NOTICE: Formatting and page numbering in this document may be different
from that in the original published version.
TWENTIETH DAY, FIRST SPECIAL SESSION
Senate Chamber, Olympia, Monday, May 14, 2001
The Senate was called to order at 12:00 noon by President Owen. The Secretary called the roll and announced to the President that all Senators were present except Senator Costa. On motion of Senator Eide, Senator Costa was excused.
The Sergeant at Arms Color Guard, consisting of staff members George Lester and Trudy Donner, presented the Colors. Alex Patterson, son of Senator Julia Patterson, offered the prayer.
On motion of Senator Betti Sheldon, the reading of the Journal of the previous day was dispensed with and it was approved.
MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR
May 11, 2001
TO THE HONORABLE, THE SENATE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I have the honor to advise you that on May 11, 2001, Governor Locke approved the following Senate Bills entitled:
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5182
Relating to funding hazardous liquid and gas pipeline safety.
Senate Bill No. 5333
Relating to preliminary permit timelines.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5417
Relating to opiate substitution treatment programs.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5438
Relating to fish and wildlife lands vehicle use permits.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5443
Relating to commercial salmon licenses.
Engrossed Senate Bill No. 5495
Relating to the community outdoor athletic fields advisory council.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5502
Relating to boxing official licensing.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5558
Relating to penalties for alcohol violators.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5565
Relating to controlled substance orders and prescriptions.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5702
Relating to simplifying and harmonizing the taxation of lands valued at current use.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5862
Relating to improving the business practices associated with selling valuable materials on trust land.
Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 5877
Relating to licensed mental health counselors.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5910
Relating to temporary nonuse of water by the owner of a water right.
Senate Bill No. 5921
Relating to graduate education in physical therapy.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5961
Relating to making technical corrections to fish and wildlife statutes.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5986
Relating to regulation of county or local government-owned psychiatric facilities.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 6055
Relating to evaluating children within the foster care agency caseload.
Substitute Senate Bill No. 6056
Relating to the department of social and health services coordination of services for children and families in child dependency cases.
EVERETT H. BILLINGSLEA, General Counsel
MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR
VETO MESSAGE ON SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 5187
May 11, 2001
To the Honorable President and Members,
The Senate of the State of Washington
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am returning herewith, without my approval, Substitute Senate Bill No. 5187 entitled:
"AN ACT Relating to updating creditor/debtor personal property exemptions:”
Substitute Senate Bill No. 5187 would have increased and expanded the exemptions from execution, attachment or garnishment for certain household goods, vehicles, and certain other assets.
I agree with the underlying theory that prompted this bill. However, because this bill lacks an exemption for the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) for the collection of court-ordered child support payments, it is not good public policy. The primary financial responsibility of debtors should be that of their dependent children.
This legislation would have prevented DSHS from taking collection action against certain liquid assets of a child support debtor, with no consideration of the needs of dependent children who do not reside with the debtor. The result would have been a net loss of support available for children and custodial parents.
DSHS provided the appropriate legislative committees with language that would have corrected the defects of this bill. If this bill is passed in the next legislative session with the corrective language, I will be glad to sign it.
For these reasons, I have vetoed Substitute Senate Bill No. 5187 in its entirety.
GARY LOCKE, Governor
On motion of Senator Betti Sheldon, the veto message on Substitute Senate Bill No. 5187 was held on the desk.
MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR
PARTIAL VETO MESSAGE ON SENATE BILL NO. 5275
May 11, 2001
To the Honorable President and Members,
The Senate of the State of Washington
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am returning herewith, without my approval as to section 23, Senate Bill No. 5275 entitled:
"AN ACT Relating to ballots cast by mail;"
Senate Bill No. 5275 reorganizes and clarifies the laws governing absentee and mail balloting. Section 23 of the bill would have amended RCW 29.62.090, and clarified reporting requirements and submittal deadlines for official election results. However, the legislature also sent to me Substitute House Bill No. 1644, which amends the same statute section in a slightly different way - most notably by providing for electronic transmission of election results.
Because I signed Substitute House Bill No. 1644 in its entirety on May 9, 2001, I have vetoed section 23 of Senate Bill No. 5275 in order to avoid a conflicting double amendment.
For these reasons, I have vetoed section 23 of Senate Bill No. 5275.
With the exception of section 23, Senate Bill No. 5275 is approved.
GARY LOCKE, Governor
On motion of Senator Betti Sheldon, the partial veto message on Senate Bill No. 5275 was held on the desk.
INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING
SB 6185 by Senator Prentice
AN ACT Relating to nomination of partisan candidates; amending RCW 29.18.010, 29.24.010, 29.24.025, 29.24.040, 29.24.070, and 29.30.085; reenacting and amending RCW 29.24.035; adding a new section to chapter 29.18 RCW; and declaring an emergency.
Referred to Committee on State and Local Government.
On motion of Senator Betti Sheldon, Senate Bill No. 6183, which was held on the Introduction and First Reading Calendar May 4, 2001, was advanced to second reading and placed on the second reading calendar.,
CONFIRMATION OF GUBERNATORIAL APPOINTMENTS
On motion of Senator Kohl-Welles, Gubernatorial Appointment No. 9106, Shawnte' Pearson, as a member of the Board of Trustees for Central Washington University, was confirmed.
APPOINTMENT OF SHAWNTE' PEARSON
The Secretary called the roll. The appointment was confirmed by the following vote: Yeas, 48; Nays, 0; Absent, 0; Excused, 1.
Voting yea: Senators Benton, Brown, Carlson, Constantine, Deccio, Eide, Fairley, Finkbeiner, Franklin, Fraser, Gardner, Hale, Hargrove, Haugen, Hewitt, Hochstatter, Honeyford, Horn, Jacobsen, Johnson, Kastama, Kline, Kohl-Welles, Long, McAuliffe, McCaslin, McDonald, Morton, Oke, Parlette, Patterson, Prentice, Rasmussen, Regala, Roach, Rossi, Sheahan, Sheldon, B., Sheldon, T., Shin, Snyder, Spanel, Stevens, Swecker, Thibaudeau, West, Winsley and Zarelli - 48.
Excused: Senator Costa - 1.
At 12:15 p.m., on motion of Senator Betti Sheldon, the Senate recessed until 1:30 p.m.
The Senate was called to order at 1:30 p.m. by President Owen.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS
The President welcomed and introduced a delegation of citizens from Russia, who were seated in the gallery. The group represented the CIVITAS Program for the Sakhalin Region and are presently visiting the state of Washington as part of their project.
EDITOR’S NOTE: On the Twenty-Second Day of the First Special Session, May 16, on motion of Senator Roach, all the floor proceedings on Senate Bill No. 6183 on that day and today will be spread across the Journal.
SENATE BILL NO. 6183, by Senators Snyder, Swecker, Kohl-Welles, Roach, Prentice, Horn, Jacobsen, Stevens, Constantine and Kline
Revising primary election law.
The bill was read the second time.
Senator Snyder moved that the following amendments by Senators Snyder, Swecker and Kohl-Welles be considered simultaneously and be adopted:
Beginning on page 7, after line 33, strike all material through "vacancy." on page 8, line 8 and insert the following: "If the vacancy occurs no later than the sixth Tuesday before the primary or general election concerned and the ballots have been printed, the appropriate election officers shall correct the ballots. In making the correction, it is not necessary to reprint complete ballots if any other less expensive technique can be used and the resulting correction is reasonably clear.
If the vacancy occurs after the sixth Tuesday before the primary or general election and time does not exist in which to correct ballots (including absentee ballots), either in total or in part, then the votes cast or recorded for the person who has died or become disqualified must be counted for the person who has been named to fill the vacancy."
On page 10, line 7, after "votes cast" insert "by all voters affiliated with that party"
REMARKS BY SENATOR SNYDER
Senator Snyder: “Thank you, Mr. President. These are technical amendments. The language has already been passed and sent to the Governor in Senate Bill No. 5273 and was inadvertently missed in the bill that was introduced.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR HARGROVE
Senator Hargrove: “Thank you, Mr. President. These are technical amendments.”
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendments by Senators Snyder, Swecker and Kohl-Welles on page 7, after line 33, and page 10, line 7, to Senate Bill No. 6183.
The motion by Senator Snyder carried and the amendments were adopted.
Senator Snyder moved that the following amendment by Senators Snyder, Swecker and Kohl-Wells be adopted: On page 21, after line 13, insert the following:
"NEW SECTION. Sec. 29. Nothing in this act may be construed by the secretary of state or a county auditor to mean that a voter may cast more than one vote for candidates for a given office.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 30. (1) The legislature recognizes that this act significantly changes the way in which a primary for partisan office shall be conducted, and thus it intends to ease the transition and allow any primary held prior to July 1, 2002, to be implemented with existing systems currently in use by each county auditor.
(2) Notwithstanding any language to the contrary found elsewhere in this act or in existing statute, only a voter who chooses not to affiliate with any major political party may vote for a minor political party or independent candidate. Any vote for a minor political party or independent candidate by a voter who chooses to affiliate with a major political party shall not be tabulated or reported. The name of a minor political party or independent candidate shall not appear on the general election ballot unless the candidate receives at least three percent of all votes cast for candidates for that office by voters who choose not to affiliate with any major political party.
(3) Each county auditor may design a ballot and utilize procedures other than those detailed in this act when conducting a partisan primary provided that the design of the ballot and the procedures are specifically allowed by a rule adopted by the secretary of state under chapter 34.05 RCW, and that the following criteria are met:
(a) A voter shall have the option to affiliate with a major political party, or to not affiliate with any major political party;
(b) Voter privacy, including selection of party affiliation, is preserved;
(c) A voter who affiliates with a major political party may only cast votes for partisan office for candidates that indicated that same-party affiliation when filing a declaration of candidacy, and any votes cast for a candidate that indicated a different party affiliation when filing a declaration of candidacy shall not be tabulated and reported;
(d) A voter who chooses not to affiliate with any major political party may vote for any candidate regardless of the candidate's political party designation, and votes cast by such voter shall be tabulated and reported; and
(e) Votes cast for a candidate by voters who choose to affiliate with a major political party shall be reported separately from votes cast for the same candidate by voters who choose not to affiliate with any major political party.
(4) This section expires July 1, 2002."
Renumber the remaining sections consecutively and correct any internal references accordingly.
REMARKS BY SENATOR SNYDER
Senator Snyder: “Thank you, Mr. President. These are two new sections that respond to questions raised by the Secretary of State and the county auditors last week. New Section 29 makes it clear that no voter can cast more than one vote for a candidate for a given office and Section 30 does two things. First, it gives the Secretary of State the ability to adopt rules that insure flexibility for auditors implementing this act this year. Secondly, it addresses specific concerns that voting software could not be changed unless votes for minor or independent party candidates could be counted when cast by voter affiliation with a major party. For, the next year only, minor and independent candidates will appear only on the unaffiliated ballot. Those candidates will advance to the general election if their vote total is at least three percent of the total cast by unaffiliated voters. I urge your adoption of the amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR HARGROVE
Senator Hargrove: “Thank you, Mr. President. This is essentially a technical amendment to the underlying bill because of the time frame.”
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendment by Senators Snyder, Swecker and Kohl-Welles on page 21, after line 13, to Senate Bill No. 6183.
The motion by Senator Snyder carried and the amendment was adopted.
On motion of Senator Roach, the following amendment by Senators Roach and Constantine was adopted:
On page 13, after line 13, insert the following:
"Sec. 27. RCW 29.42.070 and 1991 c 363 s 35 are each amended to read as follows:
Within forty-five days after the state-wide general election in even-numbered years, or within thirty days following July 30, 1967, for the biennium ending with the 1968 general elections, the county chair of each major political party shall call separate meetings of all elected precinct committee officers in each legislative district ((a majority of the precincts of which are within a county with a population of one million or more)) for the purpose of electing a legislative district chair in such district. The district chair shall hold office until the next legislative district reorganizational meeting two years later, or until a successor is elected.
The legislative district chair can only be removed by the majority vote of the elected precinct committee officers in the chair's district."
Renumber the sections consecutively and correct any internal references accordingly.
REMARKS BY SENATOR ROACH
Senator Roach: “Thank you, Mr. President. This particular amendment would require that all counties, not just the county of King, have their district chair elected by the elected officials and state officers.”
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the adoption of the amendment by Senators Roach and Constantine on page 13, after line 13, to Substitute Senate Bill No. 61g13
The motion by Senator Roach carried and the amendment was adopted.
Senator Hargrove moved that the following striking amendment by Senators Hargrove and Finkbeiner be adopted:
Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert the following:
"Sec. 1. RCW 29.30.085 and 1992 c 181 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Except as provided in RCW 29.30.086 and in subsection (2) of this section, on the ballot at the general election for ((a nonpartisan)) an office for which a primary was held, only the names of the candidate who received the greatest number of votes and the candidate who received the next greatest number of votes for that office shall appear under the title of that office, and the names shall appear in that order. If a primary was conducted, no candidate's name may be printed on the subsequent general election ballot unless he or she receives at least one percent of the total votes cast for that office at the preceding primary. On the ballot at the general election for ((any other nonpartisan)) an office for which no primary was held, the names of the candidates shall be listed in the order determined under RCW 29.30.025.
(2) On the ballot at the general election for the office of justice of the supreme court, judge of the court of appeals, judge of the superior court, or state superintendent of public instruction, if a candidate in a contested primary receives a majority of all the votes cast for that office or position, only the name of that candidate may be printed under the title of the office for that position.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 29.07 RCW to read as follows:
Under no circumstances may an individual be required to affiliate with, join, adhere to, express faith in, or declare a preference for, a political party or organization upon registering to vote.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. A new section is added to chapter 29.18 RCW to read as follows:
(1) A primary is a critical stage in the public process by which voters elect candidates to public office. A primary may not be used to select the nominees of a political party.
(2) Whenever candidates for a partisan office are to be elected, the general election must be preceded by a primary conducted under this chapter, except as otherwise provided in law. Based upon votes cast at the primary, either one or two candidates must be certified as qualified to appear on the general election ballot, under RCW 29.27.050 and 29.30.085.
(3) If a candidate expresses a party preference on his or her declaration of candidacy, then the preference will be listed for the candidate on the primary and general election ballots. Each candidate who does not express a preference for a political party will be listed as an independent candidate on the primary and general election ballots. Party preferences will be listed for the information of voters only, and may not be used for any purpose relating to the conduct, canvassing, or certification of the primary, and may in no way limit the options available to voters in deciding for whom to cast a vote.
