(The Center Square) – For the first time since The Center Square obtained exclusive documents revealing how Democratic supporters of Washington’s new income tax worked behind the scenes with the Washington Attorney General’s Office to design legislation that would serve as a legal test case, the chief architect of the bill spoke with TCS.
Sen. Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, attended a Monday swearing in ceremony in for Washington’s newest state Supreme Court justice, Theo Angelis, at the Temple of Justice in Olympia.
After the swearing in ceremony, Sen. Pedersen responded to questions from The Center Square about the documents obtained and the flood of business owners and wealthy individuals making plans to leave the state since passage of the income tax in late March.
The nearly one thousand pages obtained by TCS showed internal emails, mostly between Sen. Pedersen and the office of Attorney General Mike Brown discussing how to craft the bill as a challenge to the 1933 Culliton decision, which made progressive income taxes illegal under the state constitution’s uniformity clause.
“I would like to force the Washington Supreme Court to reconsider its caselaw that considers income to be property,” Pedersen, who sponsored SB 6346, wrote in an email on Aug. 27.
The records also reveal discussions regarding the use of a “necessity clause.” This clause was intended to implement the tax immediately and bypass the public’s ability to challenge it via a referendum.
Pedersen told The Center Square on Monday there was nothing out of the ordinary with his consulting Brown’s office as the legislation was being crafted.
“It is absolutely normal for legislators to consult with the attorney general’s office on bills,” Pederson said.
“I think citizens would want their legislators to consult lawyers before they draft laws, right? That’s a completely normal thing.”
However, the state legislature does not typically rely on the executive branch’s legal arm for routine bill drafting. The legislative branch maintains its own extensive, nonpartisan legal staff specifically tasked with researching, writing, and analyzing potential laws.
Through agencies like the Office of the Code Reviser, as well as staff attorneys embedded within Senate Committee Services and the House Office of Program Research, lawmakers have year-round access to independent legal counsel.
These internal attorneys are utilized precisely to maintain the constitutional separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches.
Critics note that while the attorney general’s office frequently defends state laws after they are enacted, it is highly unusual for executive branch lawyers to act as a co-architect in crafting a bill’s initial strategy, particularly when aimed at bypassing potential voter referendums or navigating specific judicial precedents.
TCS asked the senate majority leader about emails from Solicitor General Noah Purcell suggesting that an emergency clause be added to the bill to prevent the possibility of a referendum from voters.
Pedersen said, with or without the “necessity clause” which was ultimately attached to the bill, a referendum was not going to happen.
“The court has now said, what we said all along, which is the referendum power does not apply to tax measures, period. It doesn’t matter whether we put language in there or not,” Pedersen said.
“The point that Noah Purcell was making to me was that it becomes easier for the Secretary of State if the legislature has made that explicit,” he added.
“It is, of course, subject to initiative, and that’s what will happen now,” he continued.
“But it is not subject to referendum. It doesn’t matter whether we put that language in there. The only reason that that’s important is because it signals to the Secretary of State what they should do.”
As reported by The Center Square, Let’s Go Washington filed for a referendum campaign to repeal the income tax with Secretary of State Steve Hobbs, but Hobbs denied the request, citing the fact a “necessity clause” was attached to the bill.
LGW appealed to the State Supreme Court but lost that attempt. The group is now working to gather up to 400,000 signatures for an income tax repeal initiative that they hope to get qualified in time for the fall 2026 ballot.
As reported by The Center Square, former WA Attorney General Rob McKenna is concerned about lawmakers increasing reliance of attaching an emergency or necessity clause to bills they don’t want the public to have a voice on.
“It is systematically undermining the checks and balances which our voters built into the Constitution. It was the voters who said, ‘we want the power of initiative, and we want the power of referendum,’” McKenna said. “This is a great concern. It is undermining the various systems that our voters put in place many years ago.”
TCS asked Pedersen for comment on the fact many business executives and wealthy Washingtonians have publicly stated they are making plans to leave the state because of crushing tax and regulatory policies.
“Well, time will tell,” said Pedersen.
