So said King County Councilmember Bob Ferguson at last night's meeting of Washington Citizens for Fair Elections . Ferguson is convinced that if the proposal for an elected Auditor is placed on the ballot this November, it will pass. Ron Sims and the other Council Democrats are also apparently convinced that the measure will pass. And that is exactly why they are working so hard not to put the measure on the ballot this November.

Although Democrat Ferguson joined the Republicans to put the proposal on the November 2006 ballot, he's now wavering and thinking of postponing the vote until 2009. Ferguson claims that the "new information" which is causing him to back down on the timing is the fact that Ron Sims claims he has a candidate who might be close to accepting Dean Logan's old job. Ferguson said he met the candidate the other day and that he is a serious applicant for the position, but that he is unwilling to take the job if the proposal is on the ballot. I told Ferguson that even under the generous assumption that the applicant is best possible person for the job, the opportunity cost of putting the proposal on the ballot would be low. After all, the proposal might be defeated and the applicant would only have to delay his most optimistic start date by a few weeks. That was the point at which Ferguson immediately shot back "If it's on the ballot in November it will pass". (I don't know if Ferguson has seen actual poll numbers, of if he's merely relying on his formidable instincts, but the fact is that he and his colleagues believe this is and are operating on the basis of that belief).

So... what is wrong with this picture? The voters of King County want to make the Auditor position an elected office this year, but some unknown man from another state who wants to run our elections office and who may or may not even accept the job or be approved by the Council, will take the job only if the voters aren't allowed to approve him. He will agree to take the job only if he can do it the way the voters of King County don't want the job done. He is therefore inherently unfit in the minds of the majority who want to elect our Auditor. He does not deserve to get the job. If he does take the job, he would be coming in opposed by a large numbers of voters. And thus he would only be setting himself up for unprecedented scrutiny, controversy and failure. Ron Sims and the Courthouse Democrats should understand this, but their only interest is maintaining control of the elections office for short term advantage. The actual appointees are expendable. I pity the new guy who is being set up for failure (and who probably isn't getting the whole story from the limited number of people he's been allowed to speak to), but there is a win-win way out of this.

Ron Sims, the Council Democrats and the applicant all go public as being in favor of an elected Auditor and the November 2006 ballot measure. (To save face, this newly public applicant can plausibly deny he had ever refused to go before the voters). The Democrats can give the voters the opportunity to vote on the measure, but can also make the argument that it is unnecessary to pass, because they've just hired the most qualified person to run the elections office. If the measure is defeated, then Ron Sims has the satisfaction of prevailing in yet another county-wide election. If the measure passes, then Ron Sims' hand-picked elections director has the advantage of incumbency and is the favored candidate to win election by the voters in 2007. Meanwhile (and to my regret, but to the Democrats' satisfaction) the forced mail voting scheme can be implemented ASAP.

I can't imagine how Ron Sims and the Democrats could reasonably reject this scenario. The people get our elected Auditor, but the Democrats have an advantaged nominee. The only reason the Democrats would rationally reject this scenario and decline to put the proposal on the November ballot is if they're convinced that Sims' hand-picked elections director is not someone whom the voters would approve (call this the Deanron2 scenario)

While the Democrats are currently moving forward under the Deanron2 scenario, they can quickly change direction if it's to their advantage. In the meantime, those of us who want an elected Auditor should move forward under the assumption that we're facing Deanron2. That would entail both doing what it takes to torpedo the unqualified, anti-voter Deanron2, and also to bypass the Council and file an initiative to put the question on the ballot as soon as possible.

(If anybody has the inside scoop on who Deanron2 is, let me know and we'll start looking into him).