In the height of Judicial arrogance and liberal elitism the Supreme Court of the State of Washington, in a 5-4 majority decision, on November 8, 2007 called 58% of the voters in Washington State (all those that voted for Initiative 747 in 2001) illiterate and stupid; deciding that we couldn't have possibly understood what we were voting for when we voted to limit property tax increases. I guess it is their assumption that only stupid people who can't read or comprehend what they are reading would vote to limit their taxes. Only a complete imbecile wants to limit the amount of taxes they pay. Intelligent people on the other hand intuitively know that it is better for the government to decide how their hard earned money is spent. Please call me stupid and by me a dunce cap as I was part of that 58%. I will honor the label and wear the hat proudly.
This points out one of the huge flaws in how someone becomes a Supreme Court Judge or for that matter any judge in this state. The first problem is most of the time judges on the court leave before their terms are complete. This allows the Governor, almost always a liberal democrat in this state, to appoint someone. Therefore in the next election they have an advantage as they can run as an incumbent claiming more judicial experience. Second many times judges run unopposed so we as voters really have no chance to change things. Third it is next to impossible for the average voter to figure out what someone running for the court really stands for. Ethically judges are not supposed to say in advance how they would rule in certain types of cases leaving the citizens of the state completely in the dark as to who best supports their basic philosophy of government and law.
I'm going to give you a little information so that you might be able to make a more informed decision as the judges on this court come up for re-election.
First off two of the nine judges on the court had to recuse themselves from this case as they had previous involvement with the measure. Justice James M. Johnson had to recluse himself as he was involved in the drafting of the initiative prior to becoming Supreme Court Justice. (I assume he would have voted with the minority to uphold the initiative as the voters approved it.) Justice Mary E. Fairhurst recused herself as she had worked for the State Attorney Generals office trying to get the courts to overturn the measure. (I assume she would have voted with the majority calling the voters stupid.) Due to their recusals two state appeals court judges moved up to vote on this case. Those Judge Pro tems. were: Stephen M. Brown and Teresa C. Kulik. They both voted with the majority that called the voters incompetent.
The regular Justices that voted to overturn the passage of the Initiative were: Bobbe J. Bridge (who wrote the majority decision), Susan Owens, and Barbara A. Madsen. I really enjoy the label of stupid, but these three Justices along with the two temporary Justices that said I am illiterate and can't interpret the English Language will never receive my vote for Dog Catcher let alone Supreme Court Judge.
The four Justices who voted to uphold the passage of Initiative 747 will have my vote unless they do something egregious in the mean time. They are: The Honorable Justice Charles W. Johnson (author of the dissent opinion and defender of the voters of this state), The Honorable Justice Gerry L. Alexander, The Honorable Justice Richard B. Sanders, and The Honorable Justice Tom Chambers. The honorable members of the court who understand who they work for and respect our intelligence, our rights, and our votes deserve our support and thanks.
This is LostinLiberalLand signing off from the Peoples Republic of The State of Washington.