Olympia lawmaking is about to go virtual. Participants see both minefields and silver linings
During the 2021 session, Olympia’s Capitol Campus that comes alive each January will, under current plans, remain largely dormant.
Legislative buildings will stay closed to the public, with COVID-19 transmission prevention in mind. Much of the typical activity and conversation will move online.
Not everyone supports that vision. Republican leaders believe more access could be preserved safely. And groups have stated plans to enter and occupy the state Legislative Building during session, claiming that keeping the Capitol closed to the public is unconstitutional, COVID-19 or not.
What will the unfamiliar terrain mean for transparency and access to government during the 105-day session? Access advocates, legislators, lobbyists, and an experienced government reporter forecast a minefield of obstacles and a few glimmering silver linings.
Leading legislators prepare their caucuses
The Senate Facility and Operations (F&O) Committee and the House Executive Rules Committee have each approved plans — along party lines — that may evolve and are contingent on adoption by each chamber on the first day of session.
On the first day, Jan. 11, in-person quorums of 25 members in the Senate and 50 in the House will be required to vote on rules, the plans say.
Committee meetings will be held via Zoom. In the Senate, the F&O Committee will decide ahead of session just how many members and staff can return to the floor, rostrum, and wings based on state health department guidance and COVID-19 rates. In the House, just presiding officers, the minority leader, and caucus floor leaders will be allowed on the floor.
Other lawmakers will vote remotely and participate via video conference.
With those plans and the technology involved in mind, each caucus is preparing for a session that’s less efficient.
Lawmakers have said they aim to be more intentional in connecting with staff who work on policy. Staffers don’t complain, they say, and it’ll be more difficult to gauge workloads.
Democratic leaders in each chamber have stated a handful of major priorities, including COVID-19 response, economic recovery, passing a two-year balanced budget, racial equity, and climate change.
“There’s not doubt that it’ll be different than any session we’ve ever had before,” said Speaker of the House Rep. Laurie Jinkins, D-Tacoma.
House members in her caucus have been asked to limit themselves to seven bills or fewer this session, Northwest News Network first reported. And chairs of committees have been asked to limit public hearings and how many bills they let through.
Jinkins said her highest priorities are “doing the people’s work” safely and transparently as possible.
“I think things will be slower, for sure,” Jinkins said. But, she hopes they’ll move more smoothly over time.
Unlike in other sessions, “the universe has given us our priorities” and a filter, Majority Floor Leader Sen. Marko Liias, D-Lynnwood, said in a phone interview.
Caucus leadership will vet bills through the filter of priorities and work with chairs to limit how many bills make it out of committees. Leadership has told members they expect at least a 25-30% reduction in the volume of bills that can be processed, Liias said.
But senate Democrats haven’t been asked to limit themselves to a specific number of bills — the House has 98 members, the Senate has 49.
House Minority Leader J.T. Wilcox, R-Yelm, told McClatchy he’ll ask members to work with staff and to be as considerate as possible, but that’s about the extent of the guidance he’ll provide his caucus.
He knows not many Republican bills will pass in a body that’s majority Democrat, so participation for those lawmakers means bills, speeches, and sometimes amendments.
The majority is trying to implement its agenda efficiently, he said, and people elected Republicans with a different agenda in mind.
“I would not deserve my job if I agreed to diminish the rights of the minority,” Wilcox said, “...for the sake of implementing the majority’s agenda.”
He appreciated the amount of discussion that went into the House’s plan and that Democrats listened, he said, though he would’ve preferred more flexibility, which he sees as possible under rules in Thurston County.
“I think it’s important we keep an open mind,” he said, to ensure that if COVID-19 conditions get better, the rules can be less restrictive.
Senate Minority Leader John Braun, R-Centralia, said he’s asked top Republicans on committees to focus members on three bills per committee. Historically, the minority has offered fewer bills anyway and accounts for a fraction of bills passed, he said.
He thinks more access could be offered safely, such as keeping the Legislative Building open to the public — he questions why it would be treated differently than a big box store. He’d also in favor of allowing people to testify on campus even with committees meeting virtually.
For most observers, access will still mean TVW
Whether a largely virtual session is good or bad for access to government may depend on the circumstances of who’s trying to reach their legislator, says Toby Nixon of the Washington Coalition for Open Government (WCOG).
“Personally, I think it has positives and negatives,” he told McClatchy. Besides serving on WCOG’s board for 15 years and as its president for nearly as long, Nixon is a Kirkland City Council member and former state legislator.
While he thinks the arrangement is likely bad for lobbyists, who “trade on access,” he thinks it’s an opportunity for the Legislature to show they’re welcoming more public input.
“I wish them a lot of luck and success at this,” Nixon said.