Sec. 4. RCW 29.01.090 and 1977 ex.s. c 329 s 9 are each amended to read as follows:
"Major political party" means a political party of which at least one ((nominee for president, vice president, United States senator, or a statewide office received at least five percent of the total vote cast at the last preceding state general election in an even-numbered year: PROVIDED, That any political party qualifying as a major political party under the previous subsection (2) or subsection (3) of this section prior to its 1977 amendment shall retain such status until after the next state general election following June 30, 1977)) candidate for an office voted upon statewide who expressed a preference for that party on his or her declaration of candidacy received at least five percent of the total vote cast at the last preceding primary election or general election occurring in a year in which the governor is elected.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. A new section is added to chapter 29.01 RCW to read as follows:
"Partisan office" means the following offices:
(1) United States senator and United States representative;
(2) All state offices except (a) judicial offices and (b) the office of superintendent of public instruction;
(3) All county offices except (a) judicial offices and (b) those offices where a county home rule charter provides otherwise.
Sec. 6. RCW 29.01.130 and 1965 c 9 s 29.01.130 are each amended to read as follows:
"Primary" or "primary election" means a statutory procedure ((for nominating candidates to public office at the polls)) held before a general election by which each voter is permitted to cast a vote for his or her preferred candidate for each office appearing on the ballot, without any limitation based on party preference or affiliation, of either the voter or the candidate, with the result of qualifying not more than two candidates for each office to appear on the general election ballot.
Sec. 7. RCW 29.04.180 and 1999 c 157 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Any person who desires to be a write-in candidate and have such votes counted at a primary or election may((, if the jurisdiction of the office sought is entirely within one county,)) file a declaration of candidacy ((with the county auditor not later than the day before the primary or election. If the jurisdiction of the office sought encompasses more than one county the declaration of candidacy shall be filed)) similar to the form in RCW 29.15.010 with the ((secretary of state)) same officer as provided in RCW 29.15.030 not later than the day before the primary or election. Declarations of candidacy for write-in candidates must be accompanied by a filing fee in the same manner as required of other candidates filing for the office as provided in RCW 29.15.050.
(2) Votes cast for write-in candidates who have filed such declarations of candidacy ((and write-in votes for persons appointed by political parties pursuant to RCW 29.18.160)) need only specify the name of the candidate in the appropriate location on the ballot in order to be counted. Write-in votes cast for any other candidate, in order to be counted, must designate the office sought and position number ((or political party)), if applicable. In order for write-in votes to be valid in jurisdictions employing optical-scan mark sense ballot systems the voter must complete the proper mark next to the write-in line for that office.
(3) No person may file as a write-in candidate where:
(((1))) (a) At a general election, the person attempting to file either filed as a write-in candidate for the same office at the preceding primary or the person's name appeared on the ballot for the same office at the preceding primary;
(((2))) (b) The person attempting to file as a write-in candidate has already filed a valid write-in declaration for that primary or election, unless one or the other of the two filings is for the office of precinct committeeperson;
(((3))) (c) The name of the person attempting to file already appears on the ballot as a candidate for another office, unless one of the two offices for which he or she is a candidate is precinct committeeperson.
(4) The declaration of candidacy shall be similar to that required by RCW 29.15.010. No write-in candidate filing under RCW 29.04.180 may be included in any voter's pamphlet produced under chapter ((29.80)) 29.81 RCW unless that candidate qualifies to have his or her name printed on the general election ballot. The legislative authority of any jurisdiction producing a local voter's pamphlet under chapter 29.81A RCW may provide, by ordinance, for the inclusion of write-in candidates in such pamphlets.
Sec. 8. RCW 29.04.190 and 1988 c 181 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
The secretary of state or county auditor who received a write-in declaration for a district encompassing more than one county shall notify each county auditor of any declarations filed with the secretary under RCW 29.04.180 for offices appearing on the ballot in that county. The county auditor shall ensure that those persons charged with counting the ballots for a primary or election are notified of all valid write-in candidates before the tabulation of those ballots.
Sec. 9. RCW 29.13.070 and 1977 ex.s. c 361 s 29 are each amended to read as follows:
((Nominating)) Primaries for general elections to be held in November shall be held at the regular polling places in each precinct on the third Tuesday of the preceding September or on the seventh Tuesday immediately preceding such general election, whichever occurs first.
Sec. 10. RCW 29.15.010 and 1990 c 59 s 82 are each amended to read as follows:
A ((candidate)) person who desires to have his or her name printed on the ballot as a candidate for ((election to)) an office where ownership of property is not a prerequisite to vote, other than president of the United States((,)) or vice president of the United States, ((or an office for which ownership of property is a prerequisite to voting)) shall complete and file a declaration and affidavit of candidacy for the office. The secretary of state shall adopt, by rule, a ((declaration of candidacy)) separate form for candidates for the office of precinct committee officer and a ((separate)) standard form for candidates for all other offices filing under this chapter. Included on the standard form ((shall)) must be:
(1) A place for the candidate to declare that he or she is a registered voter within the jurisdiction of the office for which he or she is filing, and the address at which he or she is registered;
(2) A place for the candidate to indicate the position for which he or she is filing;
(3) For partisan offices only, a place for the candidate to indicate ((a party designation, if applicable)) which major or minor political party, if any, or independent status, the candidate regards as best approximating his or her personal preference. A candidate may only list one party preference or may list independent;
(4) A place for the candidate to indicate the amount of the filing fee accompanying the declaration and affidavit of candidacy or for the candidate to indicate that he or she is filing a ((nominating)) petition of candidacy in lieu of the filing fee under RCW 29.15.050;
(5) A place for the candidate to sign the declaration and affidavit of candidacy, stating that the information provided on the form is true and swearing or affirming that he or she will support the Constitution and laws of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the state of Washington((.
The secretary of state may require)); and
(6) Any other information ((on the form he or she)) that the secretary of state deems appropriate to facilitate the filing process.
Sec. 11. RCW 29.15.025 and 1999 c 298 s 9 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A person filing a declaration and affidavit of candidacy for an office shall, at the time of filing, be a registered voter and possess the qualifications specified by law for persons who may be elected to the office.
(2) The name of a candidate for an office shall not appear on a ballot for that office unless, except as provided in RCW 3.46.067 and 3.50.057, the candidate is, at the time the candidate's declaration and affidavit of candidacy is filed, properly registered to vote in the geographic area represented by the office. For the purposes of this section, each geographic area in which registered voters may cast ballots for an office is represented by that office. If a person elected to an office must be ((nominated)) qualified from a district or similar division of the geographic area represented by the office, the name of a candidate for the office shall not appear on a primary ballot for that office unless the candidate is, at the time the candidate's declaration and affidavit of candidacy is filed, properly registered to vote in that district or division. The officer with whom declarations and affidavits of candidacy must be filed under this title shall review each such declaration filed regarding compliance with this subsection.
(3) This section does not apply to the office of a member of the United States congress.
Sec. 12. RCW 29.15.040 and 1987 c 110 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
Any candidate may mail his or her declaration of candidacy for an office to the filing officer. Such declarations of candidacy shall be processed by the filing officer in the following manner:
(1) Any declaration received by the filing officer by mail before the tenth business day immediately preceding the first day for candidates to file for office shall be returned to the candidate submitting it, together with a notification that the declaration of candidacy was received too early to be processed. The candidate shall then be permitted to resubmit his or her declaration of candidacy during the filing period.
(2) Any properly executed declaration of candidacy received by mail on or after the tenth business day immediately preceding the first day for candidates to file for office and before the close of business on the last day of the filing period shall be included with filings made in person during the filing period. In primaries for partisan offices and judicial ((elections)) offices the filing officer shall determine by lot the order in which the names of those candidates shall appear upon sample and absentee primary ballots.
(3) Any declaration of candidacy received by the filing officer after the close of business on the last day for candidates to file for office shall be rejected and returned to the candidate attempting to file it.
Sec. 13. RCW 29.15.050 and 1999 c 298 s 10 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A filing fee of one dollar shall accompany each declaration of candidacy for precinct committee officer; a filing fee of ten dollars shall accompany the declaration of candidacy for any office with a fixed annual salary of one thousand dollars or less; a filing fee equal to one percent of the annual salary of the office at the time of filing shall accompany the declaration of candidacy for any office with a fixed annual salary of more than one thousand dollars per annum. No filing fee need accompany a declaration of candidacy for any office for which compensation is on a per diem or per meeting attended basis.
(2) A candidate who lacks sufficient assets or income at the time of filing to pay the filing fee required by this section shall submit a petition of candidacy with his or her declaration of candidacy ((a nominating petition)). The petition shall contain not less than a number of signatures of registered voters equal to the number of dollars of the filing fee. The signatures shall be of voters registered to vote within the jurisdiction of the office for which the candidate is filing.
(3) When the candidacy is for:
(((1))) (a) A legislative or judicial office that includes territory from more than one county, the fee shall be paid to the secretary of state for equal division between the treasuries of the counties comprising the district.
(((2))) (b) A city or town office, the fee shall be paid to the county auditor who shall transmit it to the city or town clerk for deposit in the city or town treasury.
Sec. 14. RCW 29.15.060 and 1984 c 142 s 5 are each amended to read as follows:
The ((nominating)) petition of candidacy authorized by RCW 29.15.050 shall be printed on sheets of uniform color and size, shall contain no more than twenty numbered lines, and shall be in substantially the following form:
Any person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly (1) signs more than one petition for any single candidate, (2) signs the petition when he or she is not a legal voter, or (3) makes any false statement may be subject to fine, or imprisonment, or both.
We, the undersigned registered voters of (( (the state of Washington or the political subdivision for which the petition of candidacy is made) )) the state of Washington, hereby petition that the name of (candidate's name) be printed on the official primary ballot for the office of (insert name of office) .
│ │ │ │
Signature │ Printed Name │ Residence Address │ City │ County
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
1– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
2– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
│ │ │ │
3– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Sec. 15. RCW 29.15.070 and 1984 c 142 s 6 are each amended to read as follows:
((Nominating)) (1) Petitions of candidacy may be rejected for the following reasons:
(((1))) (a) The petition is not in the proper form;
(((2))) (b) The petition clearly bears insufficient signatures;
(((3))) (c) The petition is not accompanied by a declaration of candidacy;
(((4))) (d) The time within which the petition and the declaration of candidacy could have been filed has expired.
(2) If the petition is accepted, the officer with whom it is filed shall canvass the signatures contained on it and shall reject the signatures of those persons who are not registered voters ((and the signatures of those persons who are not registered to vote)) within the jurisdiction of the office for which the ((nominating)) petition of candidacy is filed. He or she shall additionally reject any signature that appears on the ((nominating)) petitions of candidacy of two or more candidates for the same office ((and shall also reject, each time it appears, the name of any person who signs the same petition more than once)). If the filing officer finds that the same voter has signed the same petition more than once, he or she shall reject all but the first valid signature.
(3) If the officer with whom the petition is filed refuses to accept the petition or refuses to certify the petition as bearing sufficient valid signatures, the person filing the petition may appeal that action to the superior court. The application for judicial review shall take precedence over other cases and matters and shall be speedily heard and determined.
Sec. 16. RCW 29.15.080 and 1984 c 142 s 8 are each amended to read as follows:
The following apply to persons signing ((nominating)) petitions of candidacy prescribed by RCW 29.15.060:
(1) A person who signs a petition with any other than his or her name ((shall be)) is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(2) A person ((shall be)) is guilty of a misdemeanor if the person knowingly: Signs more than one petition for any single candidacy of any single candidate; signs the petition when he or she is not a legal voter; or makes a false statement as to his or her residence.
Sec. 17. RCW 29.15.150 and 1973 c 4 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
Whenever it shall be necessary to hold a special election in an odd-numbered year to fill an unexpired term of any office which is scheduled to be voted upon for a full term in an even-numbered year, no ((September)) primary election shall be held in the odd-numbered year if, after the last day allowed for candidates to withdraw, ((either of the following circumstances exist:
(1) No more than one candidate of each qualified political party has filed a declaration of candidacy for the same partisan office to be filled; or
(2))) no more than two candidates have filed a declaration of candidacy for a single ((nonpartisan)) office to be filled.
In ((either)) this event, the officer with whom the declarations of candidacy were filed shall immediately notify all candidates concerned and the names of the candidates that would have been printed upon the ((September)) primary ballot, but for the provisions of this section, shall be printed as ((nominees)) candidates for the positions sought upon the ((November)) general election ballot.
Sec. 18. RCW 29.15.160 and 1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 120 s 9 are each amended to read as follows:
A void in candidacy for ((a nonpartisan)) an office occurs when an election for such office, except for the short term, has been scheduled and no valid declaration of candidacy has been filed for the position or all persons filing such valid declarations of candidacy have died or been disqualified.
Sec. 19. RCW 29.15.170 and 2001 c 46 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
Filings for ((a nonpartisan)) an office shall be reopened for a period of three normal business days, such three day period to be fixed by the election officer with whom such declarations of candidacy are filed and notice thereof given by notifying press, radio, and television in the county or counties involved, and by such other means as may now or hereafter be provided by law whenever before the sixth Tuesday prior to a primary:
(1) A void in candidacy occurs;
(2) A vacancy occurs in ((any nonpartisan)) an office leaving an unexpired term to be filled by an election for which filings have not been held; or
(3) A ((nominee)) candidate for judge of the superior court entitled to a certificate of election pursuant to Article 4, section 29, Amendment 41 of the state Constitution, dies or is disqualified.
Candidacies validly filed within said three-day period shall appear on the ballot as if made during the earlier filing period.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 20. A new section is added to chapter 29.15 RCW to read as follows:
If the death or disqualification of a candidate for a partisan or nonpartisan office does not give rise to the opening of a new filing period under RCW 29.15.170 and if no appointment is made under RCW 29.18.160, then the following will occur:
(1) If the candidate dies or becomes disqualified after filing a declaration of candidacy but before the close of the filing period, then the declaration of candidacy is void and his or her name will not appear on the ballot.
(2)(a) If the candidate dies or becomes disqualified after the close of the filing period but before the day of the primary, then his or her name will appear on the primary ballot and all otherwise valid votes for that candidate will be tabulated. The candidate's name will not appear on the general election ballot even if he or she otherwise would have qualified to do so, but no other candidate will advance or be substituted in place of that candidate.
(b) If the candidate was the only candidate to qualify to advance to the general election, then the general election for that office lapses, and the office will be regarded as vacant as of the time the newly elected official would have otherwise taken office.
(3) If the candidate dies or becomes disqualified on or after the day of the primary, and he or she would have otherwise qualified to appear on the general election ballot, then his or her name will appear on the general election ballot and all otherwise valid votes for that candidate will be tabulated. If the candidate received a number of votes sufficient to be elected to office, but for his or her death or disqualification, then the office will be regarded as vacant as of the time the newly elected official would have otherwise taken office.
