Attorney General completely contradicts Gregoire’s budget office

by | Aug 23, 2012

  On Friday at 9 am in Thurston County Superior Court, I’m going to ask why the Attorney General has completely contradicted Gregoire’s budget office when it comes to their I-1185 Fiscal Impact Statement.  It’s all explained in my reply brief which provides the absolute best summary of my arguments against OFM’s I-1185 Fiscal Impact Statement.  It’s just 8 pages — please take the time to read it:
        Some have suggested that I’m not taking this issue seriously.  Far from it.  We worked really hard sponsoring and promoting I-960 in 2007 and despite being radically outspent by opponents, the voters approved it.  We worked really hard on I-1053 in 2010 and despite being radically outspent, the voters approved it.  We’ve worked really hard this year to give voters another opportunity to approve these policies again by passing I-1185.  All of us have put forth years of Herculean effort to institute these protections and to convince the Legislature and Governor to follow them.    
        All our usual attorneys were unavailable for Friday’s hearing so it was either me or not at all.  I figure there’s nothing to lose because unless there’s a challenge, the erroneous statement will be in the voters pamphlet. 
        Tomorrow I’ll be in a suit and tie, clean shaven, and serious while I present my arguments to the judge, essentially restating the arguments in the reply brief.  My earlier reference to “A Few Good Men” and Perry Mason was my way of dealing with the pressure.    Wish me luck.