I am not sure why we would accept anything other than complete transperancy from our government on all issues. If anything we should be demanding more real answers and more transperancy. Trades should not be taking place, especially involving our meida outlets who should be acting as watchdogs in the publics’ interest. Yet we see some level of obsfucations just about everytime a bill is passed and on just about every issue.

For example, I will be writing an article on how the State Senate took a very straight forward bill about allowing the ports to expand telecom services into rural areas, that came out of the House in great shape and in a way that would have helped our local net-neutral providers really get into rural areas via our ports solving our problems with the predatory big telecoms forever, and decided to throw the big telecoms a bone via amendments before passing it. Maria Cantwell’s response to the gun epidemic is very disappointing, totally disconnected from reality, and toally centrist. She provides no real substance in her replies or responses. In short she’s not going to do anything, even though most Washingtonians want her to because she doesn’t answer to them. This is probably because of how her donations work, but it shows that the rights of citizens are considered last and there are probably larger players she is trying to please working in the background.

In short, we need to replace just about everyone currently in power with people who put ethics before money and work in the public interest. I’m sure if you investigate just about everyone that is in office right now, using the past records you mention here, most of them will be caught red handed with something that would lead to them being removed from office, at the very least. Sorry if I’m preaching to the choir. 

Initially, a denied public records request regarding sexual harassment complaints against lawmakers spurred several media corporations to file a lawsuit to force the legislature to release files related to incidents of reported abuse.

The legislature has used an informal complaint process to deal with abuse complaints for decades. In other words, formal disciplinary records will not exist for the majority of workplace violence and harassment complaints. Hence, a law that restricts public access to “formal disciplinary records” will effectively hide the majority of complaints against lawmakers. The members of the legislature and the governor are aware of this fact. This is why the media and individual citizens require access to the informal complaint records kept by the House and Senate Administration. The employee’s name can be redacted. Unless the employee is willing to go public with their complaint. 

I will allow a credible citizen’s group to request my employment records from the legislature - which have been denied to me and the media repeatedly over the last 18 years. That is, if the Administration hasn’t hired someone to shred every past record of abuse in thelegislature’s H.R. files.  It’s my understanding that federal law requires the state to keep employee records for 30 years.  I have no way of knowing if my files still exist. But I do have a series of letters denying me access to my own employee file from House Counsel over the years.   

The legislature should never refuse to allow an employee to examine their employee file. That’s a violation of state and federal law and a violation of the individual employee’s constitutional rights. If they are denying an employee and the media access to a file, as they did in my case. They are protecting the legislator who in some cases is a serial offender. Why shouldn’t the legislator re-offend? There are no consequences or discipline for inappropriate or abusive behavior.  

Public disclosure of past abuse will do more to change the future behavior of elected officials than a revised handbook on sexual harassment/workplace violence. As long as the legislature remains in control of deciding which documents can be released, the public will have no idea how lawmakers really behave in Olympia. 

That said, Governor Inslee and the legislature have a right to negotiate with the media regarding the terms of settlement of the case.  

We the people have been given the power of Initiative by our state Constitution.  It appears that we will have to write and circulate an Initiative to force our arrogant legislature to comply with the same laws that that same legislature requires other elected officials to obey.  Our elected state legislators are not kings and queens. Yet, in Olympia, they are behaving as if they have royal prerogative.

No one, not even a state lawmaker, is above the law.  

I have an update:

Jim Brunner of the Seattle Times just reported that Tim Eyman filed  The Transparency in Lawmaking Act Initiative in Olympia on Thursday. 

Eyman’s Initiative was drafted in response to a ruling by Thurston County Superior Court Judge Chris Lanese. Lanese determined that the state legislature is subject to public disclosure laws. 

Joseph O’Sullivan wrote the original article  about the court’s decision published on January 19th, 2018 in the Seattle Times.  Readers can also find a direct link to the court decision in O’Sullivan’s article.  

 To my non-lawyer’s eye, Eyman’s initiative seems to the point and worthy of support. Especially considering that one of the clauses of the excrable bill vetoed by Gov. Enslee specifically outlawed the ability of citizens to undo the secret records law using the Citizens’ initiative process. 

I’d be interested to know anyone else’s thoughts on Eyman’s initiative.