Sec. 21. RCW 29.15.190 and 1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 120 s 12 are each amended to read as follows:
A scheduled election ((shall be lapsed)) lapses, the office is deemed stricken from the ballot, no purported write-in votes may be counted, and no candidate may be certified as elected, when:
(1) In an election for judge of the supreme court ((or)), superintendent of public instruction, or a partisan office, a void in candidacy occurs on or after the fourth Tuesday prior to a primary, public filings and the primary being an indispensable phase of the election process for such offices;
(2) Except as otherwise specified in RCW 29.15.180, ((as now or hereafter amended, a nominee)) a candidate for judge of the superior court entitled to a certificate of election pursuant to Article 4, section 29, Amendment 41 of the state Constitution dies or is disqualified on or after the fourth Tuesday prior to a primary;
(3) In other elections for nonpartisan office a void in candidacy occurs or a vacancy occurs involving an unexpired term to be filled on or after the fourth Tuesday prior to an election.
Sec. 22. RCW 29.15.210 and 1972 ex.s. c 61 s 5 are each amended to read as follows:
The election officer with whom declarations of candidacy are filed shall give notice of a void in candidacy for ((a nonpartisan)) an office((,)) by notifying press, radio, and television in the county or counties involved and by such other means as may now or hereafter be provided by law. The notice shall state the office, and the time and place for filing declarations of candidacy.
Sec. 23. RCW 29.15.220 and 1972 ex.s. c 61 s 6 are each amended to read as follows:
Filings to fill a void in candidacy for ((nonpartisan)) an office shall be made in the same manner and with the same official as required during the regular filing period for such office((: PROVIDED, That nominating signature)). Petitions ((which may be)) of candidacy that are required of candidates filing ((for certain district offices)) during the normal filing period shall not be required of candidates filing during the special three day filing period.
Sec. 24. RCW 29.18.010 and 1990 c 59 s 78 are each amended to read as follows:
Candidates for ((the following offices shall be nominated at)) partisan offices will appear on the ballot at primaries held ((pursuant to the provisions of)) under this chapter((:
(1) Congressional offices;
(2) All state offices except (a) judicial offices and (b) the office of superintendent of public instruction;
(3) All county offices except (a) judicial offices and (b) those offices where a county home rule charter provides otherwise)).
Sec. 25. RCW 29.18.160 and 2001 c 46 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
A vacancy caused by the death or disqualification of any candidate ((or nominee of)) for a partisan office who is affiliated with a major or minor political party that would result in no candidate affiliated with that party being on the primary ballot for a partisan office, may be filled at any time up to and including the day ((prior to the election)) before the primary for that position. For ((state)) partisan offices ((in any political subdivision voted on solely by electors)) of a county or the state legislature voted on solely by voters all or part of a single county, an individual ((shall)) may be appointed to fill ((such)) a vacancy by the county central committee in the case of a major political party or by the state central committee or comparable governing body in the case of a minor political party. For other partisan offices, including federal or statewide offices, an individual ((shall)) may be appointed to fill ((such)) the vacancy by the state central committee or comparable governing body of the appropriate political party.
((Should such)) If the vacancy occurs and the appointment is made no later than the sixth Tuesday ((prior to the state)) before the primary ((or general election)) concerned and the ballots have been printed, ((it shall be mandatory that)) they must be corrected by the appropriate election officers. In making ((such)) the correction, it ((shall)) is not ((be)) necessary to reprint complete ballots if any other less expensive technique can be used and the resulting correction is reasonably clear.
((Should such)) If the vacancy occurs after the sixth Tuesday ((prior to said state)) before the primary ((or general election)) and time does not exist in which to correct ballots (including absentee ballots), either in total or in part, then the votes cast or recorded at the primary for the person who has died or become disqualified ((shall)) must be counted for the person who has been named to fill ((such)) the vacancy.
When the secretary of state is the person with whom the appointment by the major or minor political party is filed, ((he)) the secretary of state shall, in certifying candidates ((or nominations)) to the various county officers insert the name of the person appointed to fill a vacancy.
((In the event that)) If the secretary of state has already sent forth ((his)) a certificate when the appointment to fill a vacancy is filed with ((him, he)) that office, the secretary of state shall forthwith certify to the county auditors of the proper counties the name and place of residence of the person appointed to fill a vacancy, the office for which ((he)) the person is a candidate ((or nominee)), the party ((he represents)) with which that person is affiliated, and all other pertinent facts pertaining to the vacancy.
Sec. 26. RCW 29.27.020 and 1990 c 59 s 8 are each amended to read as follows:
On or before the day following the last day allowed for ((political parties to fill vacancies in the ticket as provided by RCW 29.18.150)) candidates to withdraw under RCW 29.15.120, the secretary of state shall certify to each county auditor a list of the candidates who have filed declarations of candidacy in his or her office for the primary. For each office, the certificate shall include the name of each candidate, his or her address, and his or her party designation, if any.
Sec. 27. RCW 29.27.050 and 1990 c 59 s 9 are each amended to read as follows:
No later than the day following the certification of the returns of any primary, the secretary of state shall certify to the appropriate county auditors, the names of all persons ((nominated)) qualified to appear on the general election ballot as candidates for offices, the returns of which have been canvassed by the secretary of state.
Sec. 28. RCW 29.27.080 and 1999 c 4 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Except as provided in RCW 29.81A.060, notice for any state, county, district, or municipal election, whether special or general, shall be given by at least one publication not more than ten nor less than three days prior to the election by the county auditor or the officer conducting the election as the case may be, in one or more newspapers of general circulation within the county. ((Said)) The legal notice shall contain the title of each office under the proper party ((designation)) preference, the names and addresses of all ((officers)) candidates who have been ((nominated)) qualified to appear on the ballot for an office to be voted upon at that election, together with the ballot titles of all measures, the hours during which the polls will be open, and that the election will be held in the regular polling places in each precinct, giving the address of each polling place: PROVIDED, That the names of all candidates for nonpartisan offices shall be published separately with designation of the offices for which they are candidates but without party designation. This shall be the only notice required for a state, county, district, or municipal general or special election and shall supersede the provisions of any and all other statutes, whether general or special in nature, having different requirements for the giving of notice of any general or special elections.
(2) All school district elections held on February 5, 1980, at which the number and proportion of persons required by law voted to authorize bonds or tax levies, are hereby validated regardless of any failure to publish notice of such election. No action challenging the validity of any such election may be brought later than April 15, 1980, or thirty days from June 12, 1980, whichever is later. Notice of provisions of this subsection shall be published within five days after February 28, 1980, in a newspaper of general circulation within each county where a school district election was held on February 5, 1980, and where notice of such election was not published as provided in subsection (1) of this section.
(3) All school district elections held on May 19, 1998, at which the number and proportion of persons required by law voted to authorize bonds or tax levies, are hereby validated regardless of any failure to publish notice of such election. No action challenging the validity of any such election may be brought later than thirty days after January 29, 1999. Notice of provisions of this subsection shall be published within five days after January 29, 1999, in a newspaper of general circulation within each county where a school district election was held on May 19, 1998, and where notice of such election was not published as provided in subsection (1) of this section.
Sec. 29. RCW 29.27.090 and 1965 c 9 s 29.27.090 are each amended to read as follows:
The secretary of state((, county)) and the auditor of each county((, and clerks of the several municipal corporations)) shall preserve ((all certificates of nomination)) documentation indicating which candidates have qualified to appear on a general election ballot filed in their respective offices for six months. All certificates shall be open to public inspection under proper regulations made by the officer with whom they are filed.
Sec. 30. RCW 29.30.005 and 1990 c 59 s 93 are each amended to read as follows:
Except for the candidates for the positions of president and vice president or for a partisan or nonpartisan office for which no primary is required, the names of all candidates who have ((filed for nomination under chapter 29.18 RCW and those independent candidates and candidates of minor political parties who have been nominated under chapter 29.24 RCW shall)) satisfied all requirements of law will appear on the appropriate ballot at the primary throughout the jurisdiction ((in which they are to be nominated)) of the office for which they are a candidate.
Sec. 31. RCW 29.30.020 and 2001 c 30 s 5 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) The positions or offices on a primary ballot shall be arranged in substantially the following order: United States senator; United States representative; governor; lieutenant governor; secretary of state; state treasurer; state auditor; attorney general; commissioner of public lands; superintendent of public instruction; insurance commissioner; state senator; state representative; county officers; justices of the supreme court; judges of the court of appeals; judges of the superior court; and judges of the district court. For all other jurisdictions on the primary ballot, the offices in each jurisdiction shall be grouped together and be in the order of the position numbers assigned to those offices, if any.
(2) The order of the positions or offices on an election ballot shall be substantially the same as on a primary ballot except that the offices of president and vice-president of the United States shall precede all other offices on a presidential election ballot. State ballot issues shall be placed before all offices on an election ballot. The positions on a ballot to be assigned to ballot measures regarding local units of government shall be established by the secretary of state by rule.
(3) The political party or independent candidacy of each candidate for partisan office shall be indicated next to the name of the candidate on the primary and election ballot. ((A candidate shall file a written notice with the filing officer within three business days after the close of the filing period designating the political party to be indicated next to the candidate's name on the ballot if either: (a) The candidate has been nominated by two or more minor political parties or independent conventions; or (b) the candidate has both filed a declaration of candidacy declaring an affiliation with a major political party and been nominated by a minor political party or independent convention. If no written notice is filed the filing officer shall give effect to the party designation shown upon the first document filed. A candidate may be deemed nominated by a minor party or independent convention only if all documentation required by chapter 29.24 RCW has been timely filed.))
Sec. 32. RCW 29.30.101 and 1999 c 298 s 11 are each amended to read as follows:
The names of the persons certified ((as nominees)) by the secretary of state or the county canvassing board as having qualified to appear on the general election ballot shall be printed on the ballot at the ensuing election.
No name of any candidate ((whose nomination at a primary is required by law shall)) for an office for which a primary is conducted may be placed upon the ballot at a general or special election unless it appears upon the certificate of either (1) the secretary of state, or (2) the county canvassing board, or (3) ((a minor party convention or)) the state or county central committee of a major political party to fill a vacancy on its ticket under RCW 29.18.160.
Excluding the office of precinct committee officer or a temporary elected position such as a charter review board member or freeholder, a candidate's name shall not appear more than once upon a ballot for a position regularly ((nominated)) qualified or elected at the same election.
Sec. 33. 2001 c ... (SB 5275) s 17 is amended to read as follows:
In an odd-numbered year, the county auditor may conduct a primary or a special election by mail ballot concurrently with the primary:
(1) For an office or ballot measure of a special purpose district that is entirely within the county;
(2) For an office or ballot measure of a special purpose district that lies in the county and one or more other counties if the auditor first secures the concurrence of the county auditors of those other counties to conduct the primary in this manner district-wide; and
(3) For a ballot measure or nonpartisan office of a county, city, or town if the auditor first secures the concurrence of the legislative authority of the county, city, or town involved.
The county auditor shall notify an election jurisdiction for which a primary is to be held that the primary will be conducted by mail ballot.
A primary in an odd-numbered year may not be conducted by mail ballot in a precinct with two hundred or more active registered voters if a partisan office or state office or state ballot measure is to be voted upon at that primary in the precinct.
To the extent they are not inconsistent with other provisions of law, the laws governing the conduct of mail ballot special elections apply to ((nonpartisan)) primaries for nonpartisan offices conducted by mail ballot.
Sec. 34. RCW 29.42.010 and 1977 ex.s. c 329 s 16 are each amended to read as follows:
Each political party organization ((shall have the power to)) may:
(1) Make its own rules and regulations;
(2) Call conventions;
(3) Elect delegates to conventions, state and national;
(4) Fill vacancies on the ticket under RCW 29.18.160;
(5) Provide for the nomination of presidential electors; and
(6) Perform all functions inherent in such an organization((: PROVIDED, That only major political parties shall have the power to designate candidates to appear on the state primary election ballot as provided in RCW 29.18.150 as now or hereafter amended)).
Sec. 35. RCW 29.42.020 and 1987 c 295 s 11 are each amended to read as follows:
The state committee of each major political party shall consist of one committeeman and one committeewoman from each county elected by the county committee at its organization meeting. It shall have a chair and vice-chair who must be of opposite sexes. This committee shall meet during January of each odd-numbered year for the purpose of organization at a time and place designated by a sufficient notice to all the newly elected state committeemen and committeewomen by the authorized officers of the retiring committee. For the purpose of this section a notice mailed at least one week prior to the date of the meeting shall constitute sufficient notice. At its organizational meeting it shall elect its chair and vice-chair, and such officers as its bylaws may provide, and adopt bylaws, rules and regulations. It shall have power to:
(1) Call conventions at such time and place and under such circumstances and for such purposes as the call to convention shall designate. The manner, number and procedure for selection of state convention delegates shall be subject to the committee's rules and regulations duly adopted;
(2) Provide for the election of delegates to national conventions;
(3) Fill vacancies on the ticket for any federal or state office to be voted on by the ((electors)) voters of more than one county under RCW 29.18.160;
(4) Provide for the nomination of presidential electors; and
(5) Perform all functions inherent in such an organization.
Notwithstanding any provision of this chapter, the committee shall not set rules which shall govern the conduct of the actual proceedings at a party state convention.
Sec. 36. RCW 29.42.050 and 1991 c 363 s 34 are each amended to read as follows:
The statutory requirements for filing as a candidate at the primaries shall apply to candidates for precinct committee officer except that the filing period for this office alone shall be extended to and include the second Friday immediately following the last day for ((political parties to fill vacancies in the ticket as provided by RCW 29.18.150)) the filing of declarations of candidacy under RCW 29.15.020, and the office shall not be voted upon at the primaries, but the names of all candidates must appear under the proper party and office designations on the ballot for the general November election for each even-numbered year and the one receiving the highest number of votes shall be declared elected: PROVIDED, That to be declared elected, a candidate must receive at least ten percent of the number of votes cast for the candidate of the candidate's party receiving the greatest number of votes in the precinct. Any person elected to the office of precinct committee officer who has not filed a declaration of candidacy shall pay the fee of one dollar to the county auditor for a certificate of election. The term of office of precinct committee officer shall be for two years, commencing upon completion of the official canvass of votes by the county canvassing board of election returns. Should any vacancy occur in this office by reason of death, resignation, or disqualification of the incumbent, or because of failure to elect, the respective county chair of the county central committee shall be empowered to fill such vacancy by appointment: PROVIDED, HOWEVER, That in legislative districts having a majority of its precincts in a county with a population of one million or more, such appointment shall be made only upon the recommendation of the legislative district chair: PROVIDED, That the person so appointed shall have the same qualifications as candidates when filing for election to such office for such precinct: PROVIDED FURTHER, That when a vacancy in the office of precinct committee officer exists because of failure to elect at a state general election, such vacancy shall not be filled until after the organization meeting of the county central committee and the new county chair selected as provided by RCW 29.42.030.
