Helen Sommers: An Oral History

pg. 52 Déjà Vu! – House 49-49 tie again
in the 1990s, I believe the two parties did not get
along very well. The atmosphere in Olympia – and
in politics nationwide for that matter – has changed.
The 1998 session seemed to be one of the most
contentious sessions, I would say. There were deep
divisions in philosophy and policy in many areas.
Transportation funding was an area of serious difficulty.
The Puget Sound area is one of the worst in
the country for traffic gridlock. Governor Locke
had proposed a plan to deal with serious traffic
gridlock with a gradual Gas-Tax increase. But,
Republican leadership in both chambers refused
to support any increase!
Then matters got even worse in 2000, when the
state lost $1.1 billion in car tab revenues with the
approval of Initiative 695, the $30 license plate
tab. That initiative produced a loss of more than
one-third of all taxes dedicated to transportation,
plus big cuts in revenue for local government. It
was almost an impossible situation.
Monahan: During the three years of the 49-49 tie,
you served as co-chair of the House Appropriations
Committee. Republican Rep . Tom Huff was
your co-chair for the first two years of the tie. He
had been an executive for Sears and represented
the 26th District from Kitsap and Pierce counties.
How did this go?
Representative Sommers: As with the previous tie in
1979-80 and the second tie from 1999-2001, it was
imperative that the Co-Speakers and the co-chairs
get along. My experience working as co-chair of the
Revenue Committee with Republican Rep . Ellen
Craswell in the first tie went pretty well because we
both understood the need to work together.
It was true again in this tie. But, it was more
difficult this time around in part because the philosophical
differences and the lack of camaraderie
between Democrats and Republicans were so much
more difficult this time than in the late – 1970s tie.
Representative Huff and I did work together on
the operating budget. Tom was viewed by many in
our caucus as not very friendly and more difficult
to work with. But as co-chairs, we both realized
that we had to work as a team. And both Huff
and I had to work with our committee members to
stress the need to work together and to get along. I
think it went better than might have been expected,
given the 49-49 tie.
Monahan: With a tie, it looks like neither side really
wins. You just have to negotiate and work together
to reach the best balance.
Representative Sommers: Yes, as I said, sessions
during a ‘tie’ have to function very differently
because each issue had to be decided by both leaders
working together and agreeing on the issue. If
you don’t have the votes, you don’t get what you
want. If there isn’t agreement between the two
caucuses, that’s a veto! In some cases, I would say
it probably led to some good decisions. So, when
that happens, it is a win for everyone. The progress
was slow at the start, but that wasn’t surprising in
a tie. But, many in Huff’s caucus and his members
on the Appropriations Committee were reluctant
to support any legislation that required any tax
increase – period!
At the end of the 2000 session, the 2001-2003 operating
budget was approved when four Republicans
joined all 49 Democrats and voted ‘Yes.’ It had the
approval of the Senate, and was signed into law
by Governor Locke. No one was happy with the
outcome, but our Democratic Caucus got the better
of the deal when the four Republicans joined us to
pass the budget. I believe the Republican Caucus
was not pleased.