I’ve been soul searching for weeks following one of the most challenging sessions in memory. My cathartic need is to share with you the back story leading up to the 2013 session, a summary of what took place and some observations I gleaned along the way.
I know we live in a Facebook/Twitter 140-character world, but once in a while some depth is needed, so I do hope you will read this and share it with those close to you. The story is a history lesson we should not soon forget.
The final pieces of this e-memo list some major policy bills I worked on, operating budget improvements, a huge capital budget list that was secured for the 22nd District and a hint at what is possible for the district if we can pass a transportation improvement package in the coming years.
Oh, and I created a Top 10 list of things we learned from this session – some funny, all of them truthful (well, at least from my perspective).
In humble service to the greatest district in the State of Washington: The Mighty 22nd, where we eat, sleep, and breathe public service.
— Chris
“Heroes know that things must happen when it is time for them to happen. A quest may not simply be abandoned . . . a happy ending cannot come in the middle of the story.” — Peter S. Beagle (author)
I sought this quote as I contemplated the 2013 Legislative sessions. I assure you the reference to heroes is not to us as legislative members but rather to the advocates who put tireless hours into their work — and through our votes, those advocates attempt to create a better world.
Beagle writes, “…a happy ending cannot come in the middle of the story.” Sadly, the regular 105-day session really was the middle of the story, at least from a leverage standpoint. Both sides believed the other would blink first in a conflict of values that we have not seen so clearly defined in years.
I know you have read many articles, blog posts and tweets about the end of the legislative story, but I would ask that you stick with me to learn about the beginning of the story. I would like to answer a few critical questions: What were the seeds of such contention? How did this great battle form? What were some of the stories behind the stories? And, why the heck did it take so long to get an operating and capital budget?
The seeds of contention
Our story begins with the unhappy middle. A handful of Democratic Senators who felt increasingly marginalized through the years began to grumble that the liberals of the Puget Sound region (and downtown Spokane) were not sensitive enough to the needs of rural (and sometimes suburban) Washington.
By 2010, these senators had formed the “roadkill” caucus to make clear that they were not left or right of center, but stuck in the middle of the political road (they even formed a fundraising arm). By the 2011 session, they were flexing muscle in the Democratic-majority Senate and joining the Republicans to push through issues that a disciplined Democratic caucus would never allow.
By the time of the November election of 2012, the battle lines were drawn. The outgoing Senate included 27 Democrats and 22 Republicans. If just one seat flipped from Democratic to Republican in the election, the margin would shrink to 26-23 — and Democratic Sens. Rodney Tom and Tim Sheldon were prepared to join the Republicans to form a 25-24 philosophical majority in the 49-seat Senate.
Democratic Sen. Jim Kastama was leaving the Senate in the 25th District and Republican Rep. Bruce Dammeier easily won that open seat, which would give the Republicans the numbers they needed. Democrat Mark Mullet did take away a formerly Republican seat in the 5th District, but Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen lost her Democratic seat in the 10th District, and that neutralized the Mullet win.
But Democrat Rep. Tim Probst mounted a strong challenge to incumbent Republican Sen. Don Benton in the 17th District east of Vancouver — and a Probst victory would keep the Senate under the control of the organized Democratic Caucus. The election went to a recount, and Benton, with his larger-than- life personality, held off Probst by 78 votes (out of nearly 55,000 total votes cast). This 0.142% difference would set off a chain reaction that nearly shut down state government eight months later.
The Great Battle Begins
By December 2012, the newly formed Majority Coalition Caucus in the Senate was rewriting committee assignments for members, committee names and how many people would serve on each committee. On the low-intensity committees, coalition leaders created a narrow margin for their members or even a perfectly balanced split with the minority Democrats. On the critical policy and fiscal committees, they established clear majorities for themselves — claiming relative balance according to nominal party labels, but clearly dominating the vote counts as Sheldon and Tom were Democrats in name but MCC members by ideology.
The MCC even offered committee chairs to two old roadkill friends, Democratic Sens. Hobbs and Hatfield. This would be the first in a long list of so-called bipartisan moves that would mask the true nature of the conservative ideology that would eventually be revealed by the MCC. This was not empowerment for the political center; this was right-wing politics that even the old roadkill members would fail to embrace.
