106 Newhouse Building ● P.O. Box 40404 ● Olympia WA 98504-0404

Report from Olympia |  August 26, 2015

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

The word “showdown” conjures up images of the Old West, when one person would challenge another person to step out into the street to settle a disagreement. Recently the state Supreme Court set the stage for a constitutional showdown by doing something we’ve never seen: imposing a $100,000-per-day fine on the Legislature. Keep reading for details and the initial response by members of our Senate majority.

The interim between legislative sessions is a time for lawmakers to collect information that may shape future legislation. An example of that comes from the state Traffic Safety Commission and its findings about drivers who are impaired not by a familiar adversary, alcohol, but a threat some of us have seen coming: marijuana. There’s more on that below as well.

If there is anything I can do for you, or if you have questions about anything in this e-newsletter, please give me a call, send me an e-mail or come and meet with me. My 4th Legislative District office is in Suite 305 at 11707 East Sprague Avenue, in the Spokane Valley City Hall building. The phone number is 921-2460.

It’s my privilege to serve you in our state Senate.

Best Regards,

Senator Mike Padden

Supreme Court threatens Legislature’s ability to serve citizens

Like the United States Constitution, our state constitution clearly separates the three branches of government. The governor’s powers, as head of the executive branch, include the ability to veto legislation adopted by the Legislature; the powers belonging to the state Supreme Court, as head of the judicial branch, include upholding or striking down laws approved by legislators. Those are examples of the “checks and balances” that are fundamental to our governing system, to keep power from becoming concentrated. The lawmaking power assigned to the Senate and the House of Representatives, as the legislative branch of government, includes the power of the purse. Authority for taxes and spending clearly belongs to the 147 citizen lawmakers chosen by their neighbors and friends – and yet the state Supreme Court seems to think otherwise. In the landmark 2012 case known as McCleary v. Washington, the justices ruled that state government, meaning the Legislature, was not providing enough financial support to our K-12 school system. Lawmakers were given until the 2017-18 school year to bring school funding into line with state law. Since 2013, when Republicans moved into the Senate majority, we have led the way toward turning budget priorities around so that basic education is once again receiving the largest share of taxpayer support. Despite that, the Supreme Court decided last September to hold the Legislature in contempt, delaying any penalty until after this year’s session. During the collection of legislative sessions that ended July 10, we authorized a record level of funding for education. How did the justices respond? With an unprecedented $100,000-per-day fine, starting Aug. 13. According to the court order, the daily fines are to be placed in a new account to support basic education – but could be undone if the governor calls another special session and the Legislature produces a "plan" for funding education. On the surface this appears to be a disagreement over education funding. It is much more than that. The court’s unprecedented action is threatening the Legislature as an institution and a co-equal branch of state government, which in turn threatens our ability to serve citizens. The justices are attempting to dictate how taxpayer dollars are allocated, and that is not their job. Last week I was among the members of the Senate majority who sent a letter to our colleagues in the Senate and House of Representatives. In it we encourage consideration of “political, legal, and constitutional responses that we have at our disposal.” As I told the Spokane paper this past weekend, I believe the justices have put themselves in a box. This newest state budget puts us on track to be in compliance with the original McCleary ruling by the 2017-18 school year, which is right on schedule. The high court isn't satisfied, however, and, by imposing a fine, has done the equivalent of calling us out into the street. I believe they will find the state constitution is on our side.

After legalization, marijuana becomes growing traffic safety concern

In late 2013, at a Seattle ceremony to receive the “Legislator of the Year” honor from Mothers Against Drunk Driving, I took part in a followup discussion which had a sort of good news-bad news tone. On one hand the Legislature was making strides against drunken driving, but on the other we were concerned about how the legalization of recreational marijuana in our state would begin to show itself on Washington roads. Sure enough, the state Traffic Safety Commission reported this past week how marijuana had increased as a factor in deadly crashes in 2014, after the marijuana-legalization law took full effect. An initial analysis is here; as chair of the Senate Law and Justice Committee, which has led the way toward stronger DUI laws, I will make sure the marijuana-impairment statistics are factored into our panel’s work.

Reminder to abortion providers: state law protects any infant born alive

Undercover videos from the Center for Medical Progress have led to serious allegations against abortion providers in other states – that they are engaged in horrifying practices which are also illegal and unethical, all in an effort to sell fetal body parts to third-party companies which profit from reselling those parts for research.

This year our Senate majority successfully fought back efforts by House Democrats to increase health care-related funding that can find its way to Planned Parenthood; had these videos been released while the Legislature was in session, we surely would have been able to prevail sooner.

The undercover videos are still important, though, because Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers in our state have longstanding arrangements with publicly funded research institutions, including the University of Washington. This week I called their attention to my expectation that their practices and agreements will be in compliance with state law.

In particular, I reminded them how a state law created during my first session in the Legislature protects fetuses that have a heartbeat, are moving, or otherwise are showing signs of life outside the womb. RCW 18.71.240, a portion of the law governing the conduct of physicians, guarantees that infants born alive through an abortion procedure have the same right to medical treatment as an infant of the same gestational age that is born prematurely.

Because this state law has been in place nearly 35 years, it is possible that those performing abortions are either unaware of it or have moved away from compliance because of the profit motive.

Extending life: Earlier this month a 56-year-old man walked into the intensive-care unit at a Federal Way hospital to prove a point about “pulling the plug.” His first visit to the hospital had come on a stretcher a year earlier, after a massive heart attack which stopped his heartbeat for more than 25 minutes. Doctors gave the family a grim prognosis: the man had blockage in all his arteries and would require a six-way bypass, he had a history of congestive heart failure and stroke, he had entered end-stage kidney failure, his lungs were filled with fluid, and he required a feeding tube.

His wife was advised three times to end life support for her husband; she said no, as did their adult son who was taken aside by a doctor in an attempt to influence her. After a renowned surgeon from another hospital took on the case and conducted more tests, he reported that the man’s heart had “re-routed itself.” Open-heart surgery was no longer needed! When the man returned to the hospital a few weeks ago to showcase his recovery, it was with only a cane for assistance.

I believe this story because it came recently from the man’s wife: Esther Ripplinger, who served as my legislative aide during the 2015 session. Stories like hers, about how a person’s life can be extended despite a dire medical outlook, have to be taken into consideration when the Legislature debates measures such as this year’s Senate Bill 5919, which would change our state’s assisted-suicide law.

Record wildfires likely to draw legislators’ attention

With wildfires raging in north central Washington I was asked recently about the wildfire history in our part of the state. I recalled how as a member of the House of Representatives in October 1991, I had joined then-Gov. Booth Gardner for a helicopter flight over an area of Spokane County hit by a firestorm. That blaze would ultimately cost two people their lives and destroy 100-plus homes in eastern Washington and western Idaho, including some 65 homes in Chattaroy and at least a dozen more in the Ponderosa area of the Spokane Valley.

Knowing the damage and disruption that fire caused nearly a quarter-century ago, I cannot imagine what things were like for those affected by last year’s Carlton Complex fire or what are the largest of this year’s wildfires, so far: the Chelan Complex, North Star and record-breaking Okanogan Complex fires. We are all saddened by the loss of three firefighters’ lives this past week and the severe injuries to others, on top of the widespread, demoralizing property damage and economic setbacks.

The Legislature always addresses wildfires through the budget process – for instance, the adjustments we make next year to the new two-year budget will reflect the costs of fighting this year’s wildfires. However, I expect there also will be discussions about forest and water management. The Legislature cannot control the drought or the lightning but we may have some say about the amount of fuel that is available to burn in the forests.

* * *