,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “Americans who own property have found themselves increasingly entangled in litigation to prevent the government from taking their land for purposes that are not truly public use. Often those purposes involve transferring the property to other private parties with deeper pockets. I want to stop that kind of government abuse in this state by narrowly defining what public use is.”
     Over the past few years, Nixon said, “public use” has been more broadly interpreted by public officials as for public “benefit” or public “purpose,” distorting and expanding the traditional eminent domain right of government. Many of these cases involve projects where private parties benefit substantially from government property seizures. This is all done under the banner of economic development or urban redevelopment. The U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld the government right to do this in a landmark case, Kelo v. New London.
     “We’ve seen an example of government abuse right here in Washington with the Seattle monorail project,” Nixon said. “It ran up a debt of more than $100 million, often buying more property than was needed for the project with the hope of later selling that excess property for a profit. I’m sorry, but the government shouldn’t be in the business of land speculation!”
     Nixon’s eminent domain package would eliminate this kind of excess buying of land and limit acquisitions to only that which is needed for the proposed public project. It would give the original property owner the right to reacquire that property by paying back compensation received with interest, if the property was used for a purpose other than for what it was originally acquired or if it sat idle for ten years or more.
     Nixon said, “Government should focus on providing core services that serve the broad-based citizenry, and avoid acting as though the biggest or wealthiest citizen or corporation has more to offer than hundreds of hard-working homeowners and business people that are the foundation of our communities and our economy.”

(return to top)


Complete text of Rep. Nixon’s remarks on Martin Luther King Jr. Resolution

     Olympia (January 16, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon delivered the following remarks today in support of House Resolution 4679 honoring the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
     Before Thanksgiving, we were having a discussion in our men’s group at church, and the instructor asked a simple question: “What are you thankful for?”
     It would have been easy to answer with the usual, almost trite responses: my family; my faith; good health; happiness; our country; freedom; liberty. And I am thankful for all those things, of course, and recognize that many people in our world are not so blessed.
     But this time, I really thought about the question. In the past year, what had really made a difference in my life, for the better? What, if it had been missing, would have meant that the year would have been very different?
     And the answer came to me: passion.
     Not the passion I still feel for my lovely wife, or that any lovers feel for each other. No, I’m talking about the passion that makes people care enough about a cause that they are willing to get up off their sofa, put down the remote control, and actually do something to make a difference in the lives of others.
     The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose life we celebrate today, said in 1963: “If a man hasn’t discovered something he will die for, he isn’t fit to live.”
     It brought to mind the words of one of my favorite hymns. I was tempted to sing it for you, but after hearing the choir today I had second thoughts! So I’ll just recite the relevant words:

          Have I done any good in the world today?
          Have I helped anyone in need?
          Have I cheered up the sad, and made someone feel glad?
          If not, I have failed indeed.

     I’m thankful for all those in our communities who devote their lives in service to others. Whether it be helping the homeless, or victims of domestic violence, or troubled youth; whether it be as a scout leader, a school volunteer, or a coach for youth sports; whether it be as a board member or fundraiser for a non-profit organization, working to clean up streams and trails, or assembling orders at the food bank; whether it be serving on your city council, or school board, or even in the legislature. Whatever it is that you are passionate about, that motivates you to do something that helps others, thank you for what you do.
     I want to mention a particular group of people that I’m especially thankful for.
     Dr. King also said this: “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”
     I’m thankful for the citizens across our state who speak out to us in the legislature and to other government officials at all levels about the things that concern you. We could not do our jobs without you. We would certainly not do them as well without you. We need you to teach us, to help us understand how the laws affect your lives, to share with us your ideas of how things could be better, and to hold us accountable. This is your government, and those of you who take the time to visit us, to call us on the phone, to send us a letter or email, or to join with others in organizations that do those things on your behalf, thank you for helping us.
     Reverend King set the example for all of us. He taught the legislators of his day much about how the laws affected people across the country. He was certainly not silent, and the result of his speaking out and of his passion was that things changed for the better. May we all follow his example, and be passionate about something that will improve the lives of others.
     I urge you all to support the resolution. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