Tom was named Senate majority leader and Sheldon was named president pro tempore of the Senate. With a 25-24 majority, the coalition was united to ensure total control of key Senate committees, procedures and final votes. All they needed to move forward was an agenda, which they codified in the form of governing principles that all 25 members signed as their pledge to each other for the now infamous 2013 Legislative Session.
The Stories behind the Stories
As the session got under way, the daily calendars were filled with MCC bills that were designed to advance the coalition’s conservative “reform” agenda: lowering the minimum wage; making further cuts to injured worker benefits; flunking 3rd-graders; assigning letter grades to schools; suppressing the bargaining rights of public employees; diluting pension benefits; massively expanding payday lending practices, and much more.
With every bill, the tensions were rising. A trade-off with the House, which was firmly in Democratic hands, appeared to be taking form: The House’s tax-reform ambitions in direct exchange for MCC “reform” policies.
Still being new to the minority role, Senate Democrats did everything they could to honor the words of bipartisanship espoused by the new MCC. Seven of them even voted for a tax-reduction budget on April 5 that was full of glaring gimmicks and cuts in areas important to traditionally Democratic stakeholder groups. The seven Democrats claimed they did it in a spirit of bipartisanship to keep the process moving, and they insisted that their support for a final deal with the House would require approval of new revenue measures.
In one of the sadder moments of the session, it became apparent that Republican Sen. Mike Carrell from the 28th District (Lakewood) would not be able to continue taking his seat on the floor to cast votes, as he was undergoing extensive medical treatment for a terminal illness. This painful human reality began a series of inquiries about the role of the lieutenant governor — Democrat Brad Owen — in breaking a 24-24 tie vote in the Senate.
That intrigue — and a possible return to Democratic power — was snuffed out immediately and continuously by Democratic Sen. Jim Hargrove, who pledged to honor Senate tradition and offer the majority coalition the vote they needed to prevail in the absence of Sen. Carrell. Sen. Hargrove’s integrity and his respect for Sen. Carrell would end any prospect for Democratic mischief to regain control of the chamber. The Pierce County Council would eventually appoint Republican Rep. Steve O’Ban to fill Sen. Carrell’s seat and the solid 25-24 majority would be in place for the session’s final weeks.
As the session moved past the critical floor cutoff – the deadline for House-originated bills to be passed to the Senate and for Senate-originated bills to be passed to the House — it was clear that both sides had lobbed many of their core values at each other. The MCC sent to the House the before-mentioned “reform” agenda and the House sent to the Senate a reproductive parity bill, the DREAM Act and dozens of other bills aimed mostly at protecting or strengthening citizens’ rights and in some cases access to services.
By the second major procedural cutoff, it was clear that neither side would pass each other’s priority bills and the notion of trading policy for policy was gone. Thus was set the stage for the final showdown.
By this time, both sides had introduced operating-budget proposals and the values differences were very clear. Both were strong on basic education, but in the approach to human services, early childhood education and a host of other areas, the contrast was stark.
More importantly, there were massive differences in how to pay for the respective operating budgets. The House sought to extend existing taxes and close some tax preferences to fund its priorities, while the Senate counted on additional budget cuts, some mythical future budget savings and large transfers of funds from other priorities – namely the capital budget.
The regular session ended with no resolution to the budget impasse, and the Legislature re-convened for a 30-day, overtime, special session.Through the entire first special session, there were loud cries from all across the state for both sides to set aside the policy ambitions and just focus on the budget. The MCC, though, exercised real power: It had a chamber under its control and it enforced tremendous discipline. It was clear its members were willing to take government to the brink of a shutdown to get approval for some of their policy proposals and a few solid wins on their budget priorities.
By mid-June, it was well known that the upcoming official state revenue forecast could provide the “go home” plan. A favorable forecast would generate “new” revenue and the MCC could spend up to the House level on many priorities without having to agree to the House’s position on closing tax preferences. And so it seemed: Between higher forecast revenues and lower forecast spending (due to declining numbers of recipients of services), the budget picture improved by $300 million.
An operating budget one day before a government shutdown
It was widely believed that the revenue forecast would bring both sides together and lead to a final deal. But alas, the goal posts kept moving — and, still without a deal, the Legislature re-convened in a second special session.
