BY ROBBIE SCHERR
SEATTLE - By a 2 - 2 tie vote, the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission (SEEC) rejected a motion to grant the Socialist Workers 1997 Campaign an exemption from disclosing the names and addresses of its contributors and vendors. Three commissioners of the seven-member body did not attend the October 8 hearing, including its chairman and vice- chairman.

"This is a blatant attack not only on our campaign and supporters, but against the political rights of all working people," said Jeff Powers, treasurer of the Socialist Workers campaign. "We are urging all supporters of civil liberties to protest the SEEC decision, and are preparing the next stage in the fight to win the right to privacy for contributors to the Socialist Workers campaign."

At its October 8 meeting, the SEEC first voted to reconsider their decision of September 22, which denied the campaign's original request to renew its exemption from disclosing names. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) decided the previous week to take up the case and secure legal counsel for the SWP. Julya Hampton, the legal program director of the Seattle ACLU, and Nancy Talner, the ACLU attorney assisting the Socialist Workers campaign, attended the hearing.

Talner was only allowed six minutes to make a presentation. She urged the SEEC to grant an exemption to the socialist campaign, citing recent rulings by both the Federal Elections Commission and the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission in favor of the Socialist Workers Party.

Talner referred to Buckley v. Valeo, a 1976 U.S. Supreme court ruling supporting the First Amendment right to free association and privacy in the case of disclosing the contributors and vendors of minor parties.

A substantial amount of additional written evidence was put into the record backing the campaign's position that public disclosure of contributors could subject them to threats, harassment, or reprisals from either government officials or private parties.

Despite the well documented history of government, police, and anticommunist harassment, Commissioner Timothy Burgess said he "was not persuaded." In explaining his continued opposition to granting the exemption, Burgess said that none of the evidence of past and present harassment "shows a chilling effect in the Northwest."

The commission's executive director, Carolyn Van Noy, sent a letter to the socialist campaign October 1 stating, "Reports filed by the Socialist Workers 1997 Campaign are not in compliance with the law." Van Noy gave the campaign committee a deadline of October 10 to turn over the names and addresses of its contributors and vendors in amended reports.

The Socialist Workers 1997 Campaign will fight the SEEC's decision. The ACLU is now planning to take the case to court. They will immediately file with the King County Superior Court to get a stay on the SEEC's decision and possible penalties.

Meanwhile, a debate continues in the pages of the local press over the issue.

"Are harassment and retaliation against the Socialist Workers Party a thing of the past?" is the question posed in the opening paragraph of a lengthy article in the October 1 issue of the Seattle Weekly. The article sported a large photograph of Scott Breen, who was the Socialist Workers candidate for mayor of Seattle. It describes an incident that occurred on September 18 - two days after the nonpartisan primary - in which Breen's employer, The Boeing Company, subjected him to an interview regarding comments he made in a campaign interview on a radio talk show.

The Seattle Weekly quoted Breen saying, "I criticized some of Boeing's political positions and explained mine as a Socialist."

"Mr. Breen seems to be under the mistaken impression that he is being investigated for his alleged comments on the radio," rebutted Brian Ames, identified by Seattle Weekly as a company spokesman. Ames said that since Breen "did choose that platform to make comments about the company," Boeing's employee relations department had a right to question him. Ames said the company plans no further action.

The paper then quotes Hampton of the ACLU, who defended the SWP's right to an exemption from disclosure laws citing the example of Breen's investigation by Boeing as proof that "certainly this particular Socialist Worker Party candidate is experiencing some repercussions."

An editorial in the Seattle Times urging the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission to reverse the SWP's long- standing exemption from disclosure laws has drawn heat as well. The October 5 Times published letters from three angry readers who disagreed with the editorial.

In one letter, Doreen McGrath argues, "The Times editorial also completely ignores the fundamental intent of disclosure laws, which is to expose attempts by big-money interests to manipulate elections. The likelihood of big business buying the election of socialists into office is nil."

The Times printed an Op Ed editorial by Scott Breen October 8, the day of the SEEC meeting. His column explained, "Socialist Workers candidates welcome the give and take of political debate, including facing and replying to views that differ sharply from our own. Our request for an exemption is not intended to defend `secrecy' as the Times falsely claims. It is intended to protect the right to privacy of individuals who contribute to socialist candidates. Many such contributors - primarily working people and youth who make modest contributions (we raised about $1,300 in 1997) - do not want their political views made known to employers, landlords, or the government."

Seattle-area supporters of privacy and freedom of association have been sending messages support for the requested exemption. For example, Anne Atkeson, who works full-time for the United Farm Workers, wrote to the SEEC September 26 stating, "Without reporting exemptions, contributors will fear making contributions to the candidate of their choice and these candidates will not have a fair playing field. I strongly urge you to reconsider your decision, conduct a re-hearing, and approve the renewal of the exemption for the SWP."

Robbie Scherr is a member of the International Association of Machinists.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home