EFF's Election Report ·
Gonzales Letter ·
Welfare Reform ·
Boeing Contract ·
Budget & Taxes ·
Business Climate ·
K-12 Fact Sheet ·
EFF Health Study ·
Paycheck Protection ·
Transportation ·
Unemployment Ins. ·
Receive Updates ·
Bookmark EFF ·
Contribute ·
EFF in the News ·
How Can I Help? ·
Join EFF ·
Media Center ·
|
PRESS RELEASE March 26, 2004 Judge says state can discriminate against EFF EFF will appeal judge's order to limit access to public information OLYMPIA – Thurston County Superior Court Judge Christine Pomeroy today ruled in favor of a motion by the attorney general, which will limit the Evergreen Freedom Foundation's (EFF) ability to obtain public information related to the Boeing deal, and which denies fees and penalties that had been requested by EFF. The motion establishes a discriminatory policy requiring EFF—and EFF alone—to submit requests for public information regarding the 7E7 project through the attorney general's office for review and approval. "We are outraged that the Court has now established a discriminatory—separate and unequal—procedure for EFF," said Jason Mercier, EFF's budget research analyst. "This is chilling. The state wants the power to silence any critics," Mercier said. "EFF was first, but it will not be the last. If this ruling is allowed to stand, other state agencies will be emboldened to delay disclosure." This two-tiered system—one procedure for EFF and one for everyone else—violates the letter and spirit of the state's public records law. The legislative note for RCW 42.17.251 clearly states:
"Washington's Boeing 7E7 Project Office wants blanket immunity from EFF's watchful eye, and Judge Pomeroy's ruling today granted it," said Mercier. EFF will appeal the ruling. "We regret having to appeal because the governor contractually obligated taxpayers to underwrite Boeing's legal defense. However, this is an action we must take to defend the public's right to open government," said Mercier. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Contact: Marsha Richards | Communications Director | 360.956.3482
|
1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance 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]?" - Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46) Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..." |