(return to top)


Martin Luther King Jr.’s passion for a cause should be celebrated, Nixon tells House

     Olympia (January 16, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon today praised Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. for his passion in pursuing a cause and the motivation to devote his life in service to others. Nixon’s observation came during a speech honoring King on the holiday that commemorates his birth and life.
     “Dr. King had a great passion for his cause, and I’m thankful for all those in our communities who devote their lives to serving others as he did,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland.
     Nixon lived in King’s hometown of Atlanta from 1984-93 and took part in that city’s celebration when Martin Luther King Jr. Day became a federal holiday in 1986. Nixon based today’s speech on one of Dr. King’s quotes from 1963, “If a man hasn’t discovered something he will die for, he isn’t fit to live.”
     “I want to thank all our citizens who speak out to us in the Legislature and government officials at all levels about things that concern you,” Nixon said. “We could not do our jobs without you. You help us understand how government affects you.
     “Dr. King taught the legislators of his day about how the laws affected people across the country. He was certainly not silent, and the result of his speaking out and of his passion was that things changed for the better. May we all follow his example and be passionate about something that will improve the lives of others,” Nixon said.

(return to top)


Redmond teen serves as page for Rep. Nixon

     Olympia (January 13, 2006) -- Lauren Reed, from Redmond, served as a legislative page during the week of January 9. She was sponsored by Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland.
     Lauren is 15 and is home schooled in Redmond.
     Since 1891, young people from across the state have come to Olympia to serve as pages for the Washington State House of Representatives. Several hundred students between the ages of 14 and 16 will participate this year in the legislative page program.
     As a page, Lauren’s responsibilities included delivering messages and documents to legislators in their offices, committee meetings, and the House chambers during floor sessions. The job is vital to the efficient operation of the Legislature.
     In addition to her assigned duties, Lauren continued her regular schoolwork two hours a day. She also spent time in the Legislative Page School learning about state government.
     Pages must be in good academic standing and obtain permission from their parents and school. They are paid a stipend for their service and many of them live with volunteer host families while in the state capital.
     Additional information about the House Page Program can be found on the Internet by visiting http://www1.leg.wa.gov/House/PageInternProgram/.

(return to top)


Rep. Nixon moves to end “emergency clause abuse”

     Olympia (January 13, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon today introduced an amendment to the state constitution that would require a two-thirds vote of the Legislature for declaration of an emergency in legislation. House Joint Resolution 4216 would stop legislators from including an emergency clause in legislation when there is no consensus that an emergency truly exists.
     “During the 2005 session, lawmakers attached emergency clauses to nearly 100 bills,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “Most of these were not truly ‘necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, support of the state government and its existing public institutions’ as required by the state constitution. The emergency clause was added either just because an earlier effective date was needed or as a way to prevent citizens from filing a referendum against the bill.”
     In the Legislature, an emergency clause added to a bill allows the measure to become law at any time after the governor signs it. Bills without emergency clauses become effective no sooner than 90 days after the legislative session ends. An emergency clause also exempts the bill from the referendum process. HJR 4216 would amend the constitution to require a two-thirds legislative vote in order to use an emergency clause in legislation, except for appropriations bills.
     “When government powers are abused, people lose trust and become angry and cynical,” Nixon said. “This constitutional amendment would ensure that emergency clauses are used only for real emergencies and not as a means to shut out the will of the people.”
     Nixon also introduced another constitutional amendment, HJR 4215, that would preserve the ability to file a referendum on a bill while allowing the bill to become effective in less than 90 days. “The combination of these two constitutional amendments would ensure that ordinary bills, needing earlier effective dates, can be enacted without infringing on the people’s constitutional power to file referendums. It would also ensure that the referendum power would be overridden only when consensus exists that there is a true emergency,” Nixon said.

