Washington State activist Tim Eyman could celebrate election night. Several of his sponsored anti-red-light-camera initiatives won — in Bellingham and Longview and Monroe.
But his statewide initiative seems to be going down.
Eyman has become obsessed with transportation issues, and he’s receiving the usual push-back from insiders and editorialists. The Seattle Times proclaimed his I‑1125 “anachronistic,” saying that Eyman
may have something to say about the scope of government. His anti-tax proposals fare well. But voters do not think much of his ideas for moving — or, more precisely, not moving — people around a busy metropolitan region.
A tad disingenuous. Washington’s voters received a barrage of advertising against the measure, but the campaign tended to ignore the measure’s main point, its attempt to strengthen the feedback systems of paying for (and developing) road projects. I‑1125 would have kept politicians’ hands out of the road till, forcing them to leave money in road funds put there by fuel taxes and tolls and such.
Despite the negative campaign, on election night the measure was losing so narrowly that many deemed it “too close to call.”
Contrast this with the common anti-initiative complaint, that voting for them is driven by well-funded campaigns that overpower citizens’ reason. Well, Eyman’s initiative campaigns carry mainly on the written measures themselves: His group spends nothing on paid advertising, while his opponents splurge millions.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.