SSB 5382
In CommitteeSenate
Ballot measure petitions
Concerning requirements pertaining to signatures and addresses of ballot measure petitioners and petition signature gatherers.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill tightens requirements for initiative and referendum petitions in Washington by requiring circulators to sign sworn declarations under penalty of false swearing and mandating that signer addresses be verified against voter registration records. It aims to reduce fraud and errors while preserving the right to use the ballot initiative process.
- Requires each petition signature gatherer (circulator) to sign a declaration on every petition sheet under penalty of false swearing, confirming signers provided correct information, were eligible, and weren’t paid or promised compensation.
- Clarifies that circulators must swear or affirm under penalty of false swearing—not just ‘penalty of law’—to align with most other states’ requirements.
- Mandates that the Secretary of State verify petition signers’ addresses against their voter registration records; signatures with mismatched or missing addresses will not be counted, though minor errors (e.g., missing apartment numbers) are exempt.
- Reaffirms that forging petition signatures is a class C felony and offering payment to sign petitions is a gross misdemeanor, with existing penalties preserved.
- Ensures that invalidating one signature due to address issues does not affect the validity of other signatures on the same petition sheet.
Who is affected
- Petition signature gatherers (circulators) — Must now sign a formal declaration under penalty of false swearing on each petition sheet they circulate, confirming signers provided accurate information, were eligible, and weren’t paid or promised anything to sign.
- People signing initiative or referendum petitions — Must ensure their residence address on the petition matches the address in their voter registration record; otherwise, their signature may be rejected (though minor address errors like missing apartment numbers won’t invalidate it).
- Secretary of State and county election officials — Will verify petition signatures using voter registration address records, and must apply rules for accepting or rejecting signatures based on address accuracy.
- Organizers or funders of petition drives — May face increased legal risks—including potential criminal penalties—if they forge signatures or offer payments to people to sign petitions, as these acts are explicitly tied to existing felony and gross misdemeanor penalties.
Pro/Con Analysis
Potential Benefits (5)
Requiring circulators to swear under penalty of false swearing strengthens accountability and deters intentional fraud, enhancing public confidence in petition integrity—especially for initiatives that may have major fiscal or policy consequences.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 2 (new); Sec. 3–5 (amended declarations)Address verification against voter registration records reduces the risk of fraudulent or duplicate signatures, improving the accuracy and legitimacy of ballot measure thresholds—benefiting all voters by ensuring initiatives meet法定 requirements.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 6(1)(a) (address verification)The carve-out for minor discrepancies and the severability clause (invalidating only the affected signature) protect against overbroad disqualification and preserve voter intent—reducing the risk that one small error invalidates an entire petition sheet.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 6(1)(b) (minor error exception); Sec. 6(2) (signature severability)Reaffirming existing criminal penalties for signature forgery (class C felony) and paid petition solicitation (gross misdemeanor) reinforces deterrents against fraud, supporting fair and honest petition processes.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 3–5 (preserved penalties)The bill clarifies verification standards and explicitly allows use of statistical sampling, aligning with existing election practices and reducing ambiguity for election administrators.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1 (findings); Sec. 6(3) (statistical sampling)
Potential Concerns (5)
Mandating circulators sign sworn declarations under penalty of false swearing increases legal exposure for grassroots organizers and volunteers, potentially chilling participation—especially among low-income, non-English-dominant, or less legally resourced individuals—by exposing them to criminal liability for unintentional errors.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 2 (new); Sec. 3–5 (amended declarations)Requiring strict match of petition addresses to voter registration records risks rejecting valid signatures from transient, low-income, or recently relocated voters—especially renters, students, and people experiencing housing instability—who may have outdated or mismatched registration addresses despite being eligible voters.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 6(1)(a) (address verification)While minor errors are exempted, the burden of distinguishing “minor” from “non-minor” discrepancies falls to election staff, increasing administrative complexity and potential for inconsistent or discretionary rejection of signatures—especially in counties with limited staffing or training.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 6(1)(a) (address verification); Sec. 6(1)(b) (minor error exception)County election offices will face increased administrative burden verifying addresses against voter registration databases, requiring staff time, system updates, and training—though the fiscal impact is deemed minimal, the operational strain falls disproportionately on smaller or under-resourced counties.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 6(1)(a) (address verification)By disqualifying signatures with mismatched addresses—even when the signer is otherwise eligible—the bill may disproportionately suppress participation from historically marginalized groups (e.g., young voters, renters, communities of color) who are more likely to have address discrepancies due to mobility or systemic barriers to registration updates.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 6(1)(a) (address verification)
Who Is Most Affected
Grassroots organizers and volunteer circulators—especially those working for low-waged or volunteer-led campaigns—face increased legal risk and administrative burden, potentially deterring participation, especially among marginalized communities.
Low-income, mobile, or renters—particularly those who may not update voter registration after moving—are at higher risk of having their signatures rejected due to address mismatches, reducing their effective participation in direct democracy.
County election offices will need to implement new verification protocols and may face increased workload, though the fiscal impact is projected to be minimal; implementation burden is uneven across counties.
Campaigns and ballot measure committees may face higher compliance costs and risk of disqualification, but also benefit from increased public trust in petition integrity—net effect depends on campaign resources and strategy.
The general public may benefit from increased confidence in the legitimacy of initiative outcomes, but may also be harmed if the bill suppresses participation from underrepresented groups, skewing policy outcomes.