Legislative Commentary: March 14, 2019

Dear Friends,

You won’t find me sending a ton of text messages, or using the “LOL” kind of shorthand when I do. But if I had to describe this past week in a text, the abbreviation “SMH” – for “shaking my head” – would be a good choice. Some of what we saw from the Senate majority is almost too much for words.

The biggest shock was probably the decision by the chair of the Senate Transportation Committee to have a special meeting of his committee so he and his fellow Democratic members could push the pieces of his proposed $15 billion transportation package forward.

This package has a host of problems, like the fact that it would focus on transportation projects in and around Snohomish County, where this particular senator lives. Near as I can tell, there would be nothing for roads east of the Cascades. Also, the proposed funding sources include what the left calls a “carbon fee” – more accurately known as a tax on energy, such as electricity and natural gas – and a “carbon fee” is something the governor probably wants to talk about in his presidential campaign. Keep reading for more on all the ways it could affect Washington families.

The midpoint of the 105-day session came yesterday, and we also moved into the second half of the 12 days that are set aside on the calendar for nothing but floor votes. I don’t foresee the Democratic transportation package coming up for a vote yet, because the voting deadlines at this stage don’t apply to pieces of the budget. But my colleagues across the aisle have plenty of other bills that they want to push over to the House, even if it means long hours (yesterday’s voting session lasted well into the night, the Senate just adjourned for today, and we’ll reconvene at 9 a.m. tomorrow). While many of the bills being passed will make certain special interests happy, I’m starting to feel like the “war on rural Washington” has resumed with an intensity we haven’t seen in years.

Because of the day-after-day voting in the Senate chamber, this has been another light week for office visitors from home. But it was great to see Sharon Adolphson (Tri-Cities) and Debbie Chapman (Ritzville) yesterday morning – you won’t find better advocates for the developmental-disabilities community in our state.

There’s nothing to like about Democrats’ tax-heavy transportation proposal

No one likes paying a higher tax on fuel, but it helps when people see some benefit from those extra pennies. Good local examples are the passing-lane projects on U.S. Highway 195 and State Route 26, which were included in the “Connecting Washington” transportation package of 2015. It also helps that under our state constitution, gas-tax revenue can be used only for highway construction – an important taxpayer protection.

In contrast, the new Democratic transportation proposal is chock-full of taxes that are not covered by the state constitution, meaning there is no guarantee the revenue would be used for highway projects.

These include not one but two taxes on carbon – meaning energy. One tax on motor fuel, and one on home heating and electricity. Plus new or higher taxes or fees on property (that’s right, property…through impact fees), auto parts, rental cars, for-hire vehicles, bicycles, hybrid vehicles, motor homes, and vehicle registrations and licenses.

No matter what the supporters of the package say, every cent of revenue generated by these taxes could be spent on things that have nothing to do with roads, much less transportation.

The only sure funding for road projects would come from a 6-cent increase in the gas tax – and even then, none of the projects in this package would be near us anyway.

Firearm bill ignores criminals, goes after law-abiding owners

Some 60,000 people in our state have concealed pistol licenses. SB 5174 would place an unnecessary new burden on them, and everyone who obtains a CPL going forward, by requiring an extensive amount of training that includes demonstrating their shooting proficiency with every pistol they’re licensed to carry.

I think it would be fine if every CPL holder was proficient in handling his or her firearms – it could only help to discourage crime. But this may be the most useless of all the bills that have reached the Senate voting calendar so far this session. What is the value of having the state require me to demonstrate my ability to use a pistol? I sure don’t hear about CPL holders shooting at the wrong targets. And I can only imagine how time-consuming and expensive it would be for 60,000 CPL holders in Washington to comply with all the requirements in the bill, especially those involving a firing range.

Instead of going after people who own and carry firearms legally, let’s focus on the criminals who don’t.

A new ‘head tax’ on farm workers?

The federal H-2A program allows agricultural employers to bring in “guest” workers temporarily, and with a bushel of conditions: specified pay rates, housing and transportation, a guaranteed term of employment, and more. Employers also pay a fee to the feds.

The state Employment Security Department predicts more than 30,000 H-2A workers will be requested to work in Washington during 2019. The federal government provides about $300,000 to administer the program at the state level, but the Employment Security folks say that’s not nearly enough. So along comes Senate Bill 5438, requested by the ESD, to set up a 15-person office of “agricultural and seasonal workforce services.” Naturally, there are fees involved: up to $500 for an employer to apply, and $75 for each worker requested after the first 10.

Farmers and growers understandably see this proposal as double taxation, and question the implication that the state needs to get involved in their relationships with guest workers. But during the hour-long debate that preceded the Senate vote on the bill Wednesday night, our arguments were lost on the Democratic majority.

Some other bills that are unfriendly to agriculture are still on the table in the Senate, including the outrageous proposal that dares to suggest fruit growers and dairies in our state are engaged in slavery. And even the committee discussion about the Democratic transportation package included a shot at agriculture, when one of the sponsoring senators suggested that the industry isn’t paying its share for using Washington roads. You wonder if she understands how food reaches the people in her urban-Seattle legislative district.

Orca bills passed by Senate leave Snake River dams alone -- so far

The governor’s orca task force and environmental activists have taken aim at the four lower Snake River dams in the name of aiding the orca population, but so far this session we’re not seeing corresponding legislation in the Senate. The two orca bills that moved through the Senate on Thursday are actually reasonable.

The first (SB 5918) is legislation to include whale-watching guidelines in the state-sanctioned boating safety education program. It passed unanimously, and I then supported another bill (SB 5577) that tightens regulations on the commercial whale-watching industry. It may seem unusual for someone who is pro-private enterprise to back a bill like that – but as I pointed out during the debate, would the state even allow wolf-watching tours in the livestock country of northeast Washington or spotted owl-watching tours in the timber country west of the Cascades?

The Senate majority tried to sell SB 5315 as being another pro-orca bill, because it involves chemicals used in consumer products. But our entire Republican caucus and even a few Democrats stood in opposition, recognizing how the bill would give more authority to the Department of Ecology. Still, it passed 25-24.