Comment by Senator John Braun, R-Centralia
In addition to Bob Ferguson’s well-known credibility problems, there are these: the Democratic gubernatorial candidate clearly has trouble dealing with criticism, admitting mistakes and figuring out how to do the right thing.
The Attorney General recently came under criticism after failing to show the greatest possible openness in three high-profile election-related cases.
The smart response would have been to acknowledge the lack of transparency, take responsibility and vow to do better next time.
Instead, Ferguson accused critics on social media of following “right-wing arguments,” “suggesting a false conspiracy” and putting forward “wild, irresponsible theories.”
These disrespectful reactions follow a little-publicized special conference of the state Supreme Court that took place on August 9.
The court case resulted in three rulings, all of which related to the four money-saving voter initiatives that were on the ballot in November.
The most significant ruling came in the justices’ unanimous decision to dismiss a lower court lawsuit seeking to invalidate Initiative 2117, which would repeal the Emissions Trading Act, which has driven up the price of gas and other energy sources; Initiative 2109, which would repeal the capital gains tax, which some Democrats already want to expand; and Initiative 2124, which would eliminate the mandatory payroll tax that funds a care benefit for a certain group of Washington residents.
Among those seeking to defeat the initiatives were some of our state’s wealthiest residents – Ferguson’s “billionaire friends,” as one critic put it. While the lawsuit named only Secretary of State Steve Hobbs as a defendant, it also prominently mentioned the Let’s Go Washington organization, which collected many hundreds of thousands of voter signatures to qualify the initiatives.
In another ruling, Judges Ferguson and Hobbs gave the opportunity to prepare “public investment impact disclosures” for I-2117, I-2109 and I-2124. It will be the first application of a law passed by Democrats in 2022 and criticized by Republicans as the “red flag law.”
The third ruling denied a request for a preliminary injunction that would bar Initiative 2066 from the ballot, the measure blocking Democrats’ misguided push to ban natural gas in Washington.
The public pressure Ferguson is facing has nothing to do with what happened in the courtroom.
His office is responsible for defending government officials such as Secretary of State Steve Hobbs. All three rulings were in Hobbs’ favor, and the attorneys assigned to the cases did an admirable job defending cases I-2117, I-2109, and I-2124.
They called the case “a political fight disguised as a legal battle” and successfully argued that the plaintiffs had asked the judges to “unnecessarily exclude Washington voters from the initiative process…” Unfortunately, Ferguson’s antics have distracted from that good work.
Given his relationships with the people behind the lawsuits, Let’s Go Washington has rightly raised the question of why Ferguson did not recuse himself from the proceedings in the first place.
But the bigger problem – the reason Ferguson is accused of keeping secrets – is that no one officially informed Let’s Go Washington or state Rep. Jim Walsh, who filed the three initiatives, that the special conference of judges would take place on August 9.
It’s easy to understand why they’re unhappy with this. When you’ve put as much time and effort into a project as they have and someone files a lawsuit designed to derail your project, you want to be kept in the loop – especially if the lawsuit comes anywhere close to a courtroom.
In addition, the numerous voters in Washington who signed petitions in support of bills I-2117, I-2109, and I-2124 have an interest in knowing what happens with these proposals.
The last thing many of those voters knew was that the initiatives were safely on their way to a vote after Democrats rejected their passage during the House session.
Because Let’s Go Washington was not notified in time about the Supreme Court’s special conference, the organization was unable to inform its supporters about the high-level efforts to keep their voices heard.
Among Ferguson’s office’s initial attempts to limit the damage was a staffer pointing out that the responsibility for notifying interested parties traditionally rests with those filing the lawsuits.
Maybe. But even though Secretary Hobbs was the only defendant, a quick email from Ferguson’s office would have been enough to alert Jim Walsh and Let’s Go Washington before August 9.
Ferguson’s office has repeatedly claimed that it could not possibly have kept the court’s special conference a secret because Supreme Court records are publicly available, meaning anyone could have looked online and seen what was coming.
While this may be technically correct, it is completely unrealistic. Information about the state budget is also available online, but no MP I know expects their constituents to wade through all of this information. Instead, we regularly highlight items in the budget when we think they might be of interest to the people we serve.
Although Ferguson opposes these initiatives, he should have put aside his political games long enough to recognize that a large portion of the public has a vested interest in their status, even when something as important as a Supreme Court case is pending.
Here, too, all that would have been needed for transparency would have been a simple email from his office to those who had a right to know what was planned for August 9.
Ferguson then came up with an even stranger excuse: Since Republican and Democratic parliamentary staff had been informed about the lawsuits related to the initiative, Jim Walsh must have known about it too.
This is beyond absurd, for reasons that should be obvious to someone in Ferguson’s situation.
First, none of the three lawsuits involve the legislature. Jim Walsh’s support of bills I-2117, I-2109, and I-2124 is independent of his position as a legislator.
If he really had wanted to inform Jim Walsh directly about the August 9 judicial conference, Ferguson could have easily found the appropriate phone number and email address on the Secretary of State’s website with just a few clicks.
The Attorney General had absolutely no reason to believe that information shared in a briefing for legislative staff would somehow reach either Jim Walsh as a private citizen or Let’s Go Washington as a private organization.
Additionally, legislative branch employees would be crossing an ethical line if they used state resources for purposes unrelated to the legislative branch. Considering the executive director and staff of the state’s ethics committee work in the attorney general’s office, Ferguson should know better.
It’s not some wild, irresponsible theory that Ferguson either doesn’t believe in the transparency he claims to support; doesn’t know how to communicate competently; is willing to skirt ethics rules; or some combination of those things. Any of those things are major red flags for a gubernatorial candidate.
Ferguson is obviously not comfortable with the pressure he is under, but he has only himself to blame.
If he had an email or other evidence showing that his office directly informed Let’s Go Washington and Jim Walsh that the initiatives were indeed going before the Supreme Court on August 9, we would already know.
The evidence would be published for all to see, instead of the fog we currently get over court documents and parliamentary debates.
The court case on August 9 did bring one good thing: the initiatives now finally seem to have a free hand in the ballot, where voters should definitely accept them. Those who vote yes pay less.
•••
Senator John Braun of Centralia represents the 20th Legislative District, which spans parts of four counties from Yelm to Vancouver. He became Senate Republican leader in 2020.
