Jayne: Advisory votes generate more questions than answers

Yet, that is not the reason for the confusion. No, confusion comes from the fact that Advisory Vote No. 18 — and two others on the ballot — are nonbinding, which Webster’s tells us means “having no legal or binding force.” In other words, these questions are about as meaningful as a ballot measure asking “Should Led Zeppelin play a free concert at Esther Short Park?”

Legislators will be compelled to intently study the results of the advisory votes and deeply consider their meaning — and then toss them in the recycling bin. As Clark County Auditor Greg Kimsey said, “I think the advisory votes are more confusing to voters than they are beneficial. Ballots should be used to put people in office or answer questions; ballots are not supposed to be opinion polls.”

For the opportunity to hold inconsequential votes that produce worthless results, the state is spending an estimated $572,000 to produce and distribute a Voter’s Pamphlet that would otherwise be unnecessary because there are no other statewide items on the ballot. Call it The Tim Eyman Tax.

The Tim Eyman Tax

You see, the advisory votes are the remnants of Eyman’s Initiative 960, which the public approved with 51.2 percent of the vote in 2007. The centerpiece of the initiative was the requirement of two-thirds approval in the Legislature for tax increases, but that portion was tossed out by the state Supreme Court. Instead, we are left with nonsensical advisory votes as an ode to the anti-tax dogma that fueled I-960.

Some legislators might be happy to be handed a stick with which they can beat up on colleagues while claiming to have the will of the public on their side, but it doesn’t seem as though anybody else is. The Washington State Association of County Auditors wants lawmakers to overturn the advisory vote requirement, saying, “These measures have no effect, occupy a large area of the ballot, are confusing to voters, and appear in the wrong order on the ballot.”

About that last part — the advisory votes are the first question asked of voters, which is kind of like starting with calculus before covering algebra and geometry. Rather than asking important questions — such as, “Who should be Vancouver’s next mayor?” — the ballot first asks voters about $12,949,000,000 in spending that isn’t really $12,949,000,000 in spending.

Still confused? That’s understandable. After all, the meaningless advisory votes tend to generate more questions than they answer.