Time to add to the nearly two-dozen supermajority requirements currently in the state constitution

While the vote on the proposed 2/3 for taxes constitutional amendment (SJR 8205) remains in question, should it be approved, the new supermajority requirement would be joining the nearly two dozen currently in the state constitution. The most recent supermajority requirement was added to the constitution by lawmakers and voters in 2007 with the passage of SJR 8206 (Budget Stabilization Account). That measure requires a 3/5 vote of lawmakers to access funds from the Budget Stabilization Account with few exceptions.

Here are some of the other supermajority requirements already in the state constitution:

• Article 2, Section 1: Two-thirds vote of the legislature required to amend a voter-passed initiative within two years of the initiative’s enactment.

• Article 2, Section 9: Two-thirds vote of the House or Senate required to expel a member.

• Article 2, Section 12: Two-thirds vote of the legislature required to convene a special session.

• Article 2, Section 12: In the same section, a two-thirds vote of the legislature required to consider additional issues during a special session.

• Article 2, Section 24: A 60% vote of the legislature or a 60% vote of the people required to approve a lottery.

• Article 2, Section 36: Two-thirds vote of the legislature required to consider a newly introduced bill within ten days of final adjournment.

• Article 2, Section 43: Two-thirds vote of the legislature required to amend a redistricting plan.

• Article 2, Section 43: In the same section, a two-thirds vote of the legislature required to reconvene a redistricting commission.

• Article 3, Section 12: Two-thirds vote of the legislature required to override a governor’s veto.

• Article 4, Section 9: Three-fourths vote of the legislature required to remove a judge, attorney general or prosecuting attorney from office.

• Article 5, Section 1: Two-thirds vote of the Senate required to convict a state elected official after impeachment.

• Article 7, Section 2: Three-fifths vote of the people required to approve a local tax levy (except for school levies).

• Article 7, Section 12: Three-fifths vote of the legislature required to access funds in budget stabilization account (with few exceptions).

• Article 8, Section 1: Three-fifths vote of the legislature required to incur state debt.

• Article 8, Section 6: Three-fifths vote of the people required to incur local district debt in excess of 1.5% of the local property tax base.

• Article 11, Section 2: Three-fifths vote of the people required to relocate a county seat.

• Article 11, Section 16: Three-fifths vote of the people required to incur city or county debt in excess of 1.5% of the property tax base.

• Article 14, Section 2: Two-thirds vote of the people required to relocate the state capitol.

• Article 23, Section 1: Two-thirds vote of the legislature required to propose amendments to the state constitution to the people.

• Article 23, Section 2: Two-thirds vote of the legislature required to propose convening a state constitutional convention to the people.

• Article 28, Section 1: Two-thirds vote of the legislature required to change the membership of the independent state salary commission.
  
  
• Article 32, Section 1: Three-fifths vote of the legislature required to expand the definition of an industrial development project once bonds have been issued.

Based on the number of supermajority requirements already in Washington's Constitution, it is clear they have been placed there to require a high vote threshold for certain actions. These restrictions appear to be policy choices. One could argue that requiring a supermajority vote to change the rules of the game on tax exposure is no more undemocratic than those restrictions currently in the Constitution.

Providing the voters the opportunity to consider a constitutional supermajority requirement to raise tax would not be embracing undemocratic principles. It would simply be following the existing constitutional precedents for requiring higher vote thresholds before the government takes certain actions.