Olympia Business Watch

AWB Files Legal Brief in Brown v. Owen Lawsuit

This afternoon, AWB filed an amicus curiae ("friend of the court") brief in Brown v. Owen, the lawsuit by Senator Majority Leader Lisa Brown challenging the constitutionality of the provision of Initiative 601 that requires a supermajority vote of both houses of the Legislature to raise taxes.  From the brief's intro:

AWB makes this short amicus submission to add an additional dimension to respondent’s separation of powers argument, contending that the petition raises essentially a political question that the court, as a matter of prudence and restraint, should decline to reach. Should the court reach the merits and grant the writ, it would in essence absolve a coordinate and co-equal branch of government from the difficult political and policy choices it must confront under RCW 43.135.035(1) by invalidating the statute under the same constitutional principle – majority rule – that the Legislature may itself use at any time (and has used in the past) to avoid the statute’s procedural requirements. The court should refrain from granting a single member of a single political caucus of a single chamber of the Legislature the extraordinary relief of striking down an enhanced procedural requirement the full Legislature has chosen for itself when the full Legislature could, by its own authority and through its own processes, loose the binds of that requirement at any time. 

The rest can be read here.  The Supreme Court takes up the case on September 9th.

(Cross-posted at WashACE.com)

               

Gregoire, Rossi to Debate at AWB Policy Summit

What do the gubernatorial candidates have to say about business and the economy in Washington state?

We'll find out on Thursday, Sept. 25 when Gov. Chris Gregoire and former Sen. Dino Rossi come face-to-face for a debate at the 19th Annual AWB Policy Summit at Semiahmoo. Both Gregoire and Rossi have confirmed their appearance at the event for a one-hour exchange of ideas before AWB members, the press and TVW. Seattle Times' Chief Political Reporter David Postman has agreed to moderate the exchange. Candidates will respond to questions collected from AWB members at the event and from AWB's regional meetings scheduled to take place around the state next month. (You can read more about those member-only events here.)

In addition to the governor's race, AWB will also feature debates earlier that same day between Doug Sutherland and Peter Goldmark (Lands Commissioner); Rob McKenna and John Ladenburg (Attorney General); and Terry Bergeson and Randy Dorn (OSPI).

AWB members are encouraged to make reservations now for what should be an excellent primer on the 2008 statewide election races. You can also check out more information on the statewide and legislative races (including a list of AWB-endorsed legislative candidates) on AWB's new elections Web site.

Good Reads on "Card Check"

A couple notable items are up today on the national labor unions' top legislative priority, congressional approval of the wildly misnamed "Employee Free Choice Act" (EFCA), the proposal that would eliminate the decades-long democratic principle of secret ballots in union elections.

First, the Wall Street Journal describes the Wal-Mart company's aggressive and proactive mix of business and politics in meetings with management employees on the issue as well as efforts by the US Chamber and other groups to win hearts and minds on the issue this fall.

Second, in a different vein, Portland attorney Stacey Mark, who chairs Ater Wynne's labor & employment group, posts a discussion of the issue on the firm's Northwest Business Litigation blog.  Mark's piece is interesting for its thoughts on how card check plays out in practice, noting Oregon has had some experience with the system in public employment for about a year:

In some organizing efforts under the Oregon law, it was reported that employees who did not want to be represented by the union felt coerced into signing cards. Employees described verbal confrontations with the union during visits to employees’ homes and workplaces. Employees who petitioned for an election have also reported hostile and retaliatory treatment from union representatives and pro-union co-workers, who were aware of the petitioners’ identities because the process was not secret.

Mark's blog post concludes with a section headed "the EFCA is Likely to Become Law."  Of course for this prediction to come true, the unions need certain political outcomes this fall, and not just in the presidential race but in the US Senate as well.   And that gets back very nicely to the central themes of the WSJ article. 

Seattle PI Announces Supreme Court Endorsements

As one would expect, the Seattle PI today endorses the three incumbents (Charles Johnson, Mary Fairhurst, Debra Stephens) up for re-election (or in Stephens' case, election) to the Washington Supreme Court this fall.  As a point of personal privilege (and as an alumnus of his chambers), I would note the editorial's vastly more interesting comments thread which starts off with a reader's suggestion that "[w]e are in bad need of Richard Sanders clones" on the high court.

AWB has previously announced its endorsement of Justice Charles Johnson for re-election, but did not take a position in either of the other races, partly for reasons that will become apparent when the next edition of our Judicial Scorecard comes out in the next Washington Business magazine.

