Secretary of State Denies Ballot Spot to Initiative
In Washington State, democracy stops at a bureaucrat's desk. Or so claim members of Philadelphia II, a Tacoma-based organization trying to qualify an initiative for the November ballot. This Initiative, number 641, seeks to bring about direct democracy at the federal level by first getting it endorsed by a majority of the fifty states.
Rather than proceeding with signature gathering, the Philadelphia II organization has instead become embroiled in a legal struggle with the Attorney General's (AG) office. The initiative was filed with the state of Washington in January, at which time it is customary that it receive a ballot title and explanatory statement. Instead, Assistant Attorney General James Pharris declined to issue a ballot title, claiming that "the contents of the measure are beyond the legislative power reserved to the people under the Washington State Constitution." The AG's office bases its ruling in part on the fact that the initiative is concerned with making federal rather than state law, and that "the legislative power of the state of Washington does not extend to other jurisdictions."
Philadelphia II officials Mike Gravel and Robert Atkins in turn sued the state on behalf of the organization. Gravel, a two-term US Senator from Alaska, is used to getting out in front on political matters. He inserted the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record in the early seventies, thus paving the way for their publication in the New York Times, which in turn helped to hasten the end of the Vietnam war. The case has already been heard by the Superior Court of Thurston County, where the judge ruled in favor of the state. It has been appealed, and is currently on the docket of the Washington State Supreme court. If denied there, Gravel vows to pursue the case all the way to the US Supreme Court.
The major issue is this: does the AG's office have the right to make summary judgments about an initiative's extra-legal characteristics before it becomes a law? Gravel argues that there is a double standard on this, with legislative actions of lawmakers, but not citizens, being free from prior scrutiny.
Certainly this measure tries to break new and uncertain legal ground. A summary of the initiative written by its backers claims that "An American majority then makes Philadelphia II a federal law empowering you to make federal initiative laws. This process is essentially the same that was used to enable the people, in 1788, to make the U.S. Constitution the law of the land."
Its backers welcome the full scrutiny of the Democratic process. The few initiatives which do make it into law may be subject to intense legal activity, as is currently the case in California where an anti-immigrant measure is being picked apart by the courts. Regardless of this initiative's eventual legal fate, a debate on the possibility of expanding democracy through direct voting on specific issues certainly does not seem out of place.
-Mark Gardner
Editor's Note: The text of Initiative 641 is inserted into this issue of the Free Press (print version only) as a paid advertisement.
Call 1-900-835-5050 for more a copy of the petition and to help I-641 raise funds.
[Home]
[This Issue's Directory]
[WFP Index]
[WFP Back Issues]
[E-Mail WFP]
Contents on this page were published in the April/May, 1995 edition of the Washington Free
Press.
WFP, 1463 E. Republican #178, Seattle, WA -USA, 98112. -- WAfreepress@gmail.com
Copyright © 1995 WFP Collective, Inc.