(return to top)


Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Capitol Watch: Perfecting the vote

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (January 13, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, was busy between legislative sessions. On the second day of this year’s session, Nixon introduced 32 bills. Eight of them deal with open government and a dozen with election law.
     One election bill jumps out. It’s an attempt to remedy the dilemma that followed the controversial 2004 gubernatorial contest.
     Among the arguments Republicans failed to win in the ensuing court battle was that if the number of invalid ballots identified in an election exceeds the margin of victory, the election should either be thrown out or the invalid votes be deducted from the candidates in the same ratio as the valid ballots cast.
     Nixon’s House Bill 2518 would make the law explicit on what to do if such a case arises again.
     If the number of what Nixon’s bill calls “illegal” votes cast exceeds the margin of victory in a general election race, the election must be set aside and a temporary winner decided by drawing lots, as is now done in tie votes. A special run-off election would determine the final winner.
     That raises other dilemmas. Just what would be judged an “illegal” vote and who would make that judgment and would that judgment be subject to litigation?
     Existing law provided sufficiently for the orderly transition of power in the governor’s office. By proposing a dramatic alteration of the law to fit a rare instance, Nixon asks that we build the church to accommodate Easter.

(return to top)


King County Journal: Statewide initiative seen as way to form new counties

by DEAN A. RADFORD
Journal Reporter

(Click here for the original article)

     Bellevue (January 12, 2006) -- Proponents of a breakaway Cascade County are finalizing plans for a statewide initiative setting up a way to form a new county or combine existing ones that are struggling financially.
     The Cascade County Committee was formed out of the anger some rural residents in eastern King County felt over the county’s land-use regulations and what they see is heavy-handed rule from Seattle politicians.
     Efforts to accomplish the initiative’s goals through legislation have failed in a Democrat-controlled Legislature.
     However, Kirkland Republican Toby Nixon plans to introduce a bill that contains the same language as the initiative to give the Legislature another chance.
     “In any initiative campaign, one of the questions that arises is, ‘Did you give the Legislature a chance to consider it?’ he said. “We wanted to be able to say ‘yes.’”

     A bill he introduced last year specifically forming a new Cascade County went nowhere. However, a bill similar to one he will introduce this session at least made it to the House Rules Committee.
     To get on the ballot, the County Choice Initiative would require 225,000 signatures. Backers will press hard in Eastern Washington, where several small counties are struggling because of a small tax base and citizen-imposed limits on raising taxes. The theory goes that together, they could succeed financially.
     The state Constitution allows for the creation of a new county, but the Legislature has never adopted rules to do so.
     Under the initiative, and Nixon’s bill, proponents would need to collect the signatures of 50 percent of the registered voters in the proposed county to get the ball rolling. Rodney McFarland of May Valley, a Cascade County Committee member, calls that a “high bar.”
     Then the old and new counties would figure out how to split up assets and debts and give the residents of the new county a sense of their tax bill.
     “It’s like a divorce,” said McFarland, president of the Citizens Alliance for Property Rights.
     Formation of a new county would require a simple majority vote in a November election.
     An interim government would form and the new county could contract for services with the “parent” county.
     McFarland indicated the state Grange might sponsor the initiative. If not, the Cascade County Committee would sponsor it. The backers will submit the initiative to the Secretary of State’s Office for approval and for a number, a process that could take weeks.
     McFarland sees “a lot of support” for the initiative around the state. But he’s realistic, too.
     “It’s not by any means going to be easy, but it’s doable,” he said.

Dean Radford covers King County. He can be reached at dean.radford@kingcountyjournal.com or 253-872-6719.