Session observation will stay the same for much of Washington: Residents can view documents online and watch whatever interests them via TVW. As usual, the public affairs network will air some events on TV and stream, then archive committee meetings and floor activity online.
Over the interim, the network saw a dramatic uptick in traffic for the governor’s press conferences, President and CEO Renee Radcliff Sinclair told McClatchy. This prompted some equipment, bandwidth, and storage upgrades already.
“We’ve had to pretty much change our whole way of doing business,” Anthony Arenas, TVW Operations Supervisor, said.
The stakes are higher, Radcliff Sinclair acknowledged, with TVW now the sole method for so many to keep an eye on government.
TVW has the capacity to manage 15 events at once, she said. Its technical team has been working with the Legislature to figure out a system that efficiently airs Zoom calls.
It’s taken some new hardware and strategy, she said — and it’s worked so far. Of course, equipment can fail. But she said TVW is prepared to handle whatever arises.
It could be a win for those weighing in
Jason Mercier has been pushing for remote testimony at the Washington Capitol since he testified in Nevada via video in 2013. He’s director of the Center for Government Reform at Washington Policy Center, a conservative-leaning think tank based in the Tri-Cities.
The option has garnered interest, Mercier said. But concerns over technology, in part, slowed progress.
Initially, community college networks were used to provide remote testimony at fixed locations. It became an option for chairs in the Senate to offer it. A bipartisan effort in the House helped launch a trial process there.
This year, members of the public can testify by video or written testimony from wherever they may be. Links to instructions on how to do both will be available online, according to Jill Reinmuth, Staff Director for the Office of Program Research in the House.
In the past, written testimony was relatively rare, according to Reinmuth. This year, written testimony submitted through a new portal online will be part of the “official bill file” and accessible to committee members and others, she wrote in an email to McClatchy.
“We anticipate a significant increase in written testimony as a result,” Reinmuth wrote.
There’s general agreement that offering remote testimony is a net gain for the average constituent. In the past, most people have had to make long trips to Olympia to try to get in to see their legislator, WCOG’s Nixon said. They may drive hours, only to find the bill they care about was dropped from an agenda while they were on the road.
Storms sometimes close mountain passes. Many people can’t afford to take time off work.
“And so, I think the most positive thing about it will be a significant increase in opportunities for remote testimony,” Nixon said of the 2021 session.
Legislators mostly agree.
Majority Leader Sen. Andy Billig, D-Spokane, said it’s not only an opportunity for constituents like his, who live in eastern Washington, to participate without traveling. It increases access for people with disabilities or who don’t have access to child care or transportation.
“One of the few bright sides of the remote session is the increased access for citizens to participate in the legislative process,” Billig said, later referring to it as “a great equalizer.”
Rep. Alex Ybarra, R-Quincy, agrees remote testimony makes testifying more accessible, but it’s no panacea. For example, farm workers with a stake in issues important to Ybarra’s area are out in the field during the day when committee hearings are held.
There are constituents who may not have access to a computer or the knowledge to access Zoom, he said, but remote testimony increases opportunity.
Senate Minority Leader Braun said that, with the potential for more people to sign up to testify remotely, he’s concerned it may actually get harder for people to get a word in.
“The idea that it’s better isn’t obvious to me,” he said in a phone interview. He’s also concerned about the remote format’s impact while discussing “controversial” issues.
Minority Leader Wilcox said with a low barrier to participation, more people might get involved, but it may be difficult to gauge intensity of interest.
It’s not clear what form events such as the annual Washington State March for Life could take. Or what a showing like the 2019 effort by hairdressers and barbers opposing a proposed tax change might look like on a virtual stage.
The Washington Coalition for Police Accountability formed this year out of a legacy created by De-Escalate Washington, which supported Initiative 940. It’s made up of people who have lost loved ones to police violence, among others.
The group was working on implementation of I-940, which changed the state’s law on police use of deadly force, and pivoted to legislation after police killed George Floyd in Minneapolis and the details of Manuel Ellis’ death in Tacoma started coming to light.
Preparations for the 2021 session have felt familiar, member Leslie Cushman said, but the face-the-face discussions and last-minute work will surely feel different.
The group’s been meeting with legislators since June, according to Cushman, including discussions around a bill filed by Rep. Jesse Johnson, D-Federal Way, that would in part ban law enforcement officers from using chokeholds or neck restraints.
In a typical session, the group may jam hearing rooms, cover the Capitol steps with signs, carry cardboard caskets down the street.
Some of that still may happen, Cushman said. The steps still exist, and press conferences can be held over Zoom. People will still sign up in support of bills online.
Social media, already a major piece of the work, will be even more important.
