Fatal constitutional flaws in the Democrats’ Initiative Killer bill are dramatically revealed here.
I’m asking EVERYONE to send an email to all 147 legislators. Once you read it, you’ll understand why it’s critical that EVERYONE email it to them. I make it super easy.
Mon, Jan 26, 2026
To: Our thousands of supporters throughout the state
(cc’d to the media, house & senate members, and Governor, and other candidates for office)
From: Tim Eyman
Fighting for taxpayers for 29 years
We beat the crap out of the Democrats’ Initiative Killer bill last week.
Over 15,000 citizens signed in CON, and only a handful signed in PRO.
It was a great team effort.
But there’s one more thing I’m asking EVERYONE to do.
Send the email below to all 147 legislators. I make it super easy.
Once you read it, you’ll understand why it’s critical that EVERYONE email it to them.
For the senators, in the To line, copy & paste this:
emily.alvarado@leg.wa.gov; jessica.bateman@leg.wa.gov; matt.boehnke@leg.wa.gov; john.braun@leg.wa.gov; mike.chapman@leg.wa.gov; leonard.christian@leg.wa.gov; annette.cleveland@leg.wa.gov; leonard.christian@leg.wa.gov; steve.conway@leg.wa.gov; adrian.cortes@leg.wa.gov; manka.dhingra@leg.wa.gov; perry.dozier@leg.wa.gov; phil.fortunato@leg.wa.gov; noel.frame@leg.wa.gov; chris.gildon@leg.wa.gov; keith.goehner@leg.wa.gov; drew.hansen@leg.wa.gov; paul.harris@leg.wa.gov; bob.hasegawa@leg.wa.gov; jeff.holy@leg.wa.gov; victoria.hunt@leg.wa.gov; claudia.kauffman@leg.wa.gov; curtis.king@leg.wa.gov; deborah.krishnadasan@leg.wa.
In the Subject line, copy & paste:
Fatal constitutional flaws in the Democrats’ Initiative Killer bill (SB 5973 / HB 2599) are dramatically revealed here. I insist that every legislator read this legal analysis.
In the body of the email, copy & paste this:
Last week, committee members were emailed this legal analysis that identifies the fatal constitutional flaws in the Democrats’ Initiative Killer bill (SB 5973 / HB 2599).
I am providing it here and I insist that every state senator read it:
Wed, Jan 16, 2026
To: Senate State Govt and Elections Committee members
cc: Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, Brian Hatfield, & Stuart Holmes
From: Nicholas Power, Attorney WSBA #45974
Dear Members,
I have practiced law since 1997, and have been lead counsel in a number of election cases and First Amendment cases both in Washington and federal courts.
I’ve followed with interest Senate Bill 5973 (and its companion bill in the house HB 2599).
SB 5973 has obvious legal and constitutional flaws that I want to bring to your attention.
The bill seeks restrictions on the initiative and referendum process. Since I&R involves the First Amendment, specifically political speech, it is afforded the highest level of protection. The courts have consistently ruled that the only statutory restriction that can withstand the heightened scrutiny that the First Amendment affords is when actual evidence is provided by the Legislature that addresses demonstrable fraud.
Within the bill itself, in the intent section, it admits that the last instance of verified fraud in Washington state was in 2013. So that means there is no evidence of fraud for the past 12+ years.
The bill prohibits compensating circulators on a per signature basis (pay per signature). As you should certainly be aware, the 1993 Legislature passed this same ban and it was immediately struck down in US District Court by the Honorable Barbara Rothstein.
Her opinion explicitly explained why such legislation ran afoul of the First Amendment. She wrote that the mere suspicion of fraud or a simple legislative declaration is insufficient — actual evidence must be provided by the Legislature in court to show that fraud exists. None were presented then and there is none now.
She went on to quote the US Supreme Court (Meyer v Grant) which said that even if evidence of fraud was provided there must also be actual evidence provided that a pay per signature collector — whose future employment is contingent on his/her reputation — is more likely to commit fraud than a “true believer” who is motivated to make sure the measure qualifies for the ballot.
