1972 public records act naysayers called it "over-enthusiastic," a threat to privacy

Staff writerOctober 25, 2013 

d0002036

(Ron Chapple/ Thinkstock)

RON CHAPPLE — www.jupiterimages.com

Journalists in Washington state basically take the state's Public Records Act for granted. We use it all the time and don't like to think about a time when it wasn't around.

But that dark time did exist -- and it was called 1972.

For a story I'm working on right now, I got to researching the history of the state's open records laws. And I found myself reading a scanned copy of the 1972 voter pamphlet statements for and against Initiative 276, which required public agencies to make their records available for inspection and copying.

Discovery No. 1: There was a thing called a Tacoma Republican back in 1972.

Discovery No. 2: Clearly, not everyone was as happy with the public-records measure as we journalists are today. 

Opponents of Initiative 276 billed it as "well-intentioned but certainly over-enthusiastic legislation." They argued the measure would cost agencies too much money, and would "definitely destroy incentive for anyone to run and serve in low-paying part-time public offices."

"Every office holder and candidate will be subjected to countless hours of useless record-keeping — thousands of hours of wasted time — merely to fill more filing cabinets in Olympia," wrote then-state Sen. Charles E. Newschwander and then-state Rep. James P. Kuehnle, who wrote the statement against the initiative.

Newschwander was a Republican lawmaker from Tacoma (those existed back in the 1970s, unlike today) and Kuehnle was a Republican from the Spokane area.

The two legislators also wrote the initiative "threatens individual privacy" and "tries to cleanse all evils of our political process by limiting campaign expenditures and requiring disclosure of campaign and lobbying expenditures."

I-276 also required political candidates to produce detailed reports of campaign contributions and spending, made lobbyists disclose and itemize their expenditures, and established a state Public Disclosure Commission.

It passed with the support of 72 percent of voters.

Here's the copy of the voter pamphlet statements, as well as the full text of the initiative, uploaded to DocumentCloud. (The against statement is on page two of the document; the pro statement is on page 1.)

Thanks to Toby Nixon of the Washington Coalition for Open Government for sending the file my way.

The Olympian is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service