Wording of laws is important

Please forgive me for not having super intelligence like attorneys, judges, or legislators. My thinking is very simple. Our country’s laws must be written in plain English, no ambiguity or room for interpretation. Words must remain static in meaning, or laws dissolve like sugar in water. Laws are ultimately based on human psychology, not technology.

Grant County Superior Court Judge Antosz said on March 21, 2017 “substantial compliance” doesn’t require election officials to scrupulously follow election rules. The statute doesn’t state performance is essential to validity. In other words, our security due to “law” doesn’t exist. Your attempt to vote may have been ignored without you knowing it. Your vote wasn’t important. All courts should consider only the written letter of the law, without modifications by precedents. Compliance to state or federal rules and regulations enforced only by courts.

I was taught that “shall” was mandatory. It isn’t. The Supreme Court ruled when “shall” appears in statues, it means “may.” “Must” is now the operable word demanding mandatory compliance. The RCWs, starting with 29A.40.110, that define Washington state’s election laws are, for the most part, not mandatory with respect to handling ballots. Mandatory specific procedures compliance for counting ballots is missing in this state. In short, your ballot may, or may not, be counted. There is no secrecy regarding your attempt to vote, which leaves voters vulnerable to intimidation.

Do lawyers, judges, and legislators use legalese to manipulate our current world? Are we little more than slaves to their whims? Or should laws be so simple, and few, that people can directly understand what is right or wrong?

Thomas Fancher

Moses Lake