I-1029 Goes to Court

As anticipated, the legal dispute over I-1029 is now in the hands of the Supreme Court, if it agrees to hear the matter.  The News Tribune's Joe Turner and the Spokesman's Rich Roessler blog it, and Jonathan Bechtle at the Evergreen Freedom Foundation has a copy of the Community Care Coalition's petition and accompanying motion for discretionary review as well as a short summary of the argument.

More Views on I-1029's Legal Status

A few more editorial voices have weighed in on the dispute we've been following on the proper disposition of the Initiative 1029 petitions. 

The Olympian on Sunday finds the initiative "skating on thin legal ice" but mostly editorializes in favor of speedy judicial resolution of the question.

The Spokesman-Review, meanwhile, took the exactly opposite view decrying the potential for a lawsuit and describing the SEIU's failure to designate the petitions correctly as a mere "technical imprecision."

However, the Yakima Herald-Republic joins in today with its view that the initiative shouldn't move forward.

Add to the tally the views of the News Tribune and Seattle P-I (treat the petitions as written) and the Seattle Times (no harm, no foul), it would appear that in the true courts of last resort -- the editorial boards of the state -- I-1029 critics are thus far garnering a majority. 

Negotiating with Political Contributors

Deja vu reading Chris McGann's piece in today's PI describing a GOP complaint about "the appearance of a conflict between the governor's role as both chief negotiator and campaign benefactor."  The complaint involves gambling compacts with tribes but recalls last summer's discussion on this blog of the swelling clout of the public employees' unions, both as political player and bargaining representative:

That's a huge concern," said Don Brunell, president of the Association of Washington Business. "The unions have so much clout, and they're basically funding the people they're bargaining with.

SEIU's OTHER Initiative -- Cripple State Pension Returns

From Brad Shannon at The Olympian: 

The Service Employees International Union filed a citizen initiative to the Legislature on Thursday that could limit the state's investment in major private equity companies, specifically those getting questionable tax breaks or with poor records of treating workers and the environment.

Two things are notable here:  First, apparently SEIU really can distinguish between an initiative to the Legislature and an initiative to the people.

Secondly, this idea would, as the State Investment Board points out, have a major detrimental effect on the investment strategies of the state and its effect on the beneficiaries of those investments as well as the taxpayers who would otherwise have to pony up to backfill the state's obligations.

SIB executive director Joe Dear said the initiative is troubling and would "destroy our ability to invest in our highest-returning asset class. If it's approved, it will cost taxpayers and beneficiaries millions in higher taxes and contributions."

...

The SIB would be authorized to take into account "additional investment risks posed by lack of transparency, poor employment practices, environmental impacts, and other indicators of irresponsible corporate behavior," the text of the measure says.

But Dear said, "No private equity firm that we want to  do business with will do business with us under these terms."

That would harm pensioners, he said, because $13.9 billion of the pension system's $62.2 billion is invested in private equity, which has returned 12.6 percent over the past decade compared with about 7.9 percent for pension holdings as a whole.

Apparently SEIU is serious about the initiative, and Shannon perhaps unintentionally saves the best line for last:

Cook said SEIU is serious about pushing the measure.

"You've seen us run initiatives. We'll spend whatever it costs," she said.

Indeed.

Rethink the I-1029 Petitions, Says the PI

We've been following, here and here, the ongoing kerfuffle over the legitimacy of SEIU's I-1029 petitions.  This morning the Seattle P-I editorial page agrees that Secretary of State Sam Reed ought to rethink the position he's taken on these "egregiously mislabeled" initiative petitions.

More on I-1029

This morning at our Governmental Affairs Council retreat at Alderbrook, AWB members heard a short presentation on the merits, as well as the legal shortcomings, of the I-1029 initiative from a representative of one of the members of the Community Care Coalition.  In the latter regard, it appears evident this group will justifiably challenge Secretary of State Sam Reed's peculiar decision to process I-1029 as an initiative to the people when the petitions direct him on their face to submit the measure to the Legislature. 

We touched upon all of this yesterday, here.  In comment to that post, Tim Eyman also directs attention to the reliably sensible editorial page of the Tacoma News Tribune, where it leads off today with the question "Are Washingtonians smart? Or are they dumb?"  As in, with respect to what they sign when they're asked for a signature on a petition to government. 

Realizing the SEIU's mistake means there's going to be an error one way or the other, the Tribune concludes with the key point:

As secretary of state, Reed may have the legal discretion to do what he did – though that’s likely to be challenged in court. The bigger issue is how much credit to give the voters who lent their signatures to it. Supporters of I-1029 are essentially saying that virtually all 300,000 missed the critical “to the Legislature” language and ought to be given an initiative to the people instead.

But that’s giving their inattention the benefit of the doubt. If their carefulness were given the benefit of the doubt, I-1029 would be headed for the 2009 Legislature, not the 2008 ballot.