The checks and balances in Washington’s initiative process are working exactly as intended – and as they’ve worked for over 90 years. No initiative gets on the ballot unless a large number of voters sign petitions, and existing laws against forgery and fraud have worked well. Procedures by the initiative campaigns themselves and the office of the secretary of state ensure that only valid signatures count.

And obviously, no initiative becomes law unless the voters approve it at a high-turnout general election.

Yet, unfortunately, a push is under way this year in the Washington Legislature to impose such burdensome rules on signature gathering that it would effectively repeal the initiative process.

And that will only increase the public’s distrust of Olympia.

One of the most egregious violations of the First Amendment is proposed House Bill 1087, sponsored by Rep. Sherry Appleton, D-Poulsbo, and Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle. Their bill would make it a misdemeanor to either pay for or be paid to collect, petition signatures on a per-signature basis. Violators would be subject to up to 90 days in jail.

This is like making driving a crime because some people drive drunk. People shouldn’t be thrown in jail for driving and neither should they be thrown in jail for being compensated for exercising their First Amendment rights.

Here are my top seven reasons why this bill is bad:

7. In 1993, the Legislature passed an anti-initiative law like HB 1087 and a federal court ruled that the law blatantly “violated citizens’ fundamental freedom of political speech protected by the First Amendment.” Why should the 2007 Legislature pass a law the court has already rejected?

6. In 2004, we hired hourly workers to supplement our pay-per-signature folks for an initiative I co-sponsored. These hourly workers were dramatically more expensive, less productive, and had a much higher rate for invalid signatures. HB 1087 will radically increase the costs of qualifying initiatives for the ballot, adding a substantial burden to campaigns, especially small grass-roots efforts.

5. Oregon has a law like HB 1087 and since it was enacted in 2002, invalid rates for signatures have gotten worse, not better. Oregon’s invalid rates are now nearly double what they are in Washington. Why would we want to copy Oregon’s law that has resulted in more invalid signatures? Oregon’s version has radically increased the costs and has reduced by two-thirds the number of initiatives qualifying for the ballot – 18 initiatives qualified for Oregon’s ballot in 2000, prior to the 2002 law, and only six initiatives qualified in 2004.

More invalid signatures, higher costs, a substantial burden on citizens, and fewer initiatives for voters to vote on. Again, why copy Oregon’s abysmal failure?

4. The people who pay per signature check signatures each week and people who gather signatures know they won’t be compensated for bad ones. This screening process is very effective and it’s why the validity rates for signatures from people who are compensated are much, much higher than those from our volunteers.

3. The most common complaint we get from supporters each year is, “I wanted to sign your petition but I never saw it.” HB 1087 will only make that problem worse. It will result in fewer people carrying petitions that voters want to sign. Because of the added burden, many people who gather signatures do not work in states that have laws like HB 1087. HB 1087 will result in fewer people carrying petitions that voters want to sign, limiting voters’ opportunity to support liberal, conservative and nonpartisan issues.

2. The secretary of state thoroughly checks signatures on petitions. Since 1999, more than 8 million signatures have been submitted, and the secretary of state makes sure only valid signatures count and only initiatives with enough valid signatures qualify.

And the No. 1 reason why 1087 is bad: Washington’s aggressive laws against forgery and fraud are working. There is no problem that HB 1087 solves; it would only add a substantial burden on initiative campaigns and greatly reduce opportunities for voters to sign petitions they support.

Olympia shouldn’t try to take away citizens’ First Amendment rights. Olympia shouldn’t criminalize free speech. Olympia should respect the Constitution and leave the citizens’ initiative process alone.