Gov. Jay Inslee’s veto of Senate Bill 6617 on Thursday stands as a victory for open government, the public, and the art of compromise.
The bill, hastily passed by the Legislature the previous week, would have allowed lawmakers to retroactively keep government-related records such as emails and calendars free from public scrutiny. It also would have made some records available beginning in July, but lawmakers themselves would be the final arbiters of what the public is allowed to see.
This followed a lawsuit from media outlets, which led a Thurston County judge to rule that such secrecy violated Washington’s voter-approved Public Records Act. Instead of responding with compliance, legislators simply tried to change the law. Equally egregious, they bypassed accepted norms for public input in introducing and passing the legislation in less than 48 hours.
The people of Washington took note. Inslee’s office said it received more than 12,500 emails, 6,300 phone calls, and 100 letters about the bill — with nearly all of them in opposition. That was fueled, in part, when The Columbian and 11 other newspapers across the state published editorials on their front pages Tuesday urging Inslee to veto the bill. In his veto message, the governor wrote, “I applaud Washingtonians for making their voices heard as well as legislators’ thoughtful reconsideration.”
We echo that applause on both counts. As public outcry grew, lawmakers sought compromise rather than becoming entrenched in a fight that would have further damaged the public’s trust in government.
The result was a deal in which media outlets agreed to join lawmakers in asking Thurston County Judge Chris Lanese to grant a stay to his ruling. The media coalition also agreed to not seek enforcement of the ruling while it is being appealed, and to work with lawmakers in resolving differences regarding the application of transparency laws. Lawmakers, meanwhile, agreed to not override Inslee’s veto, despite passing the legislation with veto-proof majorities in both chambers.
“It is our belief the public has the right to weigh in on any potential changes to public records law before it is enacted,” wrote Michele Earl-Hubbard, an attorney for the media group.
Indeed. It also is our belief that the public has a right to know who lawmakers are meeting with and what they are writing to each other in emails pertaining to legislation. We shall not waver in our conviction that a transparent government is essential to a strong democracy, as is the role of the media in informing the public and holding elected officials accountable.
Prior to Inslee’s veto, 16 Senate Democrats and 41 House Democrats sent letters to the governor saying they “made a mistake by failing to go through a full public hearing process on this very important legislation. We think that the only way to make this right is for you to veto the bill and for us to start again.” House Republicans also offered a mea culpa, saying a veto was “a good start.”
It is unlikely that lawmakers would have developed such clarity without pressure from the public. It also is unlikely that the public would have been aware of what lawmakers were doing without diligent work by a free press.
In the end, the process worked, with the Legislature heeding public outrage and the governor vetoing a bill that was anathema to the principles of democracy. And that represents a victory on multiple levels.