Sec. 37. RCW 29.62.010 and 1990 c 59 s 62 are each amended to read as follows:
Every canvassing board or officer responsible for canvassing and certifying the returns of any primary or election shall:
(1) Adopt administrative rules to facilitate and govern the canvassing process in that jurisdiction;
(2) For each primary and election, prepare and sign a statement of the returns for each office, candidate, and issue voted on in that jurisdiction;
(3) If, at a ((partisan)) primary, two or more candidates ((of the same party)) receive the greatest or second greatest, and identical, number of votes for an office or position, resolve the tie vote by lot((;
(4) If, at a nonpartisan or judicial primary, two or more candidates receive the second greatest, and identical, number of votes for that office or position, resolve the tie vote by lot)).
Sec. 38. RCW 29.62.180 and 1999 c 157 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) For any office at any election or primary, any voter may write in on the ballot the name of any person for an office who has filed as a write-in candidate for the office in the manner provided by RCW 29.04.180 and such vote shall be counted the same as if the name had been printed on the ballot and marked by the voter. No write-in vote made for any person who has not filed a declaration of candidacy pursuant to RCW 29.04.180 is valid if that person filed for the same office, either as a regular candidate or a write-in candidate, at the preceding primary, except that nothing in this section invalidates a vote for the sole reason that the vote was cast as a write-in for a candidate whose name appears on the same ballot for the same office. Any abbreviation used to designate office, position, or political party shall be accepted if the canvassing board can determine, to their satisfaction, the voter's intent.
(2) The number of write-in votes cast for each office must be recorded and reported with the canvass for the election.
(3) Write-in votes cast for an individual candidate for an office need not be tallied if the total number of write-in votes cast for the office is not greater than the number of votes cast for ((the)) a candidate apparently ((nominated)) qualified to appear on the general election ballot or elected, and the write-in votes could not have altered the outcome of the primary or election. In the case of write-in votes for statewide office or for any office whose jurisdiction encompasses more than one county, write-in votes for an individual candidate must be tallied whenever the county auditor is notified by either the office of the secretary of state or another auditor in a multicounty jurisdiction that it appears that the write-in votes could alter the outcome of the primary or election.
(4) In the case of statewide offices or jurisdictions that encompass more than one county, if the total number of write-in votes cast for an office within a county is greater than the number of votes cast for a candidate apparently ((nominated)) qualified to appear on the general election ballot or elected in a primary or election, the auditor shall tally all write-in votes for individual candidates for that office and notify the office of the secretary of state and the auditors of the other counties within the jurisdiction, that the write-in votes for individual candidates should be tallied.
Sec. 39. RCW 29.64.010 and 2001 c 225 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) An officer of a political party or any person for whom votes were cast in a primary who was not declared ((nominated)) qualified to appear on the general election ballot may file a written application for a recount of the votes or a portion of the votes cast at that primary for all persons for whom votes were cast for ((nomination to)) that office.
(2) An officer of a political party or any person for whom votes were cast at any election may file a written application for a recount of the votes or a portion of the votes cast at that election for all candidates for election to that office.
(3) Any group of five or more registered voters may file a written application for a recount of the votes or a portion of the votes cast upon any question or issue. They shall designate one of the members of the group as chairman and shall indicate the voting residence of each member of the group.
(4) An application for a recount of the votes cast for an office or on a ballot measure must be filed with the officer with whom filings are made for the jurisdiction.
(5) An application for a recount must specify whether the recount will be done manually or by the vote tally system. A recount done by the vote tally system must use programming that recounts and reports only the office or ballot measure in question. The county shall also provide for a test of the logic and accuracy of that program.
(6) An application for a recount shall be filed within three business days after the county canvassing board or secretary of state has declared the official results of the primary or election for the office or issue for which the recount is requested.
(7) This chapter applies to the recounting of votes cast by paper ballots and to the recounting of votes recorded on ballots counted by a vote tally system.
Sec. 40. RCW 29.64.015 and 2001 c 225 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) If the official canvass of all of the returns for any office at any primary or election reveals that the difference in the number of votes cast for a candidate apparently ((nominated)) qualified to appear on the general election ballot or elected to any office and the number of votes cast for the closest apparently defeated opponent is less than two thousand votes and also less than one-half of one percent of the total number of votes cast for both candidates, the county canvassing board shall conduct a recount of all votes cast on that position.
(a) Whenever such a difference occurs in the number of votes cast for candidates for a position the declaration of candidacy for which was filed with the secretary of state, the secretary of state shall, within three business days of the day that the returns of the primary or election are first certified by the canvassing boards of those counties, direct those boards to recount all votes cast on the position.
(b) If the difference in the number of votes cast for the apparent winner and the closest apparently defeated opponent is less than one hundred fifty votes and also less than one-fourth of one percent of the total number of votes cast for both candidates, the votes shall be recounted manually or as provided in subsection (3) of this section.
(2) A mandatory recount shall be conducted in the manner provided by RCW 29.64.020, 29.64.030, and 29.64.040. No cost of a mandatory recount may be charged to any candidate.
(3) The apparent winner and closest apparently defeated opponent for an office for which a manual recount is required under subsection (1)(b) of this section may select an alternative method of conducting the recount. To select such an alternative, the two candidates shall agree to the alternative in a signed, written statement filed with the election official for the office. The recount shall be conducted using the alternative method if: It is suited to the balloting system that was used for casting the votes for the office; it involves the use of a vote tallying system that is approved for use in this state by the secretary of state; and the vote tallying system is readily available in each county required to conduct the recount. If more than one balloting system was used in casting votes for the office, an alternative to a manual recount may be selected for each system.
Sec. 41. RCW 29.64.030 and 2001 c 225 s 6 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) At the time and place established for a recount, the canvassing board or its duly authorized representatives, in the presence of all witnesses who may be in attendance, shall open the sealed containers containing the ballots to be recounted, and shall recount the votes for the offices or issues for which the recount has been ordered. Ballots shall be handled only by the members of the canvassing board or their duly authorized representatives.
Witnesses shall be permitted to observe the ballots and the process of tabulating the votes, but they shall not be permitted to handle the ballots. The canvassing board shall not permit the tabulation of votes for any ((nomination)) qualification, election, or issue other than the ones for which a recount was applied for or required.
(2) At any time before the ballots from all of the precincts listed in the application for the recount have been recounted, the applicant may file with the board a written request to stop the recount.
(3) The recount may be observed by persons representing the candidates affected by the recount or the persons representing both sides of an issue that is being recounted. The observers may not make a record of the names, addresses, or other information on the ballots, poll books, or applications for absentee ballots unless authorized by the superior court. The secretary of state or county auditor may limit the number of observers to not less than two on each side if, in his or her opinion, a greater number would cause undue delay or disruption of the recount process.
Sec. 42. RCW 29.64.040 and 2001 c 225 s 8 are each amended to read as follows:
Upon completion of the canvass of a recount, the canvassing board shall prepare and certify an amended abstract showing the votes cast in each precinct for which the recount was conducted. Copies of the amended abstracts must be transmitted to the same officers who received the abstract on which the recount was based.
If the ((nomination, election,)) office or issue for which the recount was conducted was submitted only to the voters of a county, the canvassing board shall file the amended abstract with the original results of that election or primary.
If the ((nomination, election,)) office or issue for which a recount was conducted was submitted to the voters of more than one county, the secretary of state shall canvass the amended abstracts and shall file an amended abstract with the original results of that election. An amended abstract certified under this section supersedes any prior abstract of the results for the same offices or issues at the same primary or election.
Sec. 43. RCW 29.64.060 and 2001 c 225 s 10 are each amended to read as follows:
The canvassing board shall determine the expenses for conducting a recount of votes.
The cost of the recount shall be deducted from the amount deposited by the applicant for the recount at the time of filing the request for the recount, and the balance shall be returned to the applicant. If the costs of the recount exceed the deposit, the applicant shall pay the difference. No charges may be deducted by the canvassing board from the deposit for a recount if the recount changes the result of the ((nomination)) primary or election for the office or issue for which the recount was ordered.
Sec. 44. RCW 29.68.080 and 1990 c 59 s 105 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Whenever a vacancy occurs in the office of United States representative or United States senator from this state or any congressional district of this state, the governor shall order a special election to fill the vacancy.
(2) Within ten days of such vacancy occurring, he or she shall issue a writ of election fixing a date for the special vacancy election not less than ninety days after the issuance of the writ, fixing a date for the primary for ((nominating)) qualifying candidates for the special vacancy election not less than thirty days before the day fixed for holding the special vacancy election, fixing the dates for the special filing period, and designating the term or part of the term for which the vacancy exists. If the vacancy is in the office of United States representative, the writ of election shall specify the congressional district that is vacant.
(3) If the vacancy occurs less than six months before a state general election and before the second Friday following the close of the filing period for that general election, the special primary and special vacancy elections shall be held in concert with the state primary and state general election in that year.
(4) If the vacancy occurs on or after the first day for filing under RCW 29.15.020 and on or before the second Friday following the close of the filing period, a special filing period of three normal business days shall be fixed by the governor and notice thereof given to all media, including press, radio, and television within the area in which the vacancy election is to be held, to the end that, insofar as possible, all interested persons will be aware of such filing period. The last day of the filing period shall not be later than the third Tuesday before the primary ((at which candidates are to be nominated)). The names of candidates who have filed valid declarations of candidacy during this three-day period shall appear on the approaching primary ballot.
(5) If the vacancy occurs later than the second Friday following the close of the filing period, a special primary and special vacancy election to fill the position shall be held after the next state general election but, in any event, no later than the ninetieth day following the November election.
(6) As used in this chapter, "county" means, in the case of a vacancy in the office of United States senator, any or all of the counties in the state and, in the case of a vacancy in the office of United States representative, only those counties wholly or partly within the congressional district in which the vacancy has occurred.
Sec. 45. RCW 29.68.130 and 1985 c 45 s 7 are each amended to read as follows:
The general election laws and laws relating to ((partisan)) primaries ((shall)) for partisan offices apply to the special primaries and vacancy elections provided for in RCW 29.68.080 through 29.68.120 to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the provisions of these sections. Statutory time deadlines relating to availability of absentee ballots, certification, canvassing, and related procedures that cannot be met in a timely fashion may be modified for the purposes of a specific primary or vacancy election under this chapter by the secretary of state through emergency rules adopted under RCW 29.04.080.
Sec. 46. RCW 29.71.020 and 1990 c 59 s 69 are each amended to read as follows:
In the year in which a presidential election is held, each major political party and each minor political party or independent candidate convention ((held under chapter 29.24 RCW)) that nominates candidates for president and vice president of the United States shall nominate presidential electors for this state. The party or convention shall file with the secretary of state a certificate signed by the presiding officer of the convention at which the presidential electors were chosen, listing the names and addresses of the presidential electors. Each presidential elector shall execute and file with the secretary of state a pledge that, as an elector, he or she will vote for the candidates nominated by that party. The names of presidential electors shall not appear on the ballots. The votes cast for candidates for president and vice president of each political party shall be counted for the candidates for presidential electors of that political party.
Sec. 47. RCW 29.81.220 and 1999 c 260 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
The voters' pamphlet must contain:
(1) Information about each ballot measure initiated by or referred to the voters for their approval or rejection as required by RCW 29.81.250;
(2) In even-numbered years, statements, if submitted, advocating the candidacies of ((nominees)) candidates qualified to appear on the ballot for the office of president and vice president of the United States, United States senator, United States representative, governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, state treasurer, state auditor, attorney general, commissioner of public lands, superintendent of public instruction, insurance commissioner, state senator, state representative, justice of the supreme court, judge of the court of appeals, or judge of the superior court. Candidates may also submit a campaign mailing address and telephone number and a photograph not more than five years old and of a size and quality that the secretary of state determines to be suitable for reproduction in the voters' pamphlet;
(3) In odd-numbered years, if any office voted upon statewide appears on the ballot due to a vacancy, then statements and photographs for candidates for any vacant office listed in subsection (2) of this section must appear;
(4) In even-numbered years, a section explaining how voters may participate in the election campaign process; the address and telephone number of the public disclosure commission established under RCW 42.17.350; and a summary of the disclosure requirements that apply when contributions are made to candidates and political committees;
(5) In even-numbered years the name, address, and telephone number of each political party ((with nominees listed in the pamphlet, if filed with the secretary of state by the state committee of a major political party or the presiding officer of the convention of a minor political party)) for which a candidate appearing on the ballot has expressed a preference on his or her declaration of candidacy, if the party has provided that information to the secretary of state;
(6) In each odd-numbered year immediately before a year in which a president of the United States is to be nominated and elected, information explaining the precinct caucus and convention process used by each major political party to elect delegates to its national presidential candidate nominating convention. The pamphlet must also provide a description of the statutory procedures by which minor political parties are formed and the statutory methods used by the parties to nominate candidates for president;
(7) In even-numbered years, a description of the office of precinct committee officer and its duties;
(8) An application form for an absentee ballot;
(9) A brief statement explaining the deletion and addition of language for proposed measures under RCW 29.81.260; and
(10) Any additional information pertaining to elections as may be required by law or in the judgment of the secretary of state is deemed informative to the voters.
Sec. 48. RCW 29.85.100 and 1991 c 81 s 8 are each amended to read as follows:
Every person who:
(1) Knowingly and falsely issues a certificate of ((nomination or)) election or a certificate stating which candidates for office have qualified to appear on the general election ballot; or
(2) ((Knowingly provides false information on a certificate which must be filed with an elections officer under chapter 29.24 RCW; or
(3))) Knowingly provides false information on his or her declaration of candidacy or petition of ((nomination)) candidacy; or
(((4))) (3) Conceals or fraudulently defaces or destroys a ((certificate which has been filed with an elections officer under chapter 29.24 RCW or a)) declaration of candidacy or petition of ((nomination which)) candidacy that has been filed with an elections officer, or any part of such a certificate, declaration, or petition, is guilty of a class C felony punishable under RCW 9A.20.021.
Sec. 49. RCW 42.17.020 and 1995 c 397 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) "Agency" includes all state agencies and all local agencies. "State agency" includes every state office, department, division, bureau, board, commission, or other state agency. "Local agency" includes every county, city, town, municipal corporation, quasi-municipal corporation, or special purpose district, or any office, department, division, bureau, board, commission, or agency thereof, or other local public agency.
(2) "Authorized committee" means the political committee authorized by a candidate, or by the public official against whom recall charges have been filed, to accept contributions or make expenditures on behalf of the candidate or public official.
(3) "Ballot proposition" means any "measure" as defined by RCW 29.01.110, or any initiative, recall, or referendum proposition proposed to be submitted to the voters of the state or any municipal corporation, political subdivision, or other voting constituency from and after the time when the proposition has been initially filed with the appropriate election officer of that constituency prior to its circulation for signatures.
(4) "Benefit" means a commercial, proprietary, financial, economic, or monetary advantage, or the avoidance of a commercial, proprietary, financial, economic, or monetary disadvantage.
