Opponents of an initiative sponsored by a powerful labor union called on Secretary of State Sam Reed to reject it because its petition forms are allegedly misleading.

I think they have a point.

Local 775 of Service Employees International Union were to turn in signatures today for Initiative 1029, which would set higher training requirements for workers who care for the elderly or disabled people.

The measure is fiercely opposed by the home-care industry, which contends it will drive up costs and make it harder to recruit workers. Companies that provide private-pay care would have to pay for the training. State and federal taxpayers would pay for training state-paid workers.

The Community Care Coalition, an industry group, urged Reed by letter to reject the SEIU petitions because they describe the initiative as an initiative to the people, which would require a statewide vote in November. But the text of the initiative calls it an initiative to the Legislature, which means the measure would first go to the 2009 Legislature, and then to the ballot if lawmakers fail to approve it.

In an earlier Political Buzz blog post, a spokesman for the secretary of state's office said he thought the office would accept the petitions because he didn't think it was a big mistake.

I think it is a fundamental mistake, and who can tell whether it was in fact an intentional? It's a lot easier to tell potential signers that the initiative would give the people a chance to decide the issue right away than it is to explain that it would go to the Legislature first.

The tactic could be a strategy to pressure the Legislature to approve the training requirements. An SEIU-backed bill to the effect failed in this year's session. If the Legislature approves the initiative next year, the SEIU is spared the cost of running an expensive campaign to pass the initiative in November.

Seems to me the SecState's office should accept the petitions only provisionally today, subject to legal review. Here's what a spokesman for the office said this morning:

The Secretary of State’s Office did receive a letter from an attorney representing Community Care Coalition of Washington late yesterday afternoon. Currently, the office is reviewing the letter’s claims with legal counsel from the Attorney General’s Office. Meanwhile, the agency will proceed with accepting the petition sheets from I-1029 sponsors. They are scheduled to turn in sheets at 2 p.m. today.

Read on for the text of the Community Care Coalition letter to Reed. Read the case for Initiative 1029 here.

[More:]

MISLEADING INITIATIVE PETITIONS SHOULD BE DISALLOWED,
CAREGIVER GROUP SAYS
Voters Told Initiative Would Go To Legislature, Not Ballot

Thousands of petition forms supporting Initiative 1029 should be declared invalid because they indicate that the initiative would be presented to the legislature, rather than on the general election ballot as registered with the Secretary of State's office, a coalition of caregiver organizations said today. The Community Care Coalition of Washington (CCCW) has sent Secretary of State Sam Reed a letter summarizing the legal and policy reasons the misleading petitions should not be accepted.

“If initiative forms can be rejected for something as minor as being the wrong size, then surely they should be invalidated for misleading voters as to how their signature will be used,” said CCCW spokesperson Deb Murphy. “We believe that people understand what they are signing. There is no way to know how many people might not have signed the form had they known how the union intended to use their signature.”

Initiative 1029 is sponsored by Local 775 of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). Ironically, last year an SEIU spokesman wrote that it is appropriate to reject initiative forms because they are the wrong size, lack the warning against signing multiple petitions, or if the sponsor fails to accurately print the title, summary or initiative text on the petition form.

“This initiative is not the product of a grass-roots citizen movement,” Murphy continued. “It is a self-serving proposal being pushed by a large and sophisticated labor union which has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on paid signature gatherers. They should be held to the same standards that they have so vocally and strenuously promoted for everyone else.”

“This was either a cynical attempt to mislead voters or a serious mistake on the part of SEIU. Even if it wasn't intentional, an error on something as basic as identifying which of the two initiative options is presented should give voters pause. Voters should consider what other mistakes are included in the initiative text,” Murphy concluded.

CCCW members include Aging Services of Washington (formerly WAHSA), Developmental Disability Advocates, Home Care of Washington, Inc., Home Care Association of Washington, Washington Private Duty Association, and Washington State Residential Care Council. Collectively, they serve some 500,000 elderly and disabled citizens throughout Washington. It includes non-profit assisted living providers, agencies that deliver in-home care to the elderly and disabled, adult family home operators, and other primarily small businesses that deliver care to the elderly and disabled. The coalition contends that I-1029 will make it more difficult for Washington families to get the care needed by their parents and loved ones, eliminate entry-level caregiver jobs when there is already a critical shortage, and waste millions of taxpayer dollars without improving care - all at a time when health care costs are already skyrocketing and the state faces a $2.5 billion budget shortfall.

---###---