Washington Votes Forum

The abuse of the emergency clause by the current regime in Olympia is out of control. A legitimate "emergency" could easily find a 60% vote. I hope this bill can find a 50% vote to pass.    

Except, HJR 4205 has some new words that mean just-what to whom; for example, "An appropriations bill authorizing expenditures for operating, capital, or transportation purposes and imposing any requirements, conditions, or limitations on such expenditures contained therein is exempt from the sixty percent voting requirement of this section. . . .", so, somebody needs to explain who gets what benefit from the proposed HJR 4205 bill because I did not find a single use of the word 'emergency' used within HJR 4205?

Lets hear it for representation for the people. The use of the emergency clause has been used by some to step around the will of the people and the ones that did knew exactly what they did.

This would be a victory for integrity in politics.

 It's rare that I support an ammendment to our Constitution but his would help reign in the use of the "emergency" clause. Well done, I like it!

 A step in the right direction.  I would prefer a 66% requirement (or higher) because utilizing emergency clauses should happen in ony the rarest of circumstances, if at all. It is a form of "legislative arrogance" that serves to undermine trust.

 This bill is a great one but I doubt it will get very far since the Democrats have successfully used the emergency clause in so many cases and they know it is almost impossible to reverse it.

What we really need is an educational program for Washington voters to alert them to the misuse of the emergency clause.