State Rep. Ed Orcutt hopes the public is able to separate the merits of Initiative 1366 and the legal troubles of its loudest and most active supporter, Tim Eyman.
The 20th District legislator made the comments during an interview with the Seattle Times, a session that featured Eyman’s repeated refusal to address allegations that he misspent thousands of dollars in donations to previous measures.
The initiative promoter who has become synonymous with attempts to shackle the state’s ability to hike taxes on a variety of fronts is facing an investigation from the state Attorney General’s Office.
Among other questionable issues, Eyman is accused of accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments from Citizens Solutions, a signature-gathering company that took in more than $1.2 million to get Initiative 1366 on the coming general election ballot.
Speaking with the Times, he repeatedly resisted questioning on the matter.
“I respect the fact that you have to ask the questions ... But any question you ask me about it, I’m simply going to talk more about 1366,” he said.
Eyman has become a villain in the eyes of many in the state, mostly those on the left who resent his attempts to dictate issues of revenue through votes of the people.
This editorial board has found reason to praise his work in the past, but we continue to question his reluctance to address this looming legal issue.
It’s an ongoing investigation, so Eyman deserves the same consideration as others — innocent until proven guilty.
Likewise, it might be wise for him to limit his comments on the matter in order to avoid complicating the legal process or inadvertently incriminating himself.
Still, it seems as though his silence on the issue is speaking volumes.
Absent a flat-denial, it would appear to many voters that the leader of what is otherwise an attractive initiative — despite past opposition from the Legislature and state Supreme Court — is simply not trustworthy.
Those feelings will likely come through in the polls.
1366 would reinstate a two-thirds supermajority requirement for any tax increases passed by the Legislature. A version of the same measure was struck down by the Supreme Court two years ago. If nothing else, though, another vote would show support for the idea of limiting an already weighty tax burden.
Orcutt is right to hope for a separation between the investigation of Eyman and the initiative he’s promoting.
At this point, though, it might be easier if Eyman either speaks out against the allegations or separates himself from the final push for voter approval of Initiative 1366.