All aspects of the proposed bill (SB 5973 / HB 2599) impose severe restrictions, limitations, and onerous requirements on circulators and ballot measure campaigns. The justification provided for the ban on pay per signature and private cause of action are to stop fraud — but again, the bill admits there hasn’t been any fraud for 12+ years. So those restrictions will fail on that fact alone. The justification for requiring a 1000 signature pre-filing requirement is to avoid ballot title shopping. Fraud is the only justification the court has ever allowed for a restriction — especially an onerous one — to survive constitutional scrutiny. Ballot title shopping is not. But even if it was, the bill admits there hasn’t been any fraud since 2013.
From this news article and from this press release, I’ve learned that both Secretary of State Steve Hobbs and former Secretary of State Sam Reed testified against these changes saying they’re burdensome and unnecessary. Both made clear the current system is working.
Without actual evidence, SB 5973 & HB 2599 will not withstand a legal and constitutional challenge due to Judge Rothstein’s ruling (LIMIT v. Maleng) and the US Supreme Court’s ruling (Meyer v Grant)
Please consider this at today’s and future hearings.
Sincerely,
Nicholas Power
Attorney at Law
3660 Beaverton Valley Rd
Friday Harbor, WA, 98250
I urge EVERY STATE SENATOR to oppose SB 5973 / HB 2599 and HB 2260.
— END —
Now do the same thing for the House members.
In the To line, copy & paste:
peter.abbarno@leg.wa.gov; hunter.abell@leg.wa.gov; andrew.barkis@leg.wa.gov; stephanie.barnard@leg.wa.gov; april.berg@leg.wa.gov; steve.bergquist@leg.wa.gov; adam.bernbaum@leg.wa.gov; liz.berry@leg.wa.gov; dan.bronoske@leg.wa.gov; brian.burnett@leg.wa.gov; michelle.caldier@leg.wa.gov; lisa.callan@leg.wa.gov; rob.chase@leg.wa.gov; april.connors@leg.wa.gov; chris.corry@leg.wa.gov; julio.cortes@leg.wa.gov; travis.couture@leg.wa.gov; lauren.davis@leg.wa.gov; tom.dent@leg.wa.gov; beth.doglio@leg.wa.gov; brandy.donaghy@leg.wa.gov; davina.duerr@leg.wa.gov; jeremie.dufault@leg.wa.gov; mary.dye@leg.wa.gov; andrew.engell@leg.wa.gov; debra.entenman@leg.wa.gov; carolyn.eslick@leg.wa.gov; darya.farivar@leg.wa.gov; jake.fey@leg.wa.gov; joe.fitzgibbon@leg.wa.gov; mary.fosse@leg.wa.gov; roger.goodman@leg.wa.gov; jenny.graham@leg.wa.gov; mia.gregerson@leg.wa.gov; dan.griffey@leg.wa.gov; david.hackney@leg.wa.gov; zach.hall@leg.wa.gov; natasha.hill@leg.wa.gov; cyndy.jacobsen@leg.wa.gov; laurie.jinkins@leg.wa.gov; michael.keaton@leg.wa.gov; mark.klicker@leg.wa.gov; shelley.kloba@leg.wa.gov; mari.leavitt@leg.wa.gov; debra.lekanoff@leg.wa.gov; john.ley@leg.wa.gov; sam.low@leg.wa.gov; nicole.macri@leg.wa.gov; deb.manjarrez@leg.wa.gov; matt.marshall@leg.wa.gov; stephanie.mcclintock@leg.wa.
In the Subject line, copy & paste:
Fatal constitutional flaws in the Democrats’ Initiative Killer bill (HB 2599 & SB 5973) are dramatically revealed here. I insist that every legislator read this legal analysis.
In the body of the email, copy & paste this:
Last week, committee members were emailed this legal analysis that identifies the fatal constitutional flaws in the Democrats’ Initiative Killer bill (SB 5973 / HB 2599).
