We have written and published numerous policy highlighters through the
years about the alarming growth in our state's tort liability. While most
states cap damage awards, provide for total and partial immunity, and grant
immunity for parolee conduct, Washington is one of only a few states with
very limited immunity and no limits on potential damages awarded in lawsuits.
As a result, tort payouts by the state have increased more than 400 percent
in the last decade.
As a result of this upward spiral in tort costs, self-insurance premiums
for state agencies are rising dramatically.
Source: OFM memo dated May 29, 2002
Consider what that money could buy instead. The $173 million agencies now
pay each year for self-insurance amounts to $110 per Washington family,
or 17,000 new college enrollment slots, or a 15 percent increase in starting
pay for teachers statewide.
We recommend:
State legislators work to eliminate joint and several liability
(where someone found 5% liable can end up paying 100% of the judgment; this
is the "deep pocket" syndrome that lines the wallets of trial
lawyers).
All judgments over $1 million be subject to legislative appropriation.
Legislators review previous recommendations from the Attorney General's
office.
State employees responsible for negligence or wrongdoing be held
accountable.
State officials evaluate whether or not they should and can effectively
take responsibility for providing certain protective services. Within approved
services, there should be clear guidelines showing the level and limitations
of the state's liability.
Prepared by Bob Williams, President
and Senior Research Analyst (360) 956-3482
At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question:
"Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?"