(5) "Bona fide political party" means:
(a) ((An organization that has filed a valid certificate of nomination with the secretary of state under chapter 29.24 RCW;
(b))) The governing body of the state organization of a major political party, as defined in RCW 29.01.090, that is the body authorized by the charter or bylaws of the party to exercise authority on behalf of the state party; ((or
(c))) (b) The county central committee or legislative district committee of a major political party. There may be only one legislative district committee for each party in each legislative district; or
(c) The governing body of the state organization of a minor political party, the name of which appears on a candidates's declaration of candidacy filed pursuant to RCW 29.15.010.
(6) "Depository" means a bank designated by a candidate or political committee pursuant to RCW 42.17.050.
(7) "Treasurer" and "deputy treasurer" mean the individuals appointed by a candidate or political committee, pursuant to RCW 42.17.050, to perform the duties specified in that section.
(8) "Candidate" means any individual who seeks ((nomination)) qualification for election or election to public office. An individual seeks ((nomination)) qualification or election when he or she first:
(a) Receives contributions or makes expenditures or reserves space or facilities with intent to promote his or her candidacy for office;
(b) Announces publicly or files for office;
(c) Purchases commercial advertising space or broadcast time to promote his or her candidacy; or
(d) Gives his or her consent to another person to take on behalf of the individual any of the actions in (a) or (c) of this subsection.
(9) "Caucus political committee" means a political committee organized and maintained by the members of a major political party in the state senate or state house of representatives.
(10) "Commercial advertiser" means any person who sells the service of communicating messages or producing printed material for broadcast or distribution to the general public or segments of the general public whether through the use of newspapers, magazines, television and radio stations, billboard companies, direct mail advertising companies, printing companies, or otherwise.
(11) "Commission" means the agency established under RCW 42.17.350.
(12) "Compensation" unless the context requires a narrower meaning, includes payment in any form for real or personal property or services of any kind: PROVIDED, That for the purpose of compliance with RCW 42.17.241, the term "compensation" shall not include per diem allowances or other payments made by a governmental entity to reimburse a public official for expenses incurred while the official is engaged in the official business of the governmental entity.
(13) "Continuing political committee" means a political committee that is an organization of continuing existence not established in anticipation of any particular election campaign.
(14)(a) "Contribution" includes:
(i) A loan, gift, deposit, subscription, forgiveness of indebtedness, donation, advance, pledge, payment, transfer of funds between political committees, or anything of value, including personal and professional services for less than full consideration;
(ii) An expenditure made by a person in cooperation, consultation, or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate, a political committee, or their agents;
(iii) The financing by a person of the dissemination, distribution, or republication, in whole or in part, of broadcast, written, graphic, or other form of political advertising prepared by a candidate, a political committee, or its authorized agent;
(iv) Sums paid for tickets to fund-raising events such as dinners and parties, except for the actual cost of the consumables furnished at the event.
(b) "Contribution" does not include:
(i) Standard interest on money deposited in a political committee's account;
(ii) Ordinary home hospitality;
(iii) A contribution received by a candidate or political committee that is returned to the contributor within five business days of the date on which it is received by the candidate or political committee;
(iv) A news item, feature, commentary, or editorial in a regularly scheduled news medium that is of primary interest to the general public, that is in a news medium controlled by a person whose business is that news medium, and that is not controlled by a candidate or a political committee;
(v) An internal political communication primarily limited to the members of or contributors to a political party organization or political committee, or to the officers, management staff, or stockholders of a corporation or similar enterprise, or to the members of a labor organization or other membership organization;
(vi) The rendering of personal services of the sort commonly performed by volunteer campaign workers, or incidental expenses personally incurred by volunteer campaign workers not in excess of fifty dollars personally paid for by the worker. "Volunteer services," for the purposes of this section, means services or labor for which the individual is not compensated by any person;
(vii) Messages in the form of reader boards, banners, or yard or window signs displayed on a person's own property or property occupied by a person. However, a facility used for such political advertising for which a rental charge is normally made must be reported as an in-kind contribution and counts towards any applicable contribution limit of the person providing the facility;
(viii) Legal or accounting services rendered to or on behalf of:
(A) A political party or caucus political committee if the person paying for the services is the regular employer of the person rendering such services; or
(B) A candidate or an authorized committee if the person paying for the services is the regular employer of the individual rendering the services and if the services are solely for the purpose of ensuring compliance with state election or public disclosure laws.
(c) Contributions other than money or its equivalent are deemed to have a monetary value equivalent to the fair market value of the contribution. Services or property or rights furnished at less than their fair market value for the purpose of assisting any candidate or political committee are deemed a contribution. Such a contribution must be reported as an in-kind contribution at its fair market value and counts towards any applicable contribution limit of the provider.
(15) "Elected official" means any person elected at a general or special election to any public office, and any person appointed to fill a vacancy in any such office.
(16) "Election" includes any primary, general, or special election for public office and any election in which a ballot proposition is submitted to the voters: PROVIDED, That an election in which the qualifications for voting include other than those requirements set forth in Article VI, section 1 (Amendment 63) of the Constitution of the state of Washington shall not be considered an election for purposes of this chapter.
(17) "Election campaign" means any campaign in support of or in opposition to a candidate for election to public office and any campaign in support of, or in opposition to, a ballot proposition.
(18) "Election cycle" means the period beginning on the first day of December after the date of the last previous general election for the office that the candidate seeks and ending on November 30th after the next election for the office. In the case of a special election to fill a vacancy in an office, "election cycle" means the period beginning on the day the vacancy occurs and ending on November 30th after the special election.
(19) "Expenditure" includes a payment, contribution, subscription, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value, and includes a contract, promise, or agreement, whether or not legally enforceable, to make an expenditure. The term "expenditure" also includes a promise to pay, a payment, or a transfer of anything of value in exchange for goods, services, property, facilities, or anything of value for the purpose of assisting, benefiting, or honoring any public official or candidate, or assisting in furthering or opposing any election campaign. For the purposes of this chapter, agreements to make expenditures, contracts, and promises to pay may be reported as estimated obligations until actual payment is made. The term "expenditure" shall not include the partial or complete repayment by a candidate or political committee of the principal of a loan, the receipt of which loan has been properly reported.
(20) "Final report" means the report described as a final report in RCW 42.17.080(2).
(21) "General election" for purposes of the limitation under RCW 42.17.640 means the election that results in the election of a person to a state office. It does not include a primary.
(22) "Gift," is as defined in RCW 42.52.010.
(23) "Immediate family" includes the spouse, dependent children, and other dependent relatives, if living in the household. For the purposes of RCW 42.17.640 through 42.17.790, "immediate family" means an individual's spouse, and child, stepchild, grandchild, parent, stepparent, grandparent, brother, half brother, sister, or half sister of the individual and the spouse of any such person and a child, stepchild, grandchild, parent, stepparent, grandparent, brother, half brother, sister, or half sister of the individual's spouse and the spouse of any such person.
(24) "Independent expenditure" means an expenditure that has each of the following elements:
(a) It is made in support of or in opposition to a candidate for office by a person who is not (i) a candidate for that office, (ii) an authorized committee of that candidate for that office, (iii) a person who has received the candidate's encouragement or approval to make the expenditure, if the expenditure pays in whole or in part for political advertising supporting that candidate or promoting the defeat of any other candidate or candidates for that office, or (iv) a person with whom the candidate has collaborated for the purpose of making the expenditure, if the expenditure pays in whole or in part for political advertising supporting that candidate or promoting the defeat of any other candidate or candidates for that office;
(b) The expenditure pays in whole or in part for political advertising that either specifically names the candidate supported or opposed, or clearly and beyond any doubt identifies the candidate without using the candidate's name; and
(c) The expenditure, alone or in conjunction with another expenditure or other expenditures of the same person in support of or opposition to that candidate, has a value of five hundred dollars or more. A series of expenditures, each of which is under five hundred dollars, constitutes one independent expenditure if their cumulative value is five hundred dollars or more.
(25)(a) "Intermediary" means an individual who transmits a contribution to a candidate or committee from another person unless the contribution is from the individual's employer, immediate family as defined for purposes of RCW 42.17.640 through 42.17.790, or an association to which the individual belongs.
(b) A treasurer or a candidate is not an intermediary for purposes of the committee that the treasurer or candidate serves.
(c) A professional fund-raiser is not an intermediary if the fund-raiser is compensated for fund-raising services at the usual and customary rate.
(d) A volunteer hosting a fund-raising event at the individual's home is not an intermediary for purposes of that event.
(26) "Legislation" means bills, resolutions, motions, amendments, nominations, and other matters pending or proposed in either house of the state legislature, and includes any other matter that may be the subject of action by either house or any committee of the legislature and all bills and resolutions that, having passed both houses, are pending approval by the governor.
(27) "Lobby" and "lobbying" each mean attempting to influence the passage or defeat of any legislation by the legislature of the state of Washington, or the adoption or rejection of any rule, standard, rate, or other legislative enactment of any state agency under the state Administrative Procedure Act, chapter 34.05 RCW. Neither "lobby" nor "lobbying" includes an association's or other organization's act of communicating with the members of that association or organization.
(28) "Lobbyist" includes any person who lobbies either in his or her own or another's behalf.
(29) "Lobbyist's employer" means the person or persons by whom a lobbyist is employed and all persons by whom he or she is compensated for acting as a lobbyist.
(30) "Person" includes an individual, partnership, joint venture, public or private corporation, association, federal, state, or local governmental entity or agency however constituted, candidate, committee, political committee, political party, executive committee thereof, or any other organization or group of persons, however organized.
(31) "Person in interest" means the person who is the subject of a record or any representative designated by that person, except that if that person is under a legal disability, the term "person in interest" means and includes the parent or duly appointed legal representative.
(32) "Political advertising" includes any advertising displays, newspaper ads, billboards, signs, brochures, articles, tabloids, flyers, letters, radio or television presentations, or other means of mass communication, used for the purpose of appealing, directly or indirectly, for votes or for financial or other support in any election campaign.
(33) "Political committee" means any person (except a candidate or an individual dealing with his or her own funds or property) having the expectation of receiving contributions or making expenditures in support of, or opposition to, any candidate or any ballot proposition.
(34) "Primary" for purposes of the limitation under RCW 42.17.640 means the procedure for ((nominating a candidate to state office under chapter 29.18 or 29.21 RCW or any other primary for an election that uses, in large measure, the procedures established in chapter 29.18 or 29.21)) qualifying candidates to the general election ballot under Title 29 RCW.
(35) "Public office" means any federal, state, county, city, town, school district, port district, special district, or other state political subdivision elective office.
(36) "Public record" includes any writing containing information relating to the conduct of government or the performance of any governmental or proprietary function prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics. For the office of the secretary of the senate and the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives, public records means legislative records as defined in RCW 40.14.100 and also means the following: All budget and financial records; personnel leave, travel, and payroll records; records of legislative sessions; reports submitted to the legislature; and any other record designated a public record by any official action of the senate or the house of representatives.
(37) "Recall campaign" means the period of time beginning on the date of the filing of recall charges under RCW 29.82.015 and ending thirty days after the recall election.
(38) "State legislative office" means the office of a member of the state house of representatives or the office of a member of the state senate.
(39) "State office" means state legislative office or the office of governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, attorney general, commissioner of public lands, insurance commissioner, superintendent of public instruction, state auditor, or state treasurer.
(40) "State official" means a person who holds a state office.
(41) "Surplus funds" mean, in the case of a political committee or candidate, the balance of contributions that remain in the possession or control of that committee or candidate subsequent to the election for which the contributions were received, and that are in excess of the amount necessary to pay remaining debts incurred by the committee or candidate prior to that election. In the case of a continuing political committee, "surplus funds" mean those contributions remaining in the possession or control of the committee that are in excess of the amount necessary to pay all remaining debts when it makes its final report under RCW 42.17.065.
(42) "Writing" means handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, and every other means of recording any form of communication or representation, including, but not limited to, letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combination thereof, and all papers, maps, magnetic or paper tapes, photographic films and prints, motion picture, film and video recordings, magnetic or punched cards, discs, drums, diskettes, sound recordings, and other documents including existing data compilations from which information may be obtained or translated.
As used in this chapter, the singular ((shall)) takes the plural and any gender, the other, as the context requires.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 50. The following acts or parts of acts are each repealed:
(1) RCW 29.01.160 (September primary) and 1965 c 9 s 29.01.160;
(2) RCW 29.15.200 (Lapse of election when no filing for single positions--Effect) and 1994 c 223 s 8 & 1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 120 s 13;
(3) RCW 29.18.150 (Vacancies on major party ticket caused by no filing--How filled) and 1990 c 59 s 102, 1977 ex.s. c 329 s 12, & 1965 c 9 s 29.18.150; and
(4) RCW 29.30.095 (Partisan candidates qualified for general election) and 1990 c 59 s 96.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 51. The following acts or parts of acts are each repealed:
(1) RCW 29.24.010 (Definitions--"Convention" and "election jurisdiction") and 1977 ex.s. c 329 s 1 & 1965 c 9 s 29.24.010;
(2) RCW 29.24.020 (Nomination by convention or write-in--Date for convention--Multiple conventions by single party) and 2001 c 30 s 2, 1989 c 215 s 2, 1977 ex.s. c 329 s 2, & 1965 c 9 s 29.24.020;
(3) RCW 29.24.025 (Notice of convention) and 1989 c 215 s 1;
(4) RCW 29.24.030 (Requirements for validity of convention) and 1989 c 215 s 3, 1977 ex.s. c 329 s 3, & 1965 c 9 s 29.24.030;
(5) RCW 29.24.035 (Nominating petition--Name--Registered voters) and 2001 c 64 s 1, 2001 c 30 s 3, & 1989 c 215 s 5;
(6) RCW 29.24.040 (Certificate of nomination--Requisites) and 1989 c 215 s 4, 1977 ex.s. c 329 s 4, & 1965 c 9 s 29.24.040;
(7) RCW 29.24.060 (Certificate of nomination--Checking signatures--Appeal of determination) and 1989 c 215 s 7, 1977 ex.s. c 329 s 6, & 1965 c 9 s 29.24.060;
(8) RCW 29.24.070 (Declarations of candidacy required, exceptions--Payment of fees) and 1990 c 59 s 103, 1989 c 215 s 8, 1977 ex.s. c 329 s 7, & 1965 c 9 s 29.24.070; and
(9) RCW 29.24.--- and 2001 c 30 s 4.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 52. RCW 29.24.055 is recodified as a section in chapter 29.19 RCW.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 53. (1) The code reviser shall recaption chapter 29.18 RCW as "Primaries and elections for partisan offices."
(2) The code reviser shall recaption RCW 29.30.085 as "Candidates qualified for general election."
(3) The code reviser shall recaption RCW 29.18.200 as "Rights of voters in primary elections."
NEW SECTION. Sec. 54. This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect June 1, 2001.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 55. If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected."
