2008 Washington State Initiatives
Constitution Party of Washington State Official Position
The Constitution Party of Washington State takes the following positions on these initiatives:
Initiative Measure No. 985
Initiative Measure No. 985 concerns transportation.
This measure would open high-occupancy vehicle lanes to all traffic during specified hours, require traffic light synchronization, increase roadside assistance funding, and dedicate certain taxes, fines, toll, and other revenues to traffic-flow-purposes.
Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]
Ballot Measure Summary
This measure would: open high-occupancy vehicle lanes to all vehicles Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday nights from 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m., and 6:00 p.m. Friday to 6:00 a.m. Monday; require traffic light synchronization, and mandate increased funding for roadside assistance. Certain existing revenues, including 15% of state sales and use taxes on vehicles, certain traffic infraction penalties, and certain tolls would be dedicated to traffic-flow purposes.
Link to document: http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/text/i985.pdf
(1,470 kB 
)
What the Constitution Party platform says:
The platform does not specifically address transportation, therefore we may safely assume that this issue does not belong to the federal government, and belongs to the people and the states, respectively, under the Tenth Amendment. So the question might bedoes this initiative reflect the proper role of government in regards to transportation issues? The General Welfare clause of the United States Constitution, which is intended to "promote an atmosphere where the general population can 'fare well' ", the people of Washington state can certainly choose to fund, build, and maintain a highway system since that system is of benefit to all.
This said, there are two other considerations:
Any taxes, fines, tolls, etc., collected should be used to maintain the roads themselves and not be funneled into other areas, such as public transportation, that only provides services to a small segment of the total population, at the expense of all motorists.
Since taxpayers should get the most benefit possible from their tax dollars, those dollars should be spent on projects that will get motorists to their destinations in the most efficient and timely manner, including using all lanes of a highway to maximum capacity, not leaving one (car pool lane) empty most of the day.
The Constitution Party of Washington State supports Initiative Measure No. 985 on the grounds that it promotes the General Welfare of the entire populace by providing for efficient and equitable transportation systems.
Initiative Measure No. 1000
Initiative Measure No. 1000 concerns allowing certain terminally ill competent adults to obtain lethal prescriptions.
This measure would permit terminally ill, competent, adult Washington residents who are medically predicted to have six months or less to live, to request and self-administer lethal medication prescribed by a physician.
Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]
Ballot Measure Summary
This measure would permit terminally ill, competent, adult Washington residents medically predicted to die within six months, to request and self-administer lethal medication prescribed by a physician. The measure requires two oral and one written request, two physicians to diagnose the patient and determine the patient is competent, a waiting period, and physician verification of an informed patient decision. Physicians, patients and others acting in good faith compliance would have criminal and civil immunity.
Link to document: http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/text/i1000.pdf
(952 kB )
What the Constitution Party platform says: Sanctity of Life plank
"The Declaration of Independence states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."
"We oppose all government 'legalization' of euthanasia, infanticide, and suicide."
The question then becomes—does this initiative actually legalize suicide, thereby violating the proper role of government by to protect life?
As the initiative states, "This measure would permit and to request and self-administer lethal medication prescribed by a physician." As a matter of principle and precedent, what's the difference between a lethal dose of heroin, a lethal dose of rat poison, and a lethal dose of "prescribed medication?"
The Constitution Party of Washington State opposes Initiative Measure No. 1000 on the grounds that it legalizes suicide, violating one of the proper roles of government, that of protecting life.
Initiative Measure No. 1029
Initiative Measure No. 1029 concerns long-term care services for the elderly and persons with disabilities.
This measure would require long-term care workers to be certified as home care aides based upon an examination, with exceptions; increase training and criminal background check requirements; and establish disciplinary standards and procedures.
Should this measure be enacted into law? Yes [ ] No [ ]
Ballot Measure Summary
Beginning January 1, 2010, this measure would require certification for long-term care workers for the elderly and persons with disabilities, requiring a written examination, increased and additional criminal background checks. Continuing education would be required in order to retain certification. Disciplinary standards and procedures would be applied to long-term care workers who are certified as home care aides. Certain workers would be exempt based on prior employment, training or other circumstances.
Link to document: http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/text/i1029.pdf
(1,183 kB )
What the Constitution Party platform says: Health Care and Government plank, and Welfare plank
James Madison wrote: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution and to the federal government are few and defined."
Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The question here is this—does certification and back ground checks of long-term health care workers protect the life, liberty, and property of those in their care; or does it violate that protection for the workers themselves? We know it is not a federal responsibility, but is a state one?
A state or local government might have a duty to set standards for health, cleanliness, and treatment of patients, but it should be up to the private business to decide whether or not to maintain those standards by requiring their employees to get training and certification through a program, or to just hire good employees who meet and/or surpass the standards of treatment and care of patients simply by using their good sense.
The Constitution Party of Washington State opposes Initiative Measure No. 1029 because it contributes to the growth of government bureaucracy and unnecessary regulation of a business. Simple standards can be set for private companies to meet if they desire certification, the enforcement being potential lawsuits and loss of business by injured parties for failure to provide proper patient care.