OLYMPIA — Have you heard much about the four initiatives on the ballot this fall?
If not, just wait.
You can expect the election-year barrage of mailers, TV ads and knocks on your door to ramp up after Labor Day. And you’ll hear a lot about four GOP-backed ballot measures that could upend policies passed by the Legislature’s majority Democrats before the ballots are counted in November.
One key aspect of this high-stakes fight on taxes, climate programs and more has now ended, though it has been going on for months in the state’s courtrooms. It’s all about how the initiatives will be described on voters’ ballots. And it is a fight that Democrats, who want the initiatives to fail, have won.
Earlier this month, the state Supreme Court rejected a Republican attempt to remove any budget ramifications from the explanation of three of the initiatives.
Initiative opponents have pointed to polling that shows when voters are presented with information about how the initiatives could cut public funding, support declines.
Initiative 2109, for instance, would repeal the state’s capital gains tax, which as of mid-May has brought in about $433 million this year for schools. If the initiative is successful, that funding source dries up.
The three other ballot measures include Initiative 2117, which would repeal the state’s carbon market. Initiative 2124 would make optional a payroll tax that funds the state’s long-term care insurance program, which opponents of the initiative say could gut the program. A fourth initiative that entered the fray more recently was not assigned a budget disclosure statement and was not part of the lawsuits over the budget disclosures: Initiative 2066, which would roll back state regulations on natural gas.
In July, a poll conducted by SurveyUSA on behalf of The Seattle Times, KING 5 and the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public found that each of the initiatives could succeed, with the natural gas measure garnering the most support.
But those poll questions didn’t include any financial repercussions, because it was conducted before the court confirmed they would be on the November ballots.
Jim Walsh, the chair of the state’s Republican Party, had argued state law didn’t require the disclosures and that the disclosures, enacted by the Legislature in 2022, were being “weaponized.”
Conservative activist Tim Eyman had also sued to stop the budget impact disclosures, arguing they were unconstitutional, but a judge in Thurston County last week blocked that attempt.
“Right-wing Republicans are truly desperate to keep voters from getting factual, nonpartisan information about the deep funding cuts their ballot measures would require, which is why they keep filing these cynical lawsuits,” said Aaron Ostrom, the executive director of the progressive group Fuse Washington.
Separately, initiative opponents mounted lawsuits challenging the signature verification process used by the secretary of state that allowed the petitions to get on the ballot, but the state Supreme Court on Aug. 9 issued decisions in the secretary of state’s favor.
But now that those legal disputes have been resolved, and the Aug. 6 primary is over, the initiatives are going to be “much more front and center” in voters’ minds as November approaches, said Sandeep Kaushik, a consultant for Defend Washington, an umbrella group that opposes the initiatives.
The campaign opposing the repeal of the carbon market (voting no on Initiative 2117), which has raised more than $10 million, in mid-August mounted a “weekend of action” across the state, enlisting volunteers to make phone calls, knock on doors and hand out literature at events, estimating they reached about 17,000 voters. A second weekend of action was held this past weekend with another planned in September.
And supporters of the initiatives are also looking ahead.
The coming months for the yes-on-2117 campaign aren’t likely to be filled with traditional ads that normally pepper the election cycle, said Brian Heywood, the Redmond businessman bankrolling much of the initiative effort. Instead, the organization supporting the initiatives, Let’s Go Washington, is thinking more granular.
That means targeting specific neighborhoods for door-knocking efforts in an attempt to sway people to their side, he said.
At the same time, Let’s Go Washington is likely to partner with more gas stations around the state to offer fuel at the national average rate rather than the higher costs in Washington. Already the group has done several such events, and there could be as many as 10 more in the coming months.
Ballots will be mailed to eligible voters by Oct. 18. Here is what your ballot will say in November about the initiatives:
Initiative to the People
- Initiative Measure No. 2066
Initiative Measure No. 2066 concerns regulating energy services, including natural gas and electrification. This measure would repeal or prohibit certain laws and regulations that discourage natural gas use and/or promote electrification, and require certain utilities and local governments to provide natural gas to eligible customers.
Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]
Initiatives to the Legislature
- Initiative Measure No. 2109
Initiative Measure 2109 concerns taxes. This measure would repeal an excise tax imposed on the sale or exchange of certain long-term capital assets by individuals who have annual capital gains of over $250,000. This measure would decrease funding for K-12 education, higher education, school construction, early learning and childcare.
Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]
- Initiative Measure No. 2117
Initiative Measure No. 2117 concerns carbon tax credit trading. This measure would prohibit state agencies from imposing any type of carbon tax credit trading, and repeal legislation establishing a cap and invest program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This measure would decrease funding for investments in transportation, clean air, renewable energy, conservation and emissions-reduction.
Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]
- Initiative Measure No. 2124
Initiative Measure No. 2124 concerns state long term care insurance. This measure would provide that employees and self-employed people must elect to keep coverage under RCW 50B.04 and could opt-out any time. It would also repeal a law governing an exemption for employees. This measure would decrease funding for Washington’s public insurance program providing long-term care benefits and services.
Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]