REMARKS BY SENATOR HARGROVE
Senator Hargrove: “Thank you, Mr. President. This is a striking amendment and this is basically the alternative to the underlying bill that has been presented by Senators Snyder and Swecker. We would like to call it the People’s Choice alternative. Some people have called it two forward, others have called it the Louisiana or Cajun. However, it is not exactly like the Louisiana. It is kind of a hybrid. What it would do would be, it would leave our filing process in this state exactly the same as it is now. In other words, you vou can walk in and pay your fee and file and you get on the primary ballot. What it would say would be that the top two vote getters in any primary election would go on to the general election. In rare cases, that could be two Democrats or two Republicans. I think in most cases, it would be a Democrat and a Republican.
“I guess what I should speak about a little bit is how we got here and what the alternative is. How we got here is that we have had a blanket primary in this state since, I think, 1935. It was passed by an Initiative by the People and I think that the vast majority of our citizens of our state, as I spoke around the building here, the vast majority of our legislators would just as soon leave it the way it is. In fact, we had a number of polls taken that suggest that our citizenry is still in that position. Well, California made that change. California is obviously the eight hundred pound gorilla. The parties went to court and sued and the U.S. Supreme Court overturned our blanket primary. The state of Washington--the Republican and the Democrat parties--still had the opportunity to leave our exiting blanket primary stand. They did not have to strike it down, because it was only overturned in California.
“In fact, you may remember many of the discussions last summer when I think virtually every elected official, Democrat and Republican went in and said, ‘Please don’t change our blanket primary system--don’t do anything--let it stay as it is--everything will work just fine.’ Well, the parties sued anyway and our primary system is in jeopardy for the same reason that the California primary system is. So, that brings us to the point where we can come up with an alternative. The alternative, in the underlying bill, the Snyder/Swecker bill, would be to put three boxes at the top of the ballot. There is one that says that you check it if you want the Democrats, one if you unaffiliated and one if you are Republican. In our presidential primary, where we have essentially the same choices, over eighty percent of our citizenry checked ‘unaffiliated.’ The parties have already said they were not going to count the unaffiliated votes in these primary elections. They didn’t count them in the presidential primary--two presidential primaries that we had. To their credit, they have not tried to trick us, they have been very clear and they don’t intend on counting them in the future. Now, that doesn’t mean that can’t change. I mean it can change, of course it can change. Of course, there could be a move, there could be full pressure brought on the party to count the unaffiliated voters in the primary. I think that having the presidential primary twice and not counted, having every elected official ask the party, ‘Please do not overturn our blanket primary system,’ and they did anyway. Having them say, every time I have heard them talk about it, that they do not intend on counting those ballots now, is a pretty good track record that it is not likely that those unaffiliated ballots will be counted.
“Certainly, if that measure passes, we are in a situation where it is totally up to the parties as to whether or not, they will count anybody that checks ‘unaffiliated.’ ‘Unaffiliated, ’ remember, was a an eighty percent check of the citizens of our state. We have a very independent state. In fact, I can’t even remember talking to somebody that hasn’t said, ‘You know I vote for the person, not for the party.’ You know, I think that is a universal thought in our state is that we have very few straight party line voters. So, what we would be doing in making the change in the underlying bill instead of the striking amendment, would be to give the party the opportunity not to count those unaffiliated voters, which I believe they won’t. That is my opinion, but I believe they won’t.
“In the striking amendment, what we have, is the people’s choice--or the two forward. Basically, you file just as you have filed in the past and the top two vote getters move forward. I think if you look at virtually every election in the state, that would technically be Republic and Democrat, with a few exceptions. Even with a few of those exceptions, I think if you look at it and found it was a contested primary election on one side and maybe the other party was not running very hard in the primary and if they knew they had to get up to the top two, that might change some of those races, also.
“Really, that is not the issue from my perspective, it is how each of us would turn out in all of this. There is certainly no way to predict at the polls how that is going to happen in any one of these races--who we are going to get as an opponent or how many are going to file and what is going to happen. I think the underlying issue for me to support this amendment is that everybody’s vote will count and certainly after this last fall and the presidential election where despite the outcome of what you thought of the outcome, the controversy over what votes will count and not count has certainly left an indelible imprint on the minds of the people in this nation and other states.
“I cannot imagine, myself, voting for a bill that would allow votes to not be counted. That is the issue for me--that if we talk to people and read in the press, it seems like partisanship and politics are the dirty words--and bipartisanship and nonpartisanship and working together is what everybody is striving for in this country. If we go to a system where the party can exclude votes in the primary, then we are going to be setting up a situation which is more partisan, is more political, and I believe less likely to solve problems in the long run.
“One last thing I would like to say in favor of the two-forward or the people’s choice--the striking amendment--which I have sponsored here is that it will not cost us any extra money. It is so similar to the system that we have that the county auditors have said they could do that with what they have. The underlying bill--the Snyder/Swecker bill--the fiscal note is fourteen point three million dollars. That is pretty expensive in order to come up with a system to not count votes. I would suggest that we all vote for the striking amendment and we allow the citizens votes of this state--this very populated, very independent state to continue to count in the primary, so the candidates can come forward that appeal to the great majority of the center, if you will, instead of some very extreme party people that would end up making our system mor political and more partisan and certainly, in my opinion, go to frustrate the will of the people in the election process. I urge your support for the striking amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR KOHL-WELLES
Senator Kohl-Welles: “Thank you, Mr. President. I rise in opposition to the striking amendment. And I have to agree with Senator Hargrove that the people, as well as we legislators, would likely prefer to keep our primary system as it is, but we can’t do that. If we do not pass legislation that the Governor would sign, then it will be up to a federal court judge and there’s a very strong likelihood that the parties would prevail and that we would end up with registration by party, closed primary ballots and I don’t believe that that is what most of us would like.
“Senator Hargrove said that he is in favor of everybody’s vote counting. But who is everybody? In the history of our state, primary elections have a much lower turnout that do elections in the general election in November. In fact, over the past decade or so, the average for primary election turnout is forty percent. For the general election, it is seventy-one percent. So who is everybody? If we have the primary election voters make the determination that two people, two candidates, advance and if they are of the same party, then what are our constituents going to feel when they go to vote in the general election and there are two Republicans only? Or there are two Democrats only? And that there will not be any minor party candidates on the general election ballot unless a minority party candidate is one of only two candidates on the primary election ballot. Minor party candidates can serve a purpose. They contribute to the debate. They contribute to a fuller discussion and deliberation of the issues. Now, when in history have we had two parties, excuse me, two candidates of the same party be the ones to advance? We haven’t. But what would happen, has happened in some critical races. In 1980, John Spellman would not have advanced to the general election for Governor. It would have been two Democrats who would have advanced. Yet, Spellman won for Governor.
“I would imagine that there would have been Republicans across the state who would have been very unhappy if they had not had a choice in the general election to vote for a Republican. In 1996, if the top two vote getters had advanced for Governor, then the voters of Washington State would only have been able to select from Gary Locke and from Norm Rice. Again, how many Republicans in this state would have been pleased with their choices? Now, we do know that in Louisiana throughout the nineties, the state ranked at the bottom of voter turnout in most elections. And the thought is because there was so little choice and voters just did not turn out because they weren’t interested in voting as they would have if there had been a competitive race.
“The Elway Poll conducted in March of this year asks a lot of questions. One question posed was would you favor a system in which the two top vote getters would advance even if they were of the same party? Fifty-seven percent indicated they would not favor that. I believe that we need to turn down this striking amendment. We need to give voters choice, but the general election is where that is most critical. The parties have indicated that they would indeed consider counting the unaffiliated voter’s ballots. If they were not to and that is known on the voter pamphlet; it’s known on the parties’ web site; it’s stated at the top of the ballot; and it’s in the campaign; then they would have to pay the price for that. I believe that system would change indeed. I urge you to defeat the striking amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR SWECKER
“Senator Swecker: “Thank you, Mr. President. I rise to speak reluctantly in opposition to this measure. In a perfect world, I’d like to stay with the blanket primary that we currently have and in the near perfect world, I’d probably would be voting for this amendment as it’s stated. The one outcome that I dread most should this amendment be adopted is that the parties have already indicated that they would be forced to go to a convention system to select their nominees. In a convention system, you simply have a small handful of delegates who determine who the parties’ nominees would be. So, the logic that every vote would count, I think, is a misnomer. In fact, even fewer votes would count than the underlying bill. It’s unfortunate that our blanket primary system wasn’t deemed to be constitutional.
“You know, I’ve decided I can’t pick and choose what parts of the Constitution I want to support and what parts I don’t want to support. I can’t say that I like the second amendment, but I don’t like the first amendment. So, what I think we need to do is come up with a system that observes the constitutional rights of the parties--the people in the parties to affiliate--and to put forward their candidate. The parties really have asked for all kinds of things in their suit before the court, but really this bill only gives them one of the four things that they asked for. But, one thing it gives them is some very limited amount of control over who gets to vote for their candidates. People can still register as Republicans or Democrats or Independents or anybody else. Everybody can get on the ballot. You can choose whether you want to vote for Republicans or Democrats, you don’t have to register. There’s no list published. It’s really a very small, minimal fix to the system that we have today.
“I have a big concern that if we pass this amendment and then pass the bill, we’re just going to end up going back to court. We have three parties who’ve already said they are going to sue if this bill passes. They’re going to go right to court and try to control who actually gets on the ballot with their party name affiliated, and I’ve heard very good arguments that they will be successful in that. In fact, the Attorney General said that we have one of two things, but we can’t have both. The parties either have to be able to choose who gets on the ballot or they have to be able to choose who votes for them. Now, under this system, they aren’t controlling who gets on--who votes for them--so they definitely will have the chance to control who gets on it. Let’s stay out of court. Let’s vote ‘no’ on this amendment and pass the underlying bill and go home. Thank you.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR GARDNER
Senator Gardner: “Thank you, Mr. President. We actually have two election systems in the state of Washington. We have the even numbered year system and we have the odd numbered year system and it’s only the oddnumbered year system that has been judged unconstitutional and about which we debate today. The even-numbered system is exactly what the striker is all about. In municipal local elections which occur this year, all the candidates’ names will be on the ballot. Anybody who wants to file to run can run. They can say that they’re a Republican; they can say they’re a Democrat; they can say they’re a Libertarian; they can say anything they want to say. The primary election is held and the top two advance to the general election ballot. That is exactly what this striking amendment proposes. This isn’t a Louisiana primary. It isn’t a Cajun primary. This is a Washington State primary. All we’re saying is, we’re going to run our primary elections the same in both years.
“Now, I understand that there are some questions about whether or not this is constitutional. The Attorney General, when she talked to me and it was in a large group, so I assume others heard it as well as I did, but it’s my understanding that she said she could defend it in court--that she felt that it was legal. So, I’m not concerned about that. It certainly would appear to be legal since we’ve had this kind of primary election for many years now for the locally elected officials, and no one has challenged it. I’m sorry that we have to rely on newspaper reports and polls and the way we judge our own e-mails and hotline calls and letters and people we talk to. I’m sorry we didn’t have the ability to have a public hearing on this issue.
“Though we’re all trying to make up our minds about what the public wants and how the public feels or what the public supports, but I think that labeling it with another state’s name is a misleading title and we really just need to look at what we’ve been doing in the state of Washington every other year forever. That is that anybody who wants to run for election signs up to run. We have a primary election on which all names appear on the ballot. Anybody can vote for anybody. All the votes are counted and the top two voters--voter getters--move on to the general election. We haven’t been horrified by that process to date. It’s worked. It’s accepted and all we’re saying is that we’re going to extend it to every year.
“Now, I understand. I understand as a legislator that this may not be popular with my party. I understand that they might even be concerned about my remarks. I understand it’s going to be more difficult for us to do fund raising. I understand it’s going to be more difficult for people who are used to not having a general election. But the focus is not on those of us who run. The focus is on the voters. Iit’s hard for me to stand up and do something that is going to anger some of my colleagues and certainly the people that I’ve worked with over the years, but I have no choice. I have no choice. What the people are saying to me, and I can only judge what the people say to me, is that they want two things. They want to vote for whomever they choose and they want their vote to count. Bottom line. That’s it. This isn’t a Cajun primary. This isn’t a Louisiana primary. This is a Washington primary and all we’re saying is give the people the right to do what they already do every other year--that they can vote for anyone that they choose and that their vote will count. Guaranteed that their vote will count. Not if somebody decides if their vote will count, but guaranteed that their vote will count. I have no choice but to support this striking amendment because this is the only method that delivers. Make our primaries every year the same. It’s worked for us for many, many years and it will work for us in the future. So, I do ask for your support for this striking amendment. Thank you.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR CARLSON
Senator Carlson: “Thank you, Mr. President and ladies and gentlemen of the Senate. Speaking in support of the striking amendment before us, I am going to refer to this as the Washington voter preference primary and I hope the press will pay attention to the language of this term. Please do not refer to it--to what it is not. It is not Louisiana. It is not Cajun. It is not some system that’s often identified as some corrupt form that possibly may be in some other state. It is the Washington voter preference primary, which is associated with what the citizens have chosen to have for the last sixty years with a great distinction and pride.
“I’ve had the pleasure of teaching U.S. history and civics in government in this state in the high school for thirty years. As we discussed and talked for thirty years about the blanket primary and how we got the blanket primary and the fact that the citizens of this state could choose whomever they wanted to vote for on the ballot time and again, the huge, large percentage of students said, ‘Why wouldn’t you want to do this?’ This is what freedom is all about. This is what republican form of government gives us a choice to have and that’s what this striker proposes--to allow citizens their choice in making the opportunity of a primary election that will continue to be significant and important and trying to encourage people to vote for their choice.
“Now, I recognize that indeed the integrity of the system is part of the issues that are being discussed when the auditors recommend the choice on the part of the citizens. Our auditors are proud to have a voting system in this state where the citizens know that there is a responsible choice and option clearly identified and easily identified and we have not had problems that existed in some other states. The selection of the striking amendment provides a continuation of that system. In addition, I’d like to suggest to you that there is an answer to the dilemma of what folks crossing over the vote to vote for Spellman or vote for Locke in past history. Part of the reason they did that is because that they thought that they could vote for a weaker candidate, but the striking amendment we have before us suggests that you better not do that, because you’d better vote for the one that you care most about because your candidate may not get elected if you don’t. “That’s the weakness of the blanket primary--that those folks who play political games could think that they could vote for the weaker candidate on the other side. The striking amendment says that won’t work anymore cause if you do that, you’re liable to have two from the same party. So therefore, keep your vote on the side that’s going to count and what is going to be very significant in your particular voting election. It is true that you might have folks in a convention system be selected as a party preference, but that does not prevent citizens from registering as a Republican, as a Democrat, as a Libertarian, whatever you like. You have the right to put your name with your party behind that on the ballot and you can vote as you choose, but if we don’t vote for a system that only allows one side, we have taken choice away from the citizens. One of the things that I’m proud about in this state is that we’ve encouraged choice. We’ve encouraged people to make that vote count and be significant for them.