‘What’s completely lost is spontaneity’
Structure is innate in the remote environment: It often boils down to “Can I get on your calendar?” It’s nearly devoid of chance meet-ups, impromptu conversation. Hardware and software are perpetual barriers and tools.
“What’s completely lost is spontaneity,” lobbyist Bob Cooper told McClatchy.
Cooper has been lobbying for over two decades. He represents the Washington Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, the state Association of Drug Courts, and the National Association of Social Workers.
In a typical session, he’d meet with legislators, sit in hearings, network with other lobbyists, run into people at the dome deli.
“It’s a lot of conversations, and a lot of them are spontaneous,” Cooper said.
Carrie Tellefson, also a long-time lobbyist, said virtual meetings have worked well outside of session. She’s met with more people than ever this interim. But in a typical session, the most effective communication happens in hallways.
Tellefson is a lawyer and worked in state government for well over a decade before becoming a lobbyist. She founded Sound Government Solutions, whose clients include Ford Motor Company and the Puyallup Tribe of Indians.
“What makes session really work, I feel like, is the fluidity that comes from having everyone in the same place at the same time,” she said.
Good legislation is made by having lobbyists on all sides of an issue work with legislators to “explore unintended consequences of language,” Tellefson said.
What would normally take a quick trip down a hallway and a 30-second conversation now has to be scheduled.
“I think that’s a loss on both sides,” Cooper said.
Operating in a two-dimensional world, Tellefson said a main concern for her is that new legislation may be the same way, without the depth and nuance that will be harder to bring out.
Lawmakers also expressed concern about fewer unplanned side conversations with constituents, lobbyists, and fellow lawmakers.
“Really good politics is a lot more human than it is partisan, you know,” House Minority Leader Wilcox said. “It’s a lot more human than it is mechanistic.”
Rep. Ybarra said lobbyists often will walk with him and talk between obligations. If he has a break, he might seek someone out for input. He also walks over to raise issues with members from the other side of the aisle.
When Tellefson was working for a state agency, she remembers scratching out the details of a compromise at midnight in the basement of the Legislative Building with a group of lobbyists. It was a down-to-the-wire moment for a controversial bill.
“That kind of thing — I’m not sure how that’s going to work,” she said.
There are positives: Both Cooper and Tellefson don’t have to drive to Olympia or rent an apartment. And there could be valuable pieces of the virtual environment, like remote testimony, to carry into future sessions.
“I think for one session, like everything else, we’ll get through this,” Cooper said. “It won’t be pretty, but staff is working diligently to try to make this happen.”
Long-distance watchdogs
Credentialed members of the press can usually sit at tables on the floor of the House and Senate chambers. Under current plans, a limited number of reporters can watch from above, in galleries that usually hold members of the public.
Paul Queary, who has had a keen eye on Washington state government for nearly two decades, predicts this session will change the way reporters do their work and could make it harder to hold legislators to account.
He has covered legislatures in Oregon, Oklahoma, and Alaska, as well as Washington. He was in Olympia as a correspondent from 2001 to 2004, then was Associated Press bureau chief in Seattle, supervising coverage in Olympia through 2011. After that, he worked for public affairs consultancy Strategies 360 and recently launched the newsletter Washington Observer.
Much of his reporting came from personal relationships forged via human contact at the Capitol.
Two sessions he covered were held in makeshift circumstances while the Legislative Building was renovated following the 2001 Nisqually earthquake. Lawmakers met in settings that were tighter, without as much space in the wings or lobbies, he said.
“I remember thinking at the time that cramped circumstances were kind of a hindrance to covering the Legislature,” he said in a video interview, because it was harder to pull people aside and see some of what was going on.
One aspect that may be lost for reporters this session, he predicts, are opportunities to talk to people who don’t want to talk. While calls can be ignored or missed during a busy time, it’s harder for people to be rude in person, he said.
Journalists should watch for ways legislators may use the environment to their advantage, he said — to ram through legislation or block it by simple delay.
An example: If the Legislature wants to do something unpopular or that will play poorly in the press, he said, they might minimize the process that happens — such as in 2018 when lawmakers introduced and passed a bill in roughly 48 hours exempting the Legislature from the Public Records Act.
“The prospect that there would be more of that seems like the danger here,” Queary said.
It also may be more difficult to track amendments or last-minute changes in real time, which could in turn make it tough to inform people what’s going on in time for them to engage meaningfully.
But, a silver lining in this, he said, could be an opportunity to look past pomp-and-circumstance and posturing that can be “shadow puppetry of what’s actually going on.”
“Maybe this will help us, as reporters, focus more on what’s actually going on as opposed to, you know, what the theater of the day is,” he said.
This story was originally published January 3, 2021 at 5:45 AM with the headline "Olympia lawmaking is about to go virtual. Participants see both minefields and silver linings."
.jpg)