State Democrats agree to launder and earmark $295,000
in labor donations to oppose I-960
25 Sept 2007
$200,000 from the Washington Federation of State Employees and $95,000
from the SEIU -- $295,000 total in campaign cash is being laundered through
the Washington State Democratic Party and earmarked toward opposing I-960.
By going to the PDC website, the donations were made to the State Democrats
Exempt account.
As of September 1, 2007, the No on 960 campaign had raised a total of
$188,003.55, almost completely from public employee unions, and mostly from
the SEIU. Of that, $63,000 went to consulting and research. Since then and
in the past 24 days they've only raised $15,250, again, only from special
interest groups, mostly unions.
Getting no-960 donations only from public employee unions is a
significant public relations problem; they want to be able to say they've
got a broad coalition funding their opposition campaign.
Letting the Washington State Democratic Party spend dollars against
I-960 seems to expand their coalition but it's really an illusion. The
unions are simply laundering their money and earmarking it toward opposing
I-960 and using the Washington State Democratic Party as a front for their
hidden spending.
The business community is exaccerbating opponents' public relations
problem -- on Friday, the Association of Washington Business refused to
oppose I-960, unlike in the past when they opposed and spent big money
against I-695, I-722, I-747, and I-776. So Big Business doesn't look like
they'll be riding to the rescue with big bucks.
It's clear that strong voter support for I-960, as reported by
independent pollster Stuart Elway, and the unanimous state supreme court
ruling dismissing opponents' legal challenges to I-960 have dried up the
flow of money, especially non-union money.
It certainly explains why anti-960 consultant Christian Sinderman has
been a 'no-show' at so many events. The debates before the Port Orchard
Chamber of Commerce on Sept 11th, The Private Enterprise Coalition of
Snohomish County on Sept 20th, and the Association of Washington Business in
Bellingham on Sept 21st had him confirming his participation and then not
showing up. Pretty amazing that of the $188,003.55 raised, over $63,000 had
gone to consulting and research - what exactly are opponents paying for if
their consultant keeps skipping debates?
It's certainly ironic that State Democrat Chair Dwight Pelz is involved
with this union money laundering scheme against I-960. Just last month, he
was thundering on and on about Norm Maleng's leftover campaign cash
(http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/320402_prosecutor20.html). Is Pelz'
the pot or the kettle when it comes to the earmarking of $295,000 from
public employee unions toward opposition to I-960?
Even if opponents spent hundreds of thousands or even millions of
dollars, we sincerely believe the voters would still approve I-960 because
it's a smart, balanced, reasonable proposal. I-960 helps the Legislature
follow the law, abide by the Constitution, and increases public disclosure
on efforts in Olympia to take more of the people's money. With surging tax
revenues and a $1.5 billion tax surplus, there's simply no good reason to
oppose the passage of I-960 in November.
