Capitol Chat transcript: Sue Evans for Approve 67 and Dana Childers for Reject 67 on Referendum 67

The Olympian | • Published October 10, 2007

Moderator: Welcome to The Olympian's Capitol Chat. I'm your moderator, political editor Brad Shannon. Our guests today are Sue Evans, spokeswoman for Approve 67, who is participating via phone, and Dana Childers, spokeswoman for the Reject 67 campaigns, who is here in person. Thank you both for joining us.

Moderator: Could both of you start by telling us a little bit about yourselves and your background?

Evans: I'm a media relations consultant for a Seattle firm ... I've worked on legal issues with the Trial Lawyers Association for a long time. Prior to that I worked in Olympia for two different state lawmakers.

Childers: I'm executive director for the state's liability reform coalition. We're a group of organizations -- everybody from health care providers to small businesses to government entities and non-profits -- everybody who cares about the expansion of the liability system.

Rich, Lampe: Who initiated this Referendum 67? Who are the major financial supporters of your cause? What financial fact in the state of Washington do you have to support you cause?

Childers: R-67 started out in the Legislature. It was a bill written by trial lawyers and passed by trial lawyers. Immediately following the Governor's signature, the business community put R-67 to a vote of the people, and that's what ended up on the November 6 ballot. Who is funding this? On the Reject R-67 side, it's funded largely by the insurance community. The approve R-67 side is funded largely by the trial lawyers. The Reject R-67 campaign knows that the referendum will increase the cost of insurance by about $650 million. We don't base this on anecdote or are just saying it. There is an independent, actuarial study done on R-67 by a company called Milliman who is such a nationally respected actuarial firm that the insurance commissioner and the state Legislature has hired as well. And it is Milliman who said this could increase costs by $650 million a year, or about $205 for the average household.