Sending a Blank Legislative Check to the Floor
March 16th, 2010 by Steven GardnerOur own editorial board took issue with how the Legislature is operating, but a reader called me and directed me to how The Olympian gets serious on title-only bills and leads with one offered by state Sen. Phil Rockefeller, D-Bainbridge Island. From the editorial:
How transparent was it when Sen. Phil Rockefeller, D-Kitsap County, introduced a “title only” Senate bill on Feb. 9 and majority Democrats on the Senate Ways and Means Committee sent it to the Rules Committee to be scheduled for a floor vote?
That’s right, a title only bill has absolutely no details. In this case the title read: “This act shall be known and cited as the legislative review of tax preferences act of 2010.”
That’s it. That’s the sum total of the entire Senate bill, co-sponsored by Sens. Jim Kastama, D-Puyallup; Rodney Tom, D-Medina; Debbie Regala, D-Tacoma; Randy Gordon, D-Bellevue; Kevin Ranker, D-Bellingham; Margarita Prentice, D-Renton; Eric Oemig, D-Kirkland; Karen Keiser, D-Kent; and Adam Kline, D-Seattle.
They were willing to put their name on a title only bill, having no idea what the legislation would eventually say or do.
I’ll post a visual of the bill that made it through to the floor, then was reintroduced in the special session. It looks like it could include anything.
Based on the amendments that were made, then removed, earlier, it appears the bill is designed to be a placeholder for legislation that would establish new review standards for what the state calls “tax preferences,” and what the rest of us call “tax loopholes.” On its own, the bill would probably have loud support and opposition.
The problem here is the legislation does many things that resemble actions, let’s say, “a duck” would do. When legislation is pushed through in this manner, it earns the barbs of the suspicious, little matter how much it might be warranted. Check out the Washington Policy Center’s blog entry listing several editorials critical of the Legislature for operating this way.
I don’t have a solid read on how much precedence there might be for issuing bills like this. When I was covering the speedway question in Olympia it was made clear to me then that a bill is technically never dead until the final gavel. This particular method Rockefeller’s using on this bill was exactly what a supporter said could be done to keep the NASCAR in Washington dream alive. My sense at the time, though, was this kind of maneuver was risky, for exactly the reasons we’re seeing on this one.
Loading ...
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Recent Comments