Your vote is irrelevant?

Superior Court (Ephrata, Wash.) regarding recent Moses Lake school bond vote, no mandatory requirement exists in RCW 29A.60.165 regarding unsigned ballot declarations. No mandatory requirement exists in RCW 29A.40.110 to verify the voter’s signature. The word “shall” is permissive, not mandatory.

Nearly every jurisdiction has held that the word “shall” is confusing because it can also mean “may, will or must.” Legal reference books like the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure no longer use the word “shall.” Even the Supreme Court ruled that when the word “shall” appears in statutes, it means “may.” See Federal Register Document Drafting Handbook (Section 3) or Federal Plain Language Guidelines (page 25).

Every RCW, or WAC, using “shall” to indicate mandatory requirements is effectively public fraud. Statements not written with mandatory language can be interpreted by courts – they are not laws, but suggestions. Does Washington state have a well defined mandatory voting procedure that assures every person’s attempt to vote is properly counted?

Do our legislators recognize they have become a dog and pony show if they don’t use mandatory language to write laws? Do public schools teach actual meanings of words? Is voting really secret if random people can walk into the vote count process, determine whose ballots are challenged, or determine who has voted, and then apply pressure that could influence the final count? Is your vote relevant if no mandatory procedure exists to assure proper and secret vote counts?

Thomas Fancher

Moses Lake