For most of the sessions, both sides knew they would have to approve a modification of the state’s telecommunications tax code. The “telecom fix” was years in the making, and Democrats, Republicans and industry leaders all supported the reform effort. But the MCC decided at the 11th hour to posture a negative stance on the telecom fix in order to get leverage for some of their priorities. Without the telecom fix, the state budget would be out of balance once again and more cutting would be needed.
In the final weeks of sessions, it seemed a new trade-off was rumored each day. First it was telecom for workers compensation reforms, then telecom for more tax breaks, then telecom for payday lending, and on and on and on.
In the end, the faux outrage expressed by the MCC at fixing the telecommunications tax code would win them more than a dozen new or extended tax preferences. Some of these were well vetted during the regular session and had merit, while others were gratuitous pork to satisfy an MCC member or a key MCC industry ally. To the House’s credit, the trade-off was more than $85 million in new telecom revenue for approximately $16 million in tax giveaways (again, some of these had broad support).
With the final trade agreed to and just hours to spare before the June 30 end of the two-year state budget cycle, both sides passed the operating budge (and eventually a capital budget) with overwhelming votes and a government shutdown was avoided.
Post Script: The untold story; the power of the two-thirds tax lawsuit and how it shaped this session
I believe the untold story of this session was the enormous success of the two-thirds tax lawsuit that was decided by the state Supreme Court in February. As a named plaintiff in the case, I was one of a dozen or so House members who made it our mission to get this case before the high court.
Imposed by a Tim Eyman ballot initiative, the requirement for a two-thirds vote in each House to raise taxes (and close tax preferences/loopholes) was absolutely in violation of the state constitution and we were determined to get this resolved once and for all.
We won the case on a 6-3 decision and as I have stated previously, its impact was not that we would raise taxes; its impact was that it exposed the real values of the House and Senate majorities.
Had we been under the two-thirds rule, the House simply could not have passed tax reform bills over to the Senate.
The Grover Norquist no-tax-pledge signers in our House would have threatened their leadership team (just as their congressional counterparts have threatened U.S. House Speaker John Boehner) if they had even considered a tax increase or a tax loophole closure.
So with simple majority once again the law of the land, the Democratic House was able to advance its values and challenge the MCC in the Senate. The MCC wasn’t able to hide behind the two-thirds initiative any longer. It had the power to close tax preferences and fix flaws in the tax code with a simple majority vote. Its failure to do so exposed the real conservatism (and not the touted bi-partisanship) of the MCC.
The MCC budget proposals, policies and votes were finally out in the open, and Washington voters got to see both the House and Senate majorities for who they really are. The MCC members had to defend their ideology on its merits.
In this respect, voters were the big winners of the session. Legislators had to face each other in meaningful tradeoffs without the artificial two-thirds threshold, and most importantly, come November 2014, there will be clear evidence of who supported tax reform, who supported raising taxes and who supported more tax loopholes.
When citizen legislators have to do their jobs, it reveals their values, and the voters are then empowered to evaluate those votes and cast judgment upon those legislators – to return them to Olympia or not.
In short, the republic worked. Elected officials chose their side, exposed their interests and then had to cast the tough votes. Some taxes were extended and fixed, others were cut or reduced. The success of the two-thirds lawsuit has already brought forth a more meaningful dialogue in the Legislature and a clearer understanding for voters of the values held by each caucus and each legislator.
Here are a few bills worth highlighting with unique impact to the 22nd District, or with value statewide (including in the 22nd district), that I had a role in drafting, amending or building coalitions for to get them over a major hurdle or two.
The GRuB bill – House Bill 1276 — would have created additional pilot programs to emulate the highly successful GRuB program here in Olympia. The bill did not make it, but we were able to secure $200,000 in the budget to achieve the major objectives of the bill. Propelling at-risk students to academic achievement by working on a non-profit farm is effective!
HB 1683 – Ensured that many of our private two-year colleges would continue to retain financial-aid benefits for their students.
HB 1394 – Gives the Employment Security Department flexibility in dealing with businesses who owe back taxes, penalties or fees. This bill will help small businesses in particular to stay afloat as the economic recovery inches forward.
HB 1437 – This bill would have created a pilot program in Thurston County to create fairer property tax treatment for small farmers vis-à-vis larger corporate farms in other parts of the state. The bill did not make it this year, but a tremendous alliance has been created to improve the tax status of small farmers in the coming years.