“The Governor, in an interview, that took place last week indicated that although he had some preferences, he would sign whatever of these two bills the Legislature chose to recommend. So, the fact that whether we choose the primary bill that’s before us or the striking amendment, the Governor has already indicated that he would vote for whatever was put before him.
“As I’ve read the Elway polls, I see seventy-two to eighty percent of the citizens of this state indicating that they would like to be able to choose for themselves the candidate that they believe in. Sure there may be a preference to one party or the other, but the fact is that many times, because of friends that they’ve talked to, because of individuals that are important to them, they have decided that there is a candidate or a couple of candidates on the other side of their ballot that they think are the best candidates. Are we going to say to our citizens that they cannot vote for what they think is the best? I think we want to encourage the best people to represent us from the primary, as well as in the general election, and I urge your support for the passage of the striking amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR FINKBEINER
“Senator Finkbeiner: “Thank you, Mr. President and members of the Senate. I think we’re really faced here with a very stark and clear choice between two options. I think to some extent folks have touched on that, but I think to really understand and to really make a decision about which of these two options we wish to go for, we have to stop thinking about ourselves and stop thinking about the one hundred and fifty people here that are elected and start thinking about the six million people in Washington State and start thinking about the people that have the right to vote in a system of government like ours. The most sacred right is the right to vote. There’s an old saying that in a democracy is not the voting that matters, it’s the counting. It is especially applicative here. If we’re going to ask the citizens for the other side of that voting contrast which is do we want to right to take your money? We want to have the right to regulate your business, to regulate the property that you own. Even in the cases of the most heinous crimes, to have the right to decide here in the chamber whether or not we choose people to have people put to death for certain crimes. If we’re going to have that responsibility given to us by the people, I think we have to turn around and look at the rights that those people have--to vote and to have their vote counted.
“Now, some people might say, ‘Well, you’re getting this confused with a nomination and election. You know, well, this really isn’t the election, really the general election is where it happens.’ You know, I really don’t think that’s the case. Number one, I think--let’s look at what we all call this. We call it the primary election. Have you ever heard anybody refer to it as the primary nominating system? I think not. Number two, I’d say this is the only way that you get to the general. If you control the primary, you control the general, because you don’t get to the general election ballot through any other route except through the primary election, and if we give up the right of some people to have their vote counted in that primary, we’re really giving up their right to select the person they wish to have representing them in that election.
“Finally, you know, we can all talk about polls and we can all read polls and we can all read different things in the polls, but I think what the people have clearly said, and I think we all understand it, is we want what we’ve got. Okay. The parties took us to court. They don’t want what we’ve got. They want us to give them a bunch of power, but let’s look at between the two of these systems that we have before us today and which one more closely aligns itself with our current primary system. We passed out here for all of you to see a proposal for a sample ballot that you’d get under this underlying bill. You can read through here and unlike our current system, it’s got fine print all over the place. It says, ‘If you selected unaffiliated, then all votes will be tabulated.’ and I can’t even read this--the print’s so small--‘Because neither the Democratic party or Republican party has agreed to allow any affiliated voters to participate in the representative nomination process, votes cast for candidates of those parties will not help nominate the candidates for the general election. Votes cast for minor political parties--independent political candidates, as well as candidates for nonpartisan office and ballot measures aren’t affected by your party affiliation.’ That sounds like warranty language that you get when you go buy something at Sears. You know. That does not sound like clear information that lets you vote and lets you select the person who you want to represent you in that election.
“Now, contrast that to the system that would be set up with the striker that we are proposing here. You would go into vote; your ballot would look exactly the same; you’d vote exactly the same. Everything would be the same as it has been for sixty-five years. You wouldn’t be confused by the fine print. You wouldn’t have to figure out what the heck was going on--when does my vote count--is it going to count if I vote for a minor party--does it count if I vote for a Democrat or a Republican--all this stuff. We clearly follow what the people have asked for, which is clarity and closest to our voting system. Really, at the end of this, I think we have to choose, who are we representing here? Are we representing the parties’ ability to choose who is going to represent the system--the people of this state? They can still nominate; they can do that now. They can hold conventions; they can do that now. They’ll probably do it no matter what we do, but the question is are we going to give them more control over our elections, or are we going to leave that control to the people? I think this is a great debate for the Senate to have and when it comes down to what we’re going to do, what the people--not the forty-nine of us in this chamber--but what the other six million people of this state would like us to do and I urge your support of this striker.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR CONSTANTINE
“Senator Constantine: “Thank you, Mr. President. Well, of all the days I’ve spent in the Legislature so far, this one is, in many ways, the most refreshing. This is what I thought being in the Legislature would be like when I was in my eleventh grade social studies class. Here we are. We’re really discussing civics finally. I appreciate all the speeches on both sides. I think they’ve been very clear, very forthright and I think all in the best interests of the people. We all liked the primary election. It was good. It was fair and it got every person in this chamber elected to office and it’s unconstitutional and so we are faced with a pretty clear choice between two computing systems to replace it.
“It’s stated that the Louisiana system preserves, as much as possible, the blanket primary that we are losing. I would suggest to you that while it may resemble it more in form, it departs in substance a great deal from our current primary system. It departs in substance because it is a fact that there will be few, if any, situations where a minor party candidate appears on the general election ballot. It departs in substance because there will be many districts where in the general election you have your choice between two Republicans or two Democrats. In fact, the first time I ran for the House of Representatives, Mr. President, the forty percent of the voters or thirty-five percent of the voters in my district who generally vote Republican would have been faced with a choice between two Democrats and they would have had to guess which one was the more Republican Democrat. That is not a fair situation for them and the same is true in a Republican-leaning district. It is not fair for my democratic friends in some of your districts to have to choose between two Republicans and guess which one is the more democratic.
“Elections, Mr. President, should be about ideas. This system with two people moving forward based on their popularity in a primary election forces the candidates to avoid controversial stands and move as quickly towards the center and away from debate as possible. This is why people criticize our electoral system already. They say that we’re devoid of substance--that it’s all glossy brochures and image. This exacerbates that problem. What we want is for people to stand up and say what they believe in and draw a contrast so that at the general election the voters can go in and say, ‘You know, I’m against abortion and I’m in favor of more defense spending and whatever other labels you want to put on it, and I believe that this party represents those values even though I don’t know much about this person.’ Don’t be fooled, nobody in your district knows much about you unless you’ve been around for fifty years. This party represents the things I believe in more and therefore, I’m going to rely on that party label as being able to choose someone who agrees with my beliefs.’ The system represented by the amendment drags us away from that kind of choice. Lincoln once said, ‘For every problem, there’s a solution that is neat and simple and wrong.’ I believe the striking amendment represents just such a solution. I urge you to defeat it.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR SHIN
“Senator Shin: “Thank you very much, Mr. President and members of the Senate. David Hume Spencer said, ‘When I say democracy is good that means I like democracy.’ I for one--I believe and I like American democracy which I stand for. In the last week and a half, I talked to many of you who came to talk to me about the concern about this legislation. Most of that discussion has been academic, personal conviction and emotional. Therefore, I decided to go to the best primary source. I read in U.S. Constitution from the beginning to the end and also the State Constitution and the amendments. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say anything about one party or one individual shall control the election. It says, ‘In the government of a democracy the power derives from the consent of the people.’ To me that’s the key of the issue--how the power concerns the people. I looked at the two options. One is our primaries. First of all, we try to protect. Let- let me preface my remarks. I like the two-party system because we bring a balance. Balance and checking is what we need in democracy. I like the two-party system because it provides us two philosophical concepts in interpretation and gives us a decision to make and I like that.
“To review what I like, democracy and the two-party system. In the Cajun primary system which we like to call people’s democracy, you could choose whomever you please. It’s a people’s choice, but at the end--final product--you may end up with two candidates from the same party. I prefer not to do that.
“I think there’s a very shortcoming there. At the same time, I look at Senate Bill 6183, which says that the party chooses and nominates the candidates. The question is the party people. I’m proud to be what I am and I’m proud of the party members, but at the same time, when you talk about consent of the governed, it has to come from the people. Many of you do not believe in polls and I believe that the polls are oftentimes manufactured results and it depends on what you like and what you vote for. I represent my district. My people, when they have called me, many say that we vote for the people we like. They send me here. I’m here to do my job. What my people say in my district means a lot to me, because I’m here to represent them. Therefore, I’d like to have you support this striking amendment. Thank you.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR ROACH
Senator Roach: “Members of the Senate. First of all, I just wanted to mention something. The underlying bill, Senate Bill 6183, does have something that I like and that has to do with getting rid of the punch card voting. It was brought up earlier in our debate that it would be fourteen million dollars more for the implementation of the underlying bill. The auditors met this morning and reviewed material that was worked out last Friday night and I do not think that fiscal note would be the same after some of the changes that have been made. It’s also true that the amendment that was adopted earlier would require counties to leave the punch card voting aside, which is, if you remember when we came into this legislative session, something that was very important to us all after what happened in the state of Florida. So, I think that would be a good thing. I think the voters of this state would agree that we want to move away from punch card voting.
“This has been one of the most invigorating, interesting and important issues that the state of Washington has faced this year and in decades, quite frankly. It is extremely important. For the members of the public that might be listening to this debate, truly out of the forty-nine people on this floor today, only about four wanted something other than our current blanket primary. For the last several months, we have been working very hard, first of all, to try to keep what we have; then realizing of course, we can’t. The reason we can’t is not because our current blanket primary system is unconstitutional. It has been misstated even on this floor today. It is not unconstitutional. What the U.S. Supreme Court said was the parties had the right to freely associate. If the parties do not go to court and demand that right, then we can still have a blanket primary. The fact is that they want the right for something that is not unconstitutional--will not be a part of our voting in the future. As we realize that, we move to find something that will satisfy what the U. S. Supreme Court says.
“I took both of the current measures before us, the striking amendment which is a Washington primary system and the underlying bill, 6183, and put them side by side on a little grid, exactly what we have in front of us. After we worked on these bills for all this time, we found out that both of these bills only require one ballot, that was not the case last week. So we can’t say, ‘Well, one’s more expensive, one’s more complicated,’ because now both of them require just one ballot when a person goes into the polls, they ask for one ballot and they don’t have to declare in either case who it is or what party they’re going to be voting for. Secondly, both of these methods allow for privacy, which was a very important thing for the people. They don’t want parties or anyone knowing how they voted. If, in fact, we adopt either one, we would have privacy, because no list will be kept. Parties won’t have the list. They won’t be given out by auditors and it’s just a good thing that the people have privacy. Parties wouldn’t agree, they would like the names obviously.
“Both of these particular methods will require or will result in having conventions and that nominees come out of conventions. That is political reality. Once you ring the bell, you can’t unring it. You know, the cat’s out of the bag, doggone it, you’re not going to catch this one. In the Washington primary system that we have now before us as a striking amendment, it will virtually require that the parties have a convention because it is there that there will be a nominating process, it’ll be an election when you go to the ballot. So you will have to have one. Now, while I believe that you will, as a matter of political fact, have one if the underlying bill, 6183, is adopted. You don’t have to have one. The parties can, if they want to, and I would think in smaller counties, particularly, maybe they would want to go ahead and include the public the way we have done in the past where we don’t have to get our nominees out of a convention.
“But, as practical politics here, each one of us has run races, gone to conventions, been precinct committee officers, all we’ve done, the bottom line here, what we’re arguing about, we can talk about privacy. We can talk about the people having the ability to vote and everything else. The real issue here is power. The parties want power and the only place you can take that power is from the people. We stood together, virtually together, to keep a blanket primary which gave the people that power which was granted to them themselves as they went out and got it with an initiative seventy-five years ago. What we had in California was a situation of strong parties where they would walk the wing, party hats walking the wing saying--’You, Senator, vote yes. You, Senator, you vote no. Because if you don’t do what we say, you’re not going to get our endorsement in the next election.’ You think you want to run for Congress, Senator? Better be watching what the parties are doing in the wings. The people so disliked that, that they looked around the nation and found what we were doing here in Washington State. Washington State has not had that happen. Each one of us know that we stand and vote the conscience of our elected position based on what the people have sent us here to do. California’s system gets challenged and now we are on the verge of having the problems that California tried to escape. This is really, really a crossroads for us in Washington State. In 1992, when we passed Initiative 134, which was a campaign finance reform bill, remember we gave the parties specific abilities to bring in much more money than any other entity--and then turn around and give to candidates. So, two things, the ability to raise and give a lot of money and the ability to define candidates in conventions, give almost total power, not to the people, but to the party. That’s why they’re exerting their constitutional right to have free association. That’s why they decided not to allow the constitutional process of having a blanket primary.
“But in my grid that I wrote out, I had to also consider political reality, because I think we all know when that little necessity comes around. We have a court that is waiting to make a decision and we’re not the only players in this. We have another House and we have a Governor and we have been, unfortunately, delayed in this process month after month, and hopefully, we can still get something done in time. We have got to send something to the other body that they will in turn send to the Governor, hopefully unamended. If we don’t do that, then the courts will decide and the people in the wings walking with their thumbs going up and down will be delighted. When I put it out on the grid, it was a tough decision because in many ways I could go with both--same outcome in a lot of these things. I will say to you that we must move forward. I do not think the other body will pass the striking amendment before us, so reluctantly, because I don’t have any real
complaints against either, but I believe we need to go with what’s going to pass or find ourselves collectively in a real mess. So, I would urge you to defeat the amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR KLINE
“Senator Kline: “Thank you, Mr. President and members. Mr. President, I hope we’re prepared to pay more than lip service to the notion that the major function of an election is not simply to allocate power, but to bring people to the polls, to activate the public intelligence, to have a controversy and have a way ultimately in November of resolving that controversy, that raises the level of public discourse and makes people proud to be Americans and Washingtonians. If we’re prepared to simply to pay more than lip service to that, I think we need to reject the striking amendment. Minor parties are an integral part of that greater higher level of public discourse than we are.
“Between the two of us, Republicans and Democrats, we can sometimes be Tweedledum and Tweedledee. It’s not just people at the political fringes to whom that appears to be true. Quite a few people--responsible members of our communities--who consider themselves Libertarians, perhaps in your district, Greens in mine, who feel that we Democrats and Republicans are somehow so intertwined and so interdependent, we’ve become indistinguishable from one another. Those small parties lose out in this Louisiana-style primary. Neither of the Greens nor the Libertarians are ever going to find themselves in a general election in November in this state under the system set out in the striking amendment. It’s less likely than I would prefer to be true even under the underlying bill. I’m not going to tell you that the underlying bill increases that, but it certainly does not freeze out our friends from the left and right the way the striking amendment does. I urge you reject this. Let’s raise the level of discourse. Let’s prevent ourselves from becoming even more Tweedledum and Tweedledee. Let’s vote no. Thank you.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR HALE
“Senator Hale: “Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen. You know we’ve had a very healthy debate here today and there are a lot of elements and a lot of complexities to this issue, but the bottom line is very simple. The bottom line is what the people are talking to us about and it is the freedom to vote for whomever we choose. I strongly support the striking amendment, because the underlying bill does not do it. It does not allow you to vote. Oh, you can vote for whomever you choose, but you know your vote won’t count if you vote for someone other than the stated party.
