Justice at last for those wrongfully convicted

The third time was the charm for Rep. Tina Orwall’s measure to compensate the wrongfully convicted in our state now that the Senate passed HB 1341 unanimously this evening. 

It’s been a long and winding road for this legislation. When Orwall first introduced it in 2011, it didn’t even get a hearing. The 2012 attempt was passed out of Judiciary, but was not scheduled for a hearing in Ways and Means. This time around, however, after numerous hurdles and some tweaking in the Senate, it’ll be on its way to Gov. Inslee’s desk as soon as the House agrees to the changes, which modified the bill to allow structured settlement awards and establishes that claimants must waive any other compensation under state or federal law. 

Orwall’s measure will provide a wrongfully convicted person with:

• $50,000 for each year behind bars
• Additional $50,000 for each year on death row
• $25,000 for each year on parole, community custody or as a registered sex offender
• Compensation for child support
• Reimbursement for restitution, assessments fees and court costs associated with the wrongful conviction
• Attorneys’ fees up to $75,000
• Higher education tuition waivers
• Access to reentry services

 Read this story in Spanish.

“Sorry” just doesn’t cut it

Can you imagine getting charged with a horrible crime and spending almost two decades locked-up in prison until you're proven innocent thanks to DNA testing?

And what do you get once you're set free? Nothing. An apology, maybe.

Last Friday, the House Appropriations Committe passed a bill by State Rep. Tina Orwall that would bring justice to those wrongly convicted.

Read the full press release here.

Watch Rep. Orwall talk about House Bill 1341 in her latest video update:

You can also check out some of the media coverage on this issue:

• Associated Press: Bill seeks compensation for wrongful convictions
• KOMO News: Exonerated convicts ask Washington to pay up for lost time
• NY Daily News: Man who served 17 years in prison for rape he didn't commit inspires Washington state bill to compensate wrongfully imprisoned $50,000 per year
• Seattle Times: Innocent but locked up for 17 years, man hopes for compensation
• Seattle Weekly: The Innocence Project Tries Again with Wrongly Convicted Compensation Bill

Read this story in Spanish.

What should we do with children who commit horrible crimes?

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that mandatory life terms are unconstitutional when applied to children; children sentenced to prison must be given a real opportunity for release at some point in the future; and courts must individually evaluate each child when imposing a criminal sentence.

Does our state comply with these rulings? If not, what steps should we take?

The answers may be in an opinion piece "Give juvenile offenders a chance at redemption," in this weekend's Everett Herald. It was authored by Rev. Paul Benz, Co-Director of Faith Action Network, Sr. Sharon Park, Executive Director of the Washington State Catholic Conference, and State Rep. Mary Helen Roberts, a Lynnwood Democrat who is sponsoring a measure about juveniles sentenced to long terms of incarceration.

Read this story in Spanish.

House approves Reproductive Parity Act

​“We moved this legislation forward to continue Washington state’s proud history of staying out of people’s personal lives.” –Rep. Dean Takko on the passage of the Reproductive Parity Act

War on women? Not here in Washington.

While state legislatures across the country are turning back the clock on women’s health, House Democrats are moving Washington state forward as a leader in reproductive freedom.

Today, nearly every single insurance plan in Washington covers both maternity services and abortion services. However, the Affordable Care Act could inadvertently limit these reproductive choices by requiring additional administrative red-tape for abortion services.

This change would interfere with a woman’s ability to make the best decisions for her family and her health.

Enter the Reproductive Parity Act—which would require insurance companies to continue their current policy of covering a full range of reproductive choices. Introduced by House Health Care and Wellness Chair Eileen Cody, the bill ensures fairness and protects freedom in a woman’s health care decisions.

This morning a diverse group of lawmakers from across the state spoke in favor of the measure on the House floor.

Rep. Steve Tharinger spoke of growing up in a home with five sisters.

"These are independent, intelligent women," said Rep. Tharinger. "They do not want some bureaucrat in an insurance company, some politician, or even their brother telling them what to do with their health care."

Washington has long led the nation on this important issue. Two years before the U.S. Supreme Court made their landmark decision in Roe v. Wade, Washingtonians approved Referendum 20. R-20 legalized abortion in the early stages of pregnancy.

Then again in 1991, when it looked like Roe could be overturned, voters approved Initiative 120. I-120 protected a women’s right to make a private choice with her doctor in this state- no matter what occurred at the federal level.

When given the opportunity to weigh-in, the voters of this state have always came down on the side of reproductive choice and privacy. By advancing the Reproductive Parity Act, House Democrats are working to ensure that the law in our state reflects this fact.

Read this story in Spanish.

Improving the system for adopted children

Do you remember the horrific story of Hana Williams, an adopted Ethiopian girl living in Sedro-Woolley? A couple of years ago her adoptive parents starved her, abused her, beat her repeatedly and left her outside on a cold night, which ultimately killed her.

