State shouldn’t undermine initiative process

Published 1:30 am Monday, February 23, 2026

Although the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution codifies the right of the people to “petition the government for a redress of grievances,” many states do not provide a direct path for such petitioning.

Washington is one of 26 states to have an initiative process, allowing citizens to place statutes or amendments to the state constitution on the ballot. It also is one of five states where “the initiative process has had its greatest impact,” according to the Rose Institute of State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College in California.

Lawmakers in Olympia are wise to leave that process intact, after briefly considering changes during this year’s legislative session. Initiatives are an island of direct democracy in our representative system, enhancing the power of the people and — equally important — increasing the public’s engagement with its government.

In Washington, referring a petition to the ballot or to the Legislature currently requires 308,911 signatures from registered voters. That is equal to 8 percent of the number of votes in the most recent gubernatorial election. Because many signatures typically are invalid — duplicates or not from registered voters — initiative sponsors are encouraged to collect an extra 20 percent of signees.

That can be a daunting task requiring a statewide organization. And the process for collecting signatures has come under increased scrutiny in recent years.

This year, state Sen. Javier Valdez, D-Seattle, sponsored Senate Bill 5973 to make it more difficult for initiatives to land on the ballot. The measure would have barred paying a person for each signature they collect and would have allowed legal action against those suspected of violating the provision. It also would have required 1,000 signatures from registered voters at the start of the process.

After some senators, initiative sponsors, Gov. Bob Ferguson and Secretary of State Steve Hobbs expressed concerns about the legislation, it was allowed to quietly die in the Senate.

“Obviously, I’m disappointed,” Valdez said. “… We’ll roll up our sleeves in the interim and hope to bring back another version in 2027.”

Hobbs said: “We cannot allow partisanship to distract us from what should be our ultimate goal: protecting citizens’ rights to directly participate in our democracy. Washingtonians who came before us found this right so foundational, it is enshrined in our state Constitution.”

Among the cited motivations for the bill were reports of overly aggressive signature collectors. Hobbs wisely suggested that if misbehavior is a problem, penalties should be increased. That would be preferable to a bill that attacks the entire system.

While Washington allows for a direct petition from the people to their government, the process is not simple. In addition to requiring a large number of signatures, if a measure lands on the ballot, it still must be passed by voters, and then it might face judicial scrutiny.

Let’s Go Washington, a conservative organization founded by Brian Heywood, collected enough signatures for seven initiatives to land on the 2024 ballot. Three were passed by the Legislature, and four were sent to voters; three of those were defeated by large margins.

Meanwhile, numerous initiatives approved by voters in the past 25 years have subsequently been ruled unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court.

Considering that turning an initiative into law already is difficult, lawmakers should seek methods for smoothing the process rather than undermining it.