“You know, this is the time when politicians are not held in very high regard. We’re seen as pursuing our own ends, our own self interest and making ourselves look good rather than looking out for the people. I can think of no greater way to raise public outrage than to have over half of the electorate pass the vote for an individual candidate fully knowing, or maybe not realizing, that their vote simply won’t count. The parties have been very clear about their intention to disregard votes cast for people other than their own party. It’s very basic. The decision is very simple. It’s the right to vote for whomever you choose. I urge your support for the striking amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR HORN
Senator Horn: “Thank you very much, Mr. President and ladies and gentlemen of the Senate. The people who are supporting the striking amendment would have you believe that we should vote for to maintain our choices to keep the system most like what we have today, the blanket primary, which many people want to do. Do not be mislead, because that system that would give you choices in the primary would be at what price? It would rob you of your choices in the general. And which is the election that really counts? The primary election or the general election that elects you to the office. How many districts would you have where you would have two Republicans or two Democrats running for the office? So, as people would have you believe that preserving the choices is the primary, is the key thing, is it worth the price of robbing you of your choices in the general.
“If you look at the course of action that would follow through, as you would have two people--two Republicans running in the general or two Democrats--it would lead to confusion of the people and lead to the position with the real Republican or the real Democrat please stand up. That, in turn, would lead the parties from taking a position and say, ‘We must elect our delegate in a caucus situation so we can identify which is the real Republican or which is the real Democrat.’ Once that happens, you now have not only lost your choices in the general, but you have also lost your choices in the primary. So, this ideal that you vote for the striking amendment, because it preserves your choices is bringing you down a path that robs you of that very thing.
“Now, the underlying bill which is 6183 is a bill that gives you the choices. You can go to the polls, vote as a Republican, vote as a Democrat or vote as a non-identified individual. It still gives the choices of people to register for the party as much as they do today and it ensures that the greatest number of people, not a caucus, would be selecting the candidate that advances to the general. Then it ensures that when you go to that general, that you would have those choices of voting for a Republican or a Democrat. I believe in the two-party system, because I think that’s what has made America great. It means that it’s okay to talk about the opposing viewpoint. It’s okay to be the loyal minority, so the people can hear the argument for and a credible argument against. I think that’s a very important thing that has made America great and made our state of Washington great.
“So, I think that, true, it’s very, very concerning to have a system that allows the parties to get so strong that they dictate who votes for what. It’s also very concerning about having a situation that have parties so weak that they are nonfunctional. I think the underlying bill, 6183, brings that balance to that situation. I think the striking amendment is far from keeping your choices, robs you of your choices and as the Elway poll showed, that when they look at it, fifty-seven percent of the people opposed a situation that would have you voting for two Democrats or two Republicans in the general election. Why do we want to pattern a system after the Louisiana primary? Is that the great system that has a great turnout--that great system that gave us David Duke running as a Republican? No, I don’t think that’s a system that we want to pattern our great state of Washington after. I would recommend that you vote against the striking amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR JACOBSEN
Senator Jacobsen: “Thank you, Mr. President. I’m going to ask you to vote down the amendment and first, of course, I can say because of constitutional reasons. Everybody has the right of freedom of association and I think to show the irony of the situation and the frustrations of a party--the Libertarian Party--they want to elect a candidate that shares their philosophy and espouses at the polls. On that system, they might not be on the polls, they might not make it past. But two, and more importantly, after we get done picking, they might not have a true Libertarian, but somebody that reflects the views of the Democrats or the Republicans.
“The only other thing I want to relate to you, and I like to read history, and I have a handout on your desk here. It’s from Battle Cry of Freedom. It’s by James M. McPherson. I read this many, many years ago, but I set this book aside and this chapter because I have never looked at it this way before. It’s roughly one chapter looking at the elections in the middle of the Civil War and both the North and the South had to go to elections. McPherson observes here that the South prided themselves on the fact that they didn’t have parties--didn’t have parties. He wrote, ‘Now, looking back with hindsight, most historians now recognize the absence of party was actually a source of weakness. In the North, the two-party system disciplined and channeled political activities. The Republican party became the means for mobilizing war resources, raising taxes, creating a new financial system, initiating emancipation and enacting conscription. Democrats opposed most of these measures, the existence of this well defined opposition caused the Republicans to close ranks when the chips were down. Because measures were supported or opposed by parties, voters could identify those responsible for them and register their approval or disapproval at the polls by voting the party ticket. Both parties, of course, used their well-oiled machinery to rally voters to their side. In the Confederacy by contrast, the Davis administration had no such means to mobilize support. No parties meant no institutional discipline over Congress and their governors. Opposition to the Davis administration, became personal or factional and therefore difficult to deal with.’ Then he closes with one last point here. I’m not going to read the rest of it, but in the South, opposition candidates ran on individual rather than a party basis, and the government could not muster political artillery to shoot at all these scattered targets.
“I think here a lot of times our voters experience this frustration over and over again. I’ve had people comment to me all the time. Your party sure does pick bad candidates and I have to point out to them that we didn’t pick our candidates. The voters picked the candidates and sometimes I agree with the gentlemen from Mercer Island, we need a clear choice. There’s a majority and a minority role in this thing and we should be proud of the role we play in either position. This is going to give our voters a chance in the general election to pick the direction they want to go and I urge everybody to reject this amendment and vote for the underlying bill. Thank you.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR PRENTICE
Senator Prentice: “Thank you, Mr. President. As one of the people whose name was on the lawsuit, I feel an obligation simply to explain for a moment why we chose to do what we did and I think I also need to ask, as we are referring to the parties, I think we need to ask ourselves who are we talking about? The parties are just made up of people who have chosen to be active on behalf of a political party. It has never been our option simply to get the party leaders to change their minds. I can tell you that was not possible. What we were reacting to was the very clear seven to two decision of the United States Supreme Court, and they simply said the parties have the right to decide who runs as their candidate.
“Some of the arguments that were made and as we’re hearing that that did not apply to the state of Washington, our Secretary of State at that time filed an amicus brief and someone was sent from this state, Gary McIntosh, who made the argument that the current system results in our having more centrist candidates. ‘Well it’s pretty clear,’ the Supreme Court said, ‘ It’s not the business of the government to decide which philosophies are going to be represented.’ We keep hearing that this is an unpopular move. Well, I guess if I were to base it on that, I remember in the sixties, when the United States Supreme Court struck down segregation laws. If you’d had polls, if you’d had elections, the result would have been the people didn’t want to change. Many of us who were adults at that time remember that it was a very difficult change, but a change nevertheless.
“I’m wondering is it really so that having this current system puts us in a better position to solve problems than another that’s been proposed. I guess I’d have to ask today as we’re in special session, ‘Are we really doing so well in solving those problems?’ Change might aggravate you. Everyone of us--there isn’t a single one of us sitting here who didn’t immediately think what it will mean in my race? We all thought that. I also remember in my last election and the election before that in ‘96, there was a Democrat in the primary who was recruited by some local Republicans, not our friends here, who sent out a mailing calling himself a Reagan Democrat, sending it out to Republicans. Now, I’ve maintained that that’s a dishonest system that we’ve had, but people tell me, ‘Oh well, it didn’t hurt you.’ That isn’t really the point. The point is that it was a dishonest move for someone to pretend he was a Democrat when he really wasn’t. Luckily, for me, maybe not for you, but people rejected that by a seven to two decision. It wasn’t even close. The Supreme Court came down on the side that the parties have the right to decide who runs as their candidate. I would say, ‘Okay, the jig is up.’ It’s time to make the decisions. Please reject the amendment.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR HOCHSTATTER
Senator Hochstatter: “Thank you, Mr. President. I feel like the woman who was taking a medication that only had side effects. This is perfect legislation because nobody’s going to get what they want. I support this particular piece of legislation. If we deny or if it turns out that there are two people of the same party on the ballot, that is not a mess of our making, is it? The voters did that. Yeah, we give them the opportunity to do that. But they did it, but we didn’t cause it. I would like--I don’t see why we have to break this in the first place. I’d like to see the courts break it. We mentioned about constitutionality. I don’t think the courts ever observed constitutionality. How can a judge come in here and change our law? The threat is, ‘Well, if you don’t do something, the federal judge will come in here and give you a system that you don’t want.’
“The Constitution--our State Constitution says there will be no law except that it is a bill. Is a judge going to run against Senator Kline and Senator Sheahan and then come down here and do our job? Boy, that really gets under my hide. I think that if the court and the parties would appear on the ballot, they’d both lose. Four good reasons to support this and then I’m done. First of all, privacy of the ballots. Secondly, the broadest, broadest possible choice. Thirdly, no votes thrown out and fourthly, $14 million is going to have to be wrung out of the hide of the counties. Don’t do that. This amendment, if you support this amendment, that will not happen. Lastly, and I’m pained to say it, tinkering with the system will not keep us free. The people don’t really care if they don’t turn out. If they don’t care about the direction of their country, it’s over anyway. Thank you for listening to me.”
REMARKS BY SENATOR HARGROVE
Senator Hargrove: “Thank you, Mr. President. Hopefully to close now. This has been a great debate and frankly, I think it’s been very civil on all sides. I wanted to just clear up a couple of things that I’ve heard. There was some mention made about if you want to stay out of court, you know, vote for the underlying bill. We’re already in court, so there’s no staying out of court. The AG has given me a memo here saying that this striking amendment, in their opinion, would be constitutional, so that should take care of that.
“The other thing that I’d like to say is the Governor, in a press conference, said he would sign whatever got to his desk. So, it’s not like the Governor’s holding a veto pen over the striking amendment. Our Secretary of State and many of our auditors support the striking amendment because of its clarity and because of the simplicity and because of the lack of cost--fourteen million dollars--to try to change our system over. I don’t think we can predict what the House is going to do. In my private conversations with some of the powers to be over there, they have said, ‘Send us the bill and we’ll work on it. It’s not dead on arrival in any form. It’s not alive in any form,’ so I don’t think we can base our votes on that.
“I guess the bottom line here, again, is do you want people’s votes to count or do you want to have a ballot out there where somebody can check an unaffiliated box and their votes all count? They will be counted, but they won’t count. That’s the bottom line for me. Certainly, rural Democrats and urban Democrats and rural Republicans and urban Republicans--I mean--we all fit under those tents somehow and yet we’re quite different, you know. Some of my closest friends over here on this side are some of the most liberal--I’m looking at Senator Fairley--and some of the most conservative on this side, you know, like Senator Hochstatter and Stevens. I think we have a fine mix and fine debate and fine controversy and fine-- not all getting upset at each other as it is. I think that the striking amendment will preserve that and I would urge your support.”
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the roll call on the adoption of the striking amendment by Senators Hargrove and Finkbeiner to Senate Bill No. 6183.
Senator Hargrove demanded a roll call and the demand was sustained.
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the roll call on the adoption of the striking amendment by Senators Hargrove and Finkbeiner to Senate Bill No. 6183.
The Secretary called the roll and the striking amendment was adopted by the following vote: Yeas, 27; Nays, 22; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.
Voting yea: Senators Benton, Carlson, Costa, Deccio, Fairley, Finkbeiner, Gardner, Hale, Hargrove, Haugen, Hewitt, Hochstatter, Long, McAuliffe, McCaslin, Morton, Oke, Parlette, Patterson, Rasmussen, Sheahan, Sheldon, T., Shin, Stevens, West, Winsley and Zarelli - 27.
Voting nay: Senators Brown, Constantine, Eide, Franklin, Fraser, Honeyford, Horn, Jacobsen, Johnson, Kastama, Kline, Kohl-Welles, McDonald, Prentice, Regala, Roach, Rossi, Sheldon, B., Snyder, Spanel, Swecker and Thibaudeau - 22.
On motion of Senator Hargrove, the following title amendment was adopted:
On line 1 of the title, after "primaries;" strike the remainder of the title and insert "amending RCW 29.30.085, 29.01.090, 29.01.130, 29.04.180, 29.04.190, 29.13.070, 29.15.010, 29.15.025, 29.15.040, 29.15.050, 29.15.060, 29.15.070, 29.15.080, 29.15.150, 29.15.160, 29.15.170, 29.15.190, 29.15.210, 29.15.220, 29.18.010, 29.18.160, 29.27.020, 29.27.050, 29.27.080, 29.27.090, 29.30.005, 29.30.020, 29.30.101, 29.42.010, 29.42.020, 29.42.050, 29.62.010, 29.62.180, 29.64.010, 29.64.015, 29.64.030, 29.64.040, 29.64.060, 29.68.080, 29.68.130, 29.71.020, 29.81.220, 29.85.100, and 42.17.020; amending 2001 c ... (SB 5275) s 17; adding a new section to chapter 29.07 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 29.18 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 29.01 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 29.15 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 29.19 RCW; recodifying RCW 29.24.055; repealing RCW 29.01.160, 29.15.200, 29.18.150, 29.30.095, 29.24.010, 29.24.020, 29.24.025, 29.24.030, 29.24.035, 29.24.040, 29.24.060, 29.24.070, and 29.24.---; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency."
On motion of Senator Hargrove, the rules were suspended, Engrossed Senate Bill No. 6183 was advanced to third reading, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
The President declared the question before the Senate to be the roll call on the final passage of Engrossed Senate Bill No. 6183.
The Secretary called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Senate Bill No. 6183 and the bill passed the Senate by the following vote: Yeas, 30; Nays, 19; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.
Voting yea: Senators Benton, Carlson, Costa, Deccio, Fairley, Finkbeiner, Gardner, Hale, Hargrove, Haugen, Hewitt, Hochstatter, Johnson, Kastama, Long, McAuliffe, McCaslin, Morton, Oke, Parlette, Patterson, Rasmussen, Roach, Sheahan, Sheldon, T., Shin, Stevens, West, Winsley and Zarelli - 30.
Voting nay: Senators Brown, Constantine, Eide, Franklin, Fraser, Honeyford, Horn, Jacobsen, Kline, Kohl-Welles, McDonald, Prentice, Regala, Rossi, Sheldon, B., Snyder, Spanel, Swecker and Thibaudeau - 19.
ENGROSSED SENATE BILL NO. 6183, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed. There being no objection, the title of the bill will stand as the title of the act.
At 3:02 p.m., on motion of Senator Betti Sheldon, the Senate adjourned until 12:00 noon, Tuesday, May 15, 2001.
BRAD OWEN, President of the Senate
TONY M. COOK, Secretary of the Senate