I am providing it here and I insist that every house member read it:
Wed, Jan 16, 2026
To: House State Govt and Elections Committee members
cc: Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, Brian Hatfield, & Stuart Holmes
From: Nicholas Power, Attorney WSBA #45974
Dear Members,
I have practiced law since 1997, and have been lead counsel in a number of election cases and First Amendment cases both in Washington and federal courts.
I’ve followed with interest House Bill 2599 (and its companion bill in the Senate SB 5973).
HB 2599 has obvious legal and constitutional flaws that I want to bring to your attention.
The bill seeks restrictions on the initiative and referendum process. Since I&R involves the First Amendment, specifically political speech, it is afforded the highest level of protection. The courts have consistently ruled that the only statutory restriction that can withstand the heightened scrutiny that the First Amendment affords is when actual evidence is provided by the Legislature that addresses demonstrable fraud.
Within the bill itself, in the intent section, it admits that the last instance of verified fraud in Washington state was in 2013. So that means there is no evidence of fraud for the past 12+ years.
The bill prohibits compensating circulators on a per signature basis (pay per signature). As you should certainly be aware, the 1993 Legislature passed this same ban and it was immediately struck down in US District Court by the Honorable Barbara Rothstein.
Her opinion explicitly explained why such legislation ran afoul of the First Amendment. She wrote that the mere suspicion of fraud or a simple legislative declaration is insufficient — actual evidence must be provided by the Legislature in court to show that fraud exists. None were presented then and there is none now.
She went on to quote the US Supreme Court (Meyer v Grant) which said that even if evidence of fraud was provided there must also be actual evidence provided that a pay per signature collector — whose future employment is contingent on his/her reputation — is more likely to commit fraud than a “true believer” who is motivated to make sure the measure qualifies for the ballot.
All aspects of the proposed bill (HB 2599 / SB 5973) impose severe restrictions, limitations, and onerous requirements on circulators and ballot measure campaigns. The justification provided for the ban on pay per signature and private cause of action are to stop fraud — but again, the bill admits there hasn’t been any fraud for 12+ years. So those restrictions will fail on that fact alone. The justification for requiring a 1000 signature pre-filing requirement is to avoid ballot title shopping. Fraud is the only justification the court has ever allowed for a restriction — especially an onerous one — to survive constitutional scrutiny. Ballot title shopping is not. But even if it was, the bill admits there hasn’t been any fraud since 2013.
From this news article (https://tinyurl.com/
Without actual evidence, HB 2599 & SB 5973 will not withstand a legal and constitutional challenge due to Judge Rothstein’s ruling (LIMIT v. Maleng) and the US Supreme Court’s ruling (Meyer v Grant)
Please consider this at today’s and future hearings.
Sincerely,
Nicholas Power
Attorney at Law
3660 Beaverton Valley Rd
Friday Harbor, WA, 98250
I urge EVERY STATE HOUSE MEMBER to oppose HB 2599 / SB 5973 and HB 2260.
— END —
Once you SEND these, you will KNOW you’ve really helped us!
Kudos to Jim Walsh — I know about this letter because he posted it along with this:
— END —
WAY TO GO JIM !!!!
As always, I welcome your feedback.
For 29 years, I’ve been fighting for the people of our state and our nation.
Here’s THE ONLY REASON Bob Ferguson is trying so hard to impose a lifetime ban on all my future political activity:
I urge you to help me fight back against his abuse of power by donating to the Tim Eyman Legal Defense Fund so Richard Sanders and the Pacific Legal Foundation can get the AG’s ridiculously unconstitutional ruling overturned.
Mail your check to:
Tim Eyman Legal Defense Fund
17404 Meridian Ave E #F PMB 176
Puyallup, WA, 98375
Or donate online:
By GiveSendGo (credit/debit card)
By Paypal (donate using PayPal or using a credit/debit card)
The only reason I’m still here and I’m still fighting is because of the prayers, love, and support of wonderful friends like you who’ve seen this gross injustice and are willing to help.
I love you all.
Onward!
Tim
You can call or text me anytime: 509-991-5295
You can email me anytime: Tim@TimDefense.com
For more details, go to: TimDefense.com
Recent Comments