Current, former Secretaries of State object to proposed changes to initiative process

OLYMPIA – Former Secretary of State Sam Reed and current Secretary of State Steve Hobbs differ in many ways.

“Democrat, Republican. Husky, Cougar,” Reed said Wednesday, seated next to Hobbs as he testified before the House State Government Committee. “But we agree in opposing this bill.”

The bill Reed referred to, which brought the current and former top election official in the state to testify in opposition this week, would amend the state’s initiative process in a way opponents say would make it much more challenging to gather enough signatures to qualify statewide initiatives.

If passed, the bill would require that at least 1,000 signatures be submitted with a filing to the secretary of state’s office when submitting a proposed initiative or referendum. The bill also seeks to ban signature gatherers from being paid per signature they receive, though they could still be paid an hourly rate or some other agreed upon rate.

By law, initiative organizers must gather 309,000 signatures to qualify an initiative for the Legislature, though it’s recommended they submit at least 385,000.

State Rep. Sharlett Mena, D-Tacoma, the prime sponsor of the legislation in the house, said Wednesday the goal of the bill is to make the initiative process “more perfect.”

“I believe in our system of checks and balances, and co-equal branches of government, and certainly accountability to the people we all serve,” Mena said. “In addition to the direct election of their legislators, initiatives are a powerful tool of the citizenry, and House Bill 2259 aims to improve this for Washingtonians by addressing two real and documented problems.”

The requirement to gather 1,000 signatures before an initiative receives a title, Mena said, will stop sponsors from submitting “substantively identical initiatives” in search of a preferable ballot title. The ban on paying signature gatherers on a per-signature-basis, Mena said, would disincentivize fraud and misrepresentation of signatures.

“I do believe that this bill protects access to the initiative process while strengthening its integrity,” Mena said.

Hanna Floss, who said she has served as an election observer since 2017, said the pay-per-signature model “awards volume, rather than care.”

“When pay is tied to the number of names collected, accuracy suffers long before election staff or observers ever see the petitions,” Floss said.

During his testimony, Hobbs, a Democrat, said the secretary of state’s office had already taken steps to reduce the number of duplicate initiatives. In 2024, the office increased the cost to file an initiative from $5 to $156, which accounted for inflation since the rate was set in 1913.

“That significantly reduced the number of initiatives coming before us, both my office, the code reviser, and the attorney general’s office,” Hobbs said. “By increasing the price, it really went down on these number of filing of initiatives.”

The requirement to collect signatures before an initiative can receive a ballot title, Hobbs said, would increase the amount of work his office needs to verify signatures.

Reed, a Republican who served in office from 2001 to 2013, said the bill “sets up barriers.”

“It’s a voter suppression bill,” Reed said. “My goodness, for them to have 1,000 signatures before they can even start, this process is already hard because of court challenges and title challenges. And now to try and set up another hoop to jump through.”

The notion that the law addresses fraud or a lack of integrity in the process, Reed said, “is wrong.”

“Has there been game playing? Yes, and Secretary Hobbs has been dealing with that well,” Reed said. “But this is a system with integrity, and I ask you to vote against this bill.”

In recent years, the initiative process has frequently been used by Brian Heywood, founder of Let’s Go Washington. The Political Action Committee founded by Heywood gathered enough signatures to qualify six Initiatives to the Legislature ahead of the 2024 session.

The organization has submitted signatures for two initiatives to the Legislature, currently being verified by the secretary of state’s office, though Democratic leadership have said they do not plan to hold hearings on either and will send both directly to the November ballot.

Heywood said the proposal would have a “chilling effect.”

“This would be weaponized. The PDC is often weaponized, and I believe it’s a sop to the legal firms to give them ways to make money off of lawsuits,” Heywood said.