HB 1958 – I prime-sponsored the “paymaster” bill because it was an essential piece of legislation to save many of Washington’s businesses millions of dollars in restructuring costs following a Department of Revenue decision to collect business and occupation taxes (a second time) from businesses that use a central payroll service for multiple companies under one corporate umbrella. Following the DOR ruling, Washington would have been the only state in the nation to double-charge these taxes. The bill was incorporated in its entirety in Senate Bill 5882 and passed late in session as part of a larger tax compromise.
SB 5211 – This is the “Facebook” bill. It prohibits employers and prospective employers from arbitrarily demanding passwords to social networks from their employees. Public domain remains visible, but demanding a password and thus access to private conversations has been a giant overstep by many employers. This bill protects privacy. It was facing some trouble in the House so I helped pull together business representatives and the ACLU for a compromise.
SB 5367 – Establishes the legislative intent to substantially protect and enhance the Yakima River watershed. The bill was also in trouble in the House as it lacked taxpayer protections and a rational approach to funding major river basin projects. I had the honor of helping to pull together the advocates and they agreed to include cost modeling requirements, cost-benefit obligation sand explicit language that ensures the Legislature won’t make multibillion-dollar promises on the front-end of the project; federal and local matching requirements are now a part of the bill. This bill set up the largest conservation purchase in the state’s history – 50,000 acres of private forest in the Teanaway River basin north of Cle Elum. This is one of our state’s most pristine areas and it will forever be protected from development following this bill and the subsequent capital budget appropriation we just voted on.
Operating Budget
The final operating budget, though an eternity in process, yielded very good results. Here are some of the major elements:
- Adds $1 billion for K-12 education funding
- Fully funds state-employee contracts and restores the temporary pay cuts
- Fully funds the long-term-care worker wage increase
- Extends health care coverage to 300,000 more people in the state
- Holds higher education tuition steady for the next academic year (and provides state investment in the institutions to make up for no tuition revenue increases in their budgets)
- Maintains/begins to restore vital social services for children, families, seniors and those with disabilities
- Includes the telecom fix that removes the threat of a $1+ billion liability
- Fixes our state’s estate tax to ensure those funds flow to schools while making the estate tax a bit fairer for small family owned businesses.
The Capital Budget
The capital budget was simply stellar for the 22nd District. Most of these projects had broad-based community groups advocating for their inclusion in the final capital budget. These are major wins for treasured organizations in our community.
- Washington Center for the Performing Arts building restoration – $816,000
- SafePlace Community Service Center – $241,000
- Behavioral Health Resources campus expansion renovation – $1 million
- Thurston County Food Bank distribution center acquisition and facility retrofit – $1 million
- The Evergreen State College facilities preservation and science lab renovation – $4.7 million.
- SPSCC renovation of their new Lacey campus – $5 million
- Capitol Olympic Vista Park property development – $168,000
- Military readiness center to replace current armory – $ 2.8 million
- Woodard Bay Recreation Area improvements – $1.9 million
- South Puget Sound Community College renovations – $1.5 million
- Housing for people with developmental disabilities – $2.2 million
- Housing for homeless veterans – $500,000
- Deschutes Hatchery – $7.3 million
- 1063 Block Replacement (old hands-on Children’s Museum block) — $82 million. This will be a one-of-a-kind energy efficient development as a replacement to the old state General Administration building. It will come with ground-floor retail and office space above. This is an enormous opportunity to improve the capitol campus, achieve operating efficiencies and allow for community input on how we want the building to be designed, configured, built and occupied.
- Millions of additional dollars for maintenance, repairs, and upgrades to capital campus facilities, TESC, SPSCC and other state assets in our community.
To see the full list of the capital budget click here.
Transportation (which didn’t get lift off)
While the transportation investment package was ultimately blocked by the MCC in the Senate, the 22nd District has much at stake if we can proceed next year or in 2015. The package would have included:
- A massive interchange improvement at Marvin Way and I-5;
- An interchange analysis in West Olympia for a possible new interchange off Highway 101;
- Express transit enhancement between Olympia/Lacey and Pierce County stops;
- Bike lane improvements;
- Some pedestrian enhancement; more revenue for our three cities (Olympia, Lacey, Tumwater) and Thurston County for local transportation infrastructure improvements.
If you have read to the end you deserve a prize for being so civic minded and engaged.
Thank you once again for the incredible opportunity to serve this community. As always, please contact me if you have questions, ideas or thoughts on the way forward.