x

x

Did Inslee’s 12-word veto cross the line?

  • Sunday, September 8, 2019 1:30am
  • Opinion

OLYMPIA — When Gov. Jay Inslee vetoed a 12-word sentence in the transportation budget in May, he knew what he was doing was without precedent in this state.

Now, lawmakers are gearing up to sue the Democratic governor because they think it was not just unprecedented, it was illegal.

Since Inslee acted May 21, attorneys for the Democratic and Republican caucuses have been researching whether the two-term governor crossed a constitutional line separating his veto authority from their legislating turf.

Leaders in each of the four caucuses have called the veto “troubling” and “concerning.” They set out months ago to get a legal analysis — essentially building a case. As of Aug. 28, they had not said if they would take on Inslee, who in the past two weeks ended his bid for president and embarked on a campaign for a third term.

While overriding his veto is an option, that would mean waiting until the start of the 2020 session in January and lawmakers have sounded of late like they want to do something sooner.

Democrats, who control majorities in both chambers, have been more guarded in their comments on what they want to do and when. Republican lawmakers have been more vocal in desiring to see the Legislature push back.

“It’s wrong and that’s why we’ve got to sort out our best option,” said Senate Minority Leader Mark Schoesler, R-Ritzville, in early August. “It isn’t about the substance [of the sentence]. It is about other issues that could come up in the future. I think that’s what concerns lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. Whose ox gets gored next time and what budget language do you have to write so it doesn’t happen again.”

This brewing legal battle centers on one sentence that appears at the end of six provisions of the transportation budget pertaining to grant funding for transit services including purchases of buses and vanpools.

Under Inslee, laws have been passed pushing transit providers — public and private nonprofit — to move from gasoline-powered vehicles to zero-emission vehicles such as ones powered by electricity. State law lists energy efficiency standards as one of the criteria to be considered as part of the grant selection process.

In the budget, lawmakers included the line, “Fuel type may not be a factor in the grant selection process.” They said this would ensure transit agencies that are unable to make the transition to zero-emission vehicles right away are not shut out from getting some of the roughly $200 million in grants offered through the state’s public transportation program.

That line is what got cut. Inslee argued at the time of the veto that it amended existing law by changing the rules for the grant selection process. He contended the constitution requires such a revision be done with a separate bill and not through the budget.

“It’s fair to say that there is no known legal precedent in Washington that specifically authorizes a veto of a single sentence,” said Tara Lee, a spokeswoman for the governor. “But this is a very unique situation that we do not believe the courts have considered in the past. By inserting this sentence in subsections, the Legislature put the governor in the position of choosing between vetoing critical, significant transit funding and leaving his agency and others in the position of having to choose which law to violate [because the sentence conflicts with existing state law].”

If a lawsuit is filed, it won’t surprise Inslee and his staff.

Nor will it be the first go-round in court on the extent of a governor’s veto power.

In 1977, the state Supreme Court found Gov. Dan Evans went too far when the manner in which he vetoed provisions of the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act effectively rewrote the bill. In that case, the suit was brought by an association of apartment owners.

The Legislature sued Gov. Mike Lowry about the way he vetoed some budget provisions in 1994 and lawmakers sued Gov. Gary Locke over his use of the red pen on portions of a bill in 1997.

In both cases, justices said a single sentence might be a line too far.

“The budget provisos to which the Governor’s line-item veto extends include full provisos to an appropriations bill, that is, full subsections of the section of an appropriations bill,” justices wrote to Lowry. “We do not believe an “appropriations item” may be a sentence, phrase, letter, digit or anything less than the whole proviso.”

The court said you can’t veto lines or words to fundamentally change what the Legislature did, said Phil Talmadge, who served on the Supreme Court for both cases.

“It really has been decided,” he said, adding that he was not familiar with every particular in this case.

Inslee’s action grabbed Jason Mercier’s attention in May. Since then the government reform specialist for the Washington Policy Center has been waiting to see what lawmakers might do.

“The constitution is clear that the only options for vetoes are sectional or appropriations. The Governor may not veto a word or sentence within a section,” he said. “What happens next could have a big impact on future legislative deal-making.”

Jerry Cornfield is a political reporter for The Daily Herald of Everett. He can be contacted at 360-352-8623 and jcornfield@heraldnet.com.

More in Opinion

Letters to the editor for the week of Sept. 13

Reader wishes more council members were responsive Dear editor, Our council members… Continue reading

We all benefit when we’re open to new ideas

When I drive in my car, I often listen to the PBS… Continue reading

Fall is for hydrangeas

Don’t miss Windmill Gardens “Smart Gardening Ideas for Fall” at 10 a.m.… Continue reading

Letters to the editor for the week of Aug. 30

Readers discuss the second amendment and Renton’s “multiculturalism”

This time of year, it’s all about the harvest

The fourth week of August is time to reset for the coming… Continue reading

Letters to the editor for the week of Aug. 23

Reader worries about development deal Dear editor, The agreement with Cosmos for… Continue reading

From trade to race relations, can the U.S. take any more ‘change’?

You’ve all heard the phrase, “chickens coming home to roost.” You may… Continue reading

Recognize abuse of power

Community members can work together to recognize sexual assault

Where to place the blame for mass shootings

Who do you blame for the mass killings in Dayton and El… Continue reading

Letters to the editor for the week of Aug. 9

Reader rejects racist tag, claims school unions push ‘liberal agenda’ Dear editor,… Continue reading

July was tough month for Eyman

After getting signatures for a measure that didn’t qualify, Restore Washington wants to do its own.

Letters to the editor for the week of Aug. 2

“Armondo knows the community” Dear editor, I am writing this letter in… Continue reading