Time to restructure statewide elected policy offices

Just in time for the 2008 Primary we've released a report recommending a change in the number of statewide elected policy offices.

On August 19, 2008, Washingtonians will vote in the state’s first top-two primary election. Not counting local races, voters will be asked to decide which candidates will advance to the November ballot for nine separate statewide offices. These offices are:

            1.  Governor;
            2.  Lieutenant Governor;
            3.  Secretary of State;
            4.  Treasurer;
            5.  State Auditor;
            6.  Attorney General;
            7.  Superintendent of Public Instruction;
            8.  Commissioner of Public Lands and;
            9.  Insurance Commissioner.

Other than the nine elected positions, all other senior officials in the executive branch are appointed by the governor. They make up the governor’s cabinet and include many key positions, many as important as some elected offices.

The Secretary of State, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Commissioner of Public Lands and Insurance Commissioner are policy offices, much like those currently in the governor’s appointed cabinet. Direct election of these offices does not necessarily create greater public accountability, because most Washingtonians don’t know the names of these officials.

The Treasurer, Auditor and Attorney General, however, carry out an oversight role, working to ensure government agencies are following the law. It is because of this distinction that independent election of these offices makes sense.

As “watchdog officials,” it makes sense for the Treasurer, Auditor and Attorney General (if provided enforcement power) to function as nonpartisan offices as is the case for State Supreme Court Justices. In fact, bills have been introduced over the past few years at the request of the State Treasurer to make that office subject to nonpartisan elections.

According to State Auditor Brian Sonntag: “Citizens certainly don’t expect partisanship in an office like this. The work of the State Auditor is about government accountability and transparency, not politics. Our audits are – and should be – independent and fair without even a hint of bias.”

With fewer statewide elected offices, voters would choose the five highest state officials in four elections, as follows:

            1.  Governor and Lieutenant Governor
            2.  Attorney General
            3.  State Treasurer
            4.  State Auditor

If problems arise with public education, insurance regulation, or management of public lands, voters would know that the solution lies with the governor, who could change the top managers of these policy areas at any time. If the governor fails to use his or her appointment powers to improve the management of these departments, voters could take that failure into account at election time.

Reducing the number of statewide elected offices would shorten the length of the ballot and more importantly, focus public accountability in a way that people can understand and remember. This would increase accountability both during a governor’s term and in election years when voters are assessing candidates for the state’s top offices.

Click here to read our full report.

Comments

[Todd W.]

I love the idea... Having those positions being appointed by the Governor, would allow for better continuity in the state government.

[Josef]

I find the efficiency enticing, but remember how King County Executive Sims couldn't bring himself to fire a clearly incompetent and undereducated elections director in Dean C. Logan until the pressure kept going and going and going for a year and a half after 2004 to chase "Governor Dean" Logan out? Do we want this again?!?

Sorry, but unlike with appointed department directors, there is a recall law in this state. Sadly, judges have to sign off on it but in some cases they do. Frankly, I would simply require that you can recall a politician for any reason provided you get 5% of the voters in that election within four months except in say the last 6-9 months before the next election because in that event, it would just be a waste of time and resources. Having strong recall laws would make politicians more accountable to the people. Especially when a mere $5-15 Million would have saved us from a $2.7 Billion deficit... but I digress.