(return to top)


Woodinville teen serves as page for Rep. Nixon

     Olympia (January 12, 2006) -- Mary McIntosh, from Woodinville, served as a legislative page during the week of January 9. She was sponsored by Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland.
     Mary is 14 and an eighth grader at St. Brendan Parish School in Bothell.
     Since 1891, young people from across the state have come to Olympia to serve as pages for the Washington State House of Representatives. Several hundred students between the ages of 14 and 16 will participate this year in the legislative page program.
     As a page, Mary’s responsibilities included delivering messages and documents to legislators in their offices, committee meetings, and the House chambers during floor sessions. The job is vital to the efficient operation of the Legislature.
     In addition to her assigned duties, Mary continued her regular schoolwork two hours a day. She also spent time in the Legislative Page School learning about state government.
     Pages must be in good academic standing and obtain permission from their parents and school. They are paid a stipend for their service and many of them live with volunteer host families while in the state capital.
     Additional information about the House Page Program can be found on the Internet by visiting http://www1.leg.wa.gov/House/PageInternProgram/.

(return to top)


Rep. Nixon works to prepare Legislature for natural disaster or terror attack

     Olympia (January 12, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon today introduced legislation that outlines procedures to allow the Legislature to continue operating after a natural disaster or terror attack. House Bill 2519 also establishes a task force to study how the Legislature can operate remotely through teleconferencing, web conferencing, or other means.
     “This past year we’ve seen the effects of natural disaster on the operation of government,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “The people of Washington will expect their Legislature to be able to continue meeting and doing their business even after a catastrophic disaster or pandemic disease, to ensure the interests and liberties of the people are protected in decisions made by the government.”
     Laws established during the Cold War era in the 1960s allow for the Legislature to meet outside of Olympia in the event of an enemy attack. HB 2519 would allow the Legislature to convene anywhere in Washington or an adjoining state if it’s impossible to meet in Olympia, and would allow convening by electronic means in the event that a quarantine or other emergency prevented the Legislature from meeting in person.
     While this bill helps to prepare state government for disaster, Nixon urges families to be prepared for at least 72 hours without any outside help. “Experience has shown that it can take three days or more for volunteers and government workers to mobilize and start rescue and relief efforts after an earthquake or other disaster, since they will naturally want to ensure their own families are secure first. Every family should have a disaster kit in their home.”
     The state Emergency Management Division recommends the following be in a 72-hour disaster kit:
  • Dry or canned food and drinking water for three days (1-2 gallons per person per day)
  • Can opener
  • First aid kit or supplies
  • Copies of important documents (identification, bank statements, insurance)
  • Clothing
  • Sleeping bags or blankets
  • Battery powered radio or TV
  • Flashlight
  • Matches
(return to top)


Rep. Nixon calls for a more open government

     Olympia (January 11, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon, ranking Republican member on the House committee on State Government Operations and Accountability, has introduced a package of seven bills that would maintain an open government for citizens and ensure effective and responsive public disclosure by state officials.
     “We have had far too many cases of government waste and corruption covered up by officials concealing records, and the assessment of penalties is so low that agencies just pay them as a cost of doing business,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “To correct that, I’m sponsoring legislation that would increase penalties for violations of the public disclosure act, including jail time for public officials who violate disclosure requirements.”
     Nixon introduced House Bill 2548 that would make it a gross misdemeanor to willfully or intentionally violate the Public Records Act.
     “Having these penalties could have prevented something like the Yousoufian case in King County,” he said. Armen Yousoufian is a Seattle business and real-estate entrepreneur embroiled in a nearly nine-year battle to hold King County accountable for stonewalling his request for documents relating to studies of the economic impacts of sports teams.
     Nixon is also clarifying attorney-client privilege involving public agencies with House Bill 2515. “It’s necessary to inform agencies what is subject to attorney-client privilege and what can’t be hidden by abusing this concept,” Nixon said. Records would not be exempt from disclosure merely because they were communicated to legal counsel or were provided to counsel in a meeting.
     Another issue addressed by Nixon’s legislation is the use of accident report information for direct marketing. House Bill 2530 requires that personal information be redacted by law enforcement when giving copies of accident reports to noninvolved parties. “We have a case in Redmond where an out-of-state law firm is collecting accident reports for marketing by medical professionals,” Nixon said. “We need to close this hole in the public disclosure law and protect the privacy of accident victims.”
     Below is a summary of some of the other open government bills that Nixon introduced:
  • HB 2520 makes technical corrections to the Public Records Act.
  • HB 2522 requires that records of investigations and complaints of abuse by school personnel be available for public disclosure.
  • HB 2547 establishes criminal penalties for willful violations of the Open Public Meetings Act.
  • HJM 4030 petitions Congress to subject the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Agency to the Freedom of Information Act.
(return to top)