What is wrong with the system and how do we fix it to ensure the safety and well-being of adopted children in our state?

Rep. Mary Helen Roberts believes we can do better, so she's sponsoring a bill to do things right before adoptions go through to ensure children are going to safe and caring homes.

Watch the powerful testimony at the bill's hearing in the Judiciary Committee yesterday:

 

Read the press release here.

Read this story in Spanish.

Busy week for high-profile court cases

Three significant court rulings were issued this week – two here in Washington and one at the federal level.

Initiative 1053: Supermajority Tax Requirements
Approved by voters in 2010, the Tim Eyman-sponsored I-1053 imposed a two-thirds supermajority requirement on all legislation that raises taxes. A group of HDC lawmakers joined a coalition in support of a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the measure by stating the initiative violates Article 2, Section 22 of the state constitution.

Passage of bills. No bill shall become a law unless on its final passage the vote be taken by yeas and nays, the names of the members voting for and against the same be entered on the journal of each house, and a majority of the member elected in each house be recorded thereon as voting in its favor.

At issue is whether the majority requirement in this section is merely a minimum requirement or both a minimum and maximum requirement. The coalition successfully argued the latter according to King County Superior Court Judge Bruce Heller. The judge did note, however, that a two-thirds majority threshold to raise taxes could be imposed, but such a change would require an amendment to the state constitution. Constitutional amendments require two-thirds support in both the House and Senate and a simple majority vote of the people.

You can read more about this story here and here. This case will likely be appealed to the state Supreme Court.

Washington State Supreme Court

Liquor Privatization
The state Supreme Court ruled in favor of the voter-approved I-1183 that privatized liquor sales in Washington. Opponents of the initiative argued that it violated the state’s “single subject” rule that requires a legislative bill or public initiative contain only one subject.  (This rule, for example, prevents sponsors from including farm subsidies in an education reform bill.)

The court ruling clears the way for private retailers to begin selling liquor as early as tomorrow, June 1. More on this story can be found here and here.

Same-Sex Marriage
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled today that the federal Defense of Marriage Act, also known as “DOMA,” is unconstitutional. The ruling has been stayed pending a possible ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in a similar case, but is nonetheless a major victory for marriage equality advocates.

Washington lawmakers enacted a state-version of DOMA in 1998. Those provisions have largely been rolled back over the last 14 years. During the 2012 legislative session, bi-partisan majorities in both the House and Senate approved SB 6239 giving full marriage rights and benefits to same-sex partners. The bill was signed by the governor, but will likely be on the ballot in November as a referendum to the voters.

You can read the courts’ decisions here:
I-1053 tax decision
I-1183 liquor decision
DOMA decision

To read this story in Spanish, click here.

Legislators reflect on what MLK Day means to them

Always a significant and somber day of reflection at the Capital, legislators on the House Floor marked MLK Day by passing a resolution honoring the civil rights leader, and celebrating his legacy.

Rep. Bob Hasegawa, who represents the 11th LD, spoke to us about the struggles still ahead in reaching true equality for all:

"Kids in elementary school today are learning
about Martin Luther King, Jr., his life and struggle are in books all over the world. When I was that age we didn’t have an African American hero anywhere in the school curriculum. We’ve certainly come a long way even though it really hasn’t been that long. Some folks take for granted the lessons of the Civil Rights movement and see it as a done deal, but I believe there’s a lot of work still to be done. Equality and justice have not yet reached everybody. Race and poverty are still intertwined; that’s an undeniable reality. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a fighter who never gave up. Let us honor his memory emulating his example; let’s continue fighting relentlessly to make sure his dream is not forgotten or left to collect dust in the pages of a book."

Rep. Phyllis Gutiérrez-Kenney from Seattle also reflects on the victories, and victories yet to be won:

"As we celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. today, may his life serve as a reminder to all of us that we must continue fighting oppression, intolerance and violence to become a nation whose citizens truly care for each other. Let our commitment to his ideals of equality, justice and freedom not falter. We cannot afford to become complacent. Whether one is African American, Latino, White, Asian, or other, it is important to build on Dr. King’s dream by working together. The fact that tomorrow is the inauguration of our first African American president is yet another piece of evidence that Dr. King’s struggle was not in vain. We still have a ways to go in order to reach his dream but I am hopeful that together we will get there."

When asked what the work of Martin Luther King Jr. meant to them, Rep. Flannigan from Tacoma had this to say:

"It was Dr. King and those who inspired him and were inspired by him that expanded the American heart to include all colors in America’s rainbow. President Obama is Dr. King's legacy. Wow."

And Rep. Larry Springer from Kirkland:

"Dr. King inspired a nation to recognize and listen to the better angels present in us all, which even today continues to change the face of America."

Watch the entire day's floor action, including the resolution commemorating Martin Luther King Jr. here.