In our view: Three statewide initiatives

Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act — twice approved by voters, upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court and packed with safeguards to prevent misuse — has protected a private, personal choice for more than a decade. It is an exquisite example of when and how government should stay out of our lives. The act has directly affected relatively few people (341 have died under the act’s terms in 10-plus years), and there has been no instance of abuse of the law.

For years The Columbian has praised this act and urged our state to allow terminally ill, suffering people to choose to end their lives. Now, Washingtonians have that chance with Initiative 1000, one of three statewide measures in the Nov. 4 election (ballots will be mailed Wednesday).

Foes of I-1000 clearly would never avail themselves of such an option. We respect their choice. But the other choice in this deeply individual matter warrants respect, too. We honor the choice of former Gov. Booth Gardner, who after being diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease chose to lead the crusade to get this decision before voters.

Among a dozen-plus safeguards are these requirements reported in the Voters’ Pamphlet: “independently witnessed oral and written requests, two waiting periods, mental competency and prognosis confirmed by two physicians and self-administration of the medication.” This decision belongs to each individual based on circumstances, after intimate conversations with relatives and doctors. Protect your right to decide for yourself. Vote “Yes” on Initiative 1000.

Initiative 985 — The Seattle Post-Intelligencer pulled no punches in its denunciation of this “inanity, nastiness and shortsightedness,” noting how initiative kingpin Tim Eyman “steps forward with a gale force spewing of political hucksterism, glibness and intellectual agility.”

Eyman has scored a few victories for taxpayers in the past, but his credentials as a traffic engineer are suspect. Initiative 985 would, according to the ballot title, “open high-occupancy vehicle lanes to all traffic during specified hours, require traffic light synchronization, increase roadside assistance funding and dedicate certain taxes, fines, tolls and other revenues to traffic-flow purposes.”

All of those decisions should be made by experts, overseen by elected officials whom we send to the Legislature. Further, we shudder at the thought of the state telling local jurisdictions how to run their traffic lights. And how do you suppose the task “dedicate certain taxes” would be achieved? That’s right, by taking hundreds of millions of tax dollars from vital state services at the worst possible time: during a sagging economy.

Vote “No” on Initiative 985.

Initiative 1027 — This measure is essentially an attempt by its promoter — the Service Employees International Union — to place a one-size-fits-all clamp on workers in long-term care for the elderly and persons with disabilities. I-1027 would require additional training, but that need has not been clearly delineated except by anecdotal evidence. It would waste millions of tax dollars in an era of soaring health-care costs, and deliver no proven boost in quality of care.

Our state’s health-care system is neither perfect nor inexpensive, but it was named one of the top three in the country by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

I-1027 is yet another example of an issue that our elected officials should decide. Voters and taxpayers should be especially leery whenever a union tries to write rules for the public.

Vote “No” on Initiative 1027.