Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Faith & Freedom Network regrouping

Richard Roesler The Spokesman-Review

The Faith & Freedom Network, “committed to preserving traditional Judeo-Christian values in America’s public life,” is regrouping after a series of political setbacks, most notably social conservatives’ failure last year to force a public vote on a new law protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination.

The group is no stranger to Olympia. Faith & Freedom, headed by Gary Randall, has done polling, maintains a Web site tracking key legislation and frequently weighs in publicly, particularly on same-sex marriage.

The group has hired Jennifer Lee, a former campaign deputy communication director and later a congressional staffer for West Side Republican Dave Reichert.

The group’s goal, Randall says, is to have a strong statewide network, with local leaders in all 49 legislative districts of the state, in time for the 2008 election season. The group is also setting up a political action committee, Randall said on the group’s Web site. “Looking forward, it is apparent that much remains to be done in Washington State,” he wrote. “With missed opportunities for change in referendums, senators, representatives and judges during the past year, we must do better. We are pledging ourselves to, with God’s help and your support, advance righteousness and Judeo-Christian values in more effective ways.”

Doctors, judge thyselves …

Rep. Tom Campbell says he wants health care providers accused of negligence to face discipline by someone other than their colleagues.

Campbell, R-Roy, is sponsoring House Bill 1103, which would shift the responsibility for disciplining health care providers directly to the state Health Department. That responsibility is shared by the secretary of health and 14 health boards, each composed largely of members of a particular medical specialty or occupation.

Campbell’s bill would reduce the role of those boards to “a consultative and assisting role” and instead shift all responsibility for discipline, investigations and reviews to the secretary of health.

Critics say that discipline requires a deep understanding of medicine – something that peers are uniquely well-qualified to judge. Nonetheless, the bill’s moving forward, having cleared two key committees already.

Eroding your right know

Attorney General Rob McKenna has memorably described the slow creep of exemptions to public disclosure laws as a coral-like accretion that grows slowly, steadily – and is very hard to get rid of.

Former state Rep. Tsoby Nixon, an outspoken proponent of open government, has compiled a list of proposed laws that would further erode the ability of taxpayers to determine whether government officials are acting in the public’s best interests. Among them:

“HB 2099: Would conceal information related to the Department of Health’s certificate of need program, which regulates the expansion of hospitals and other health care facilities.

“HB 2100: Would exempt information obtained by a newly proposed Health Resources Strategy Commission.

“HB 2150: Would allow a new Judicial Nominating Commission to decide for itself which of its meetings would be open to the public.

“HB 2255 and HB 2277: Would exempt initiative and referenda petitions from public disclosure.

“SB 6076: Would allow police investigative records to be forever sealed after one year, if no action is taken on the investigation.

Ahh, transparency in government …

As elected officials and state agencies often point out, the Internet has brought wondrous new realms of public access to the workings of government. To a degree never before possible, you can look at bills, amendments and votes. You can find out (a little) about which lobbyists are dining with which lawmakers. And you can watch or listen to testimony through TVW.

But it doesn’t always help. Witness this bill, “HB 2203 – Applying RCW 41.56.430 through 41.56.490 to employees working under a site certificate issued under chapter 80.50 RCW.”

What’s that mean? My best guess, after puzzling through those chapters of law, is that it a) prohibits nuclear-plant workers from striking or b) tweaks the arbitration rules for resolving grievances by nuclear-plant workers.