Rep. Nixon introduces package of bills to reform elections

     Olympia (January 10, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon, ranking Republican member on the House committee on State Government Operations and Accountability, has introduced a package of 12 bills that would strengthen the security, accuracy and integrity of elections in Washington. The legislation ranges from requiring audits of optical scan machines to making it illegal for voters who have traditional addresses to use a non-traditional address for voter registration.
     “The 2005 elections demonstrated that the work of reforming our election processes is not done yet,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “The people of Washington demand security, accuracy, and integrity in our elections, and these bills will continue to move us that direction.”
     Nixon’s election reform legislation was introduced today in Olympia. Nixon is the prime sponsor of all 12 bills.
     Nixon also called on election officials to ensure full compliance with the reforms passed during the 2005 session as well as other elements of existing state law. “Our secretary of state needs to fully implement and comply with all of our election laws, and identify errors made by election officials,” Nixon said. “Then, state and federal prosecutors need to hold county election officials accountable for violations of the law.”
     Below is a summary of some of the bills that Nixon introduced:
  • HB 2532 requires audits of votes cast by optical scan counting machines.
  • HB 2531 strengthens the statutory standards for matching signatures on ballot envelopes to registration forms.
  • HB 2529 makes it illegal to use a nontraditional address for voter registration if the voter has a traditional address and requires the secretary of state to match the statewide voter database against a list of nonresidential addresses.
  • HB 2523 requires verification of randomly selected batches of signatures declared to match the registration signature.
  • HB 2518 requires that if the number of illegal votes exceeds the margin of victory, the election is declared void and a special election will be held.
  • HB 2526 allows a voter registration to be challenged if the voter has duplicate registrations or when the voter’s address doesn’t exist.

The other bills in the package are House Bills 2512, 2513, 2514, 2525, 2528, and 2549.

(return to top)


Rep. Nixon lays out legislative agenda

     Olympia (January 9, 2006) -- Rep. Toby Nixon plans an aggressive legislative agenda during the 60-day session, beginning in Olympia today, sponsoring nearly 30 bills that deal with many issues affecting the 45th District and the state as a whole.
     “I’m honored to be representing the people of our district,” said Nixon, R-Kirkland. “And I believe the best way to represent our constituents is to introduce bills that respond to their needs. I don’t go to Olympia to warm a seat; I go to get things done.”
     Issues covered in the Nixon-sponsored bills include preparing state government for natural disaster, election reform, public disclosure laws, and auditing standards for state agencies.
     “All of the bills I’m sponsoring are important issues to my district and the state,” Nixon said. “Election reform is still needed as seen by the recent problems in King County. Also, ensuring that state agencies fully comply with and are responsive to requests for public disclosure is absolutely necessary.”
     Below is a summary of some of the 30 bills that Nixon plans to introduce:
  • Allowing the Legislature to meet away from Olympia or electronically in the event of a natural disaster or extraordinary circumstance
  • Simplifying voter challenges in cases of nonexistent or nonresidential addresses or moves without forwarding address
  • Strengthening of signature matching rules, with random audits of signature verification to insure quality and require recording of which individual declared that signatures match for accountability
  • Clarify attorney-client privilege for public records applies only in an actual controversy
  • Disallow use of lists obtained from public records from being used for direct marketing purposes
  • Improve government performance and accountability by meshing the government performance law passed last session with the recently passed Initiative 900


(return to top)


Seattle Times: Disclosure law lacks teeth

By KATE RILEY
Seattle Times editorial columnist

(Click here for the original article)

     Seattle (January 9, 2006) -- No teeth. No attention.
     That’s the problem with Washington state’s open-records laws. How else to explain so many examples of government officials disrespecting the people’s right to know? Why else has there been this troubling rash of “Gee, we didn’t know” defenses?
     The most outrageous example is the case of Armen Yousoufian. He’s the Seattle business and real-estate entrepreneur embroiled in a nearly nine-year battle to make King County accountable for stonewalling his request for documents relating to studies of the economic impacts of sports teams.
     The county’s defense? Staffers couldn’t understand what he wanted for, gosh, the longest time.
     Yousoufian won in court, but the trial judge ordered an award eclipsed by his attorney fees. Last year, the state Supreme Court upped the award to $425,000, which covered fees but carried little penalty for what the courts ruled was the county’s “lack of good faith.” He’s appealing for a higher fine to establish a precedent with enforcement teeth.
     The case clearly discourages citizens without Yousoufian’s personal resources from taking on government secret-keepers.
     The trial judge’s impulse to give government a break on the fine is understandable. A large fine punishes taxpayers innocent of law-breaking, not the public officials who withheld the documents.
     It’s a crime!
     Well, it’s not, technically. But maybe it should be.
     A Kitsap County official gave to an outside economic-development agency a document relating to a proposed NASCAR track so he would not have to disclose it, if requested. Fifteen county officials actually signed confidentiality agreements.
     Though the worker clearly violated the law, the state’s chief criminal prosecutor did not press charges — the Public Disclosure Act has no criminal penalties.
     Not all public officials are so cavalier. After all, a Kitsap County commissioner blew the whistle on the county’s misbehavior.
     You can bet, though, if officials were held personally responsible for violating public disclosure laws, they would be much more apt to follow them.
     State Rep. Toby Nixon, R-Kirkland, is considering several public-disclosure-related bills, but one I especially like would do just that.
     “The fines are so low, they’re considered the cost of doing business,” said Nixon, a member of the noble-minded Washington Coalition for Open Government. “There has to be some pain involved.”

     Other states value public access enough to have taken that step. Idaho permits a civil fine of $1,000 to be taken out of the personal wallets of public officials.
     Texas takes a dimmer view. An official who fails to comply with a legitimate records request could be found guilty of official misconduct, a misdemeanor punishable with up to six months in jail, a $1,000 fine or both.
     Now that’s what I’m talking about!
     Unfortunately, government stonewalling too often prevents citizens from maintaining control they declared they wanted when they overwhelmingly approved the 1972 law by initiative.
     Time marches past important decision points. Take Yousoufian. He wanted his documents to shed light on the economic impact of stadiums before the June 1997 vote on the football stadium. He got them in 2001.
     And Seattle surely could have been spared the disastrous Seattle Monorail Project if public officials had complied with an opposition group’s request for financial documents before the November 2002 election. Legal wrangling kept the documents hidden, and voters barely passed the vehicle-excise tax.
     (The agency prevailed on appeal. The Legislature fixed one aspect of the disturbing Supreme Court ruling last year, but another aspect, granting agencies too liberal an attorney-client privilege, remains a problem.)
     Though the monorail project now is in shutdown mode because of its erroneous projections, Seattle vehicle owners continue to pay about $1 million a week to pay off its obligations.
     If only Seattle voters knew then what they know now.
     Washington’s public-disclosure law is a generally good one. What’s missing are more specific incentives for public officials to know the law and follow it. Put them personally on the hook.

Kate Riley’s column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. Her e-mail address is kriley@seattletimes.com.

(return to top)