June 2008

An Interview with Governor Gregoire

A unique perspective on the legal profession through a candid question-and-answer with our state’s leader

by WSBA President Stan Bastian

My column this month consists of an interview with Washington State Governor Christine Gregoire, who, prior to being elected governor in 2004, spent 12 years as the state attorney general. Her career gives her a unique perspective on the legal profession and some of the issues it confronts in the near future.

Why did you become a lawyer?

I wanted to make a positive difference in people’s lives.

When and why did you decide to become a politician?

During my tenure as director of our state’s Department of Ecology, Governor Booth Gardner encouraged me to run for attorney general. I prefer to say that is when I decided to become an elected public servant following my appointed public-service days.

Do you think that your legal training and experience has helped your political career? How?

Yes, I do. I believe it has helped me see all sides of the very complicated public-policy issues that face our state. I believe it also has helped me bring people together to solve difficult and divisive public-policy issues.

Did you dream of becoming governor when you were a child, or was it a goal that came later?

I never dreamed of being governor; it was clearly a goal that came later after several years as attorney general.

What was the most interesting issue that you worked on while the attorney general for the state of Washington?

Clearly, this was the master settlement agreement among several states and the tobacco companies. It was significant, complex, high stakes, demanding, historical, and life-changing.

What career achievement are you most proud of, either as a lawyer or politician?
 Helping children to be safe from abuse and neglect, get healthcare, and get a good education.

From your perspective as governor, what are some of the critical issues for the legal profession and the WSBA?

I believe that the social justice and access to justice issues are paramount, and I am pleased that the Bar is tackling them. I see across the state that there are significant barriers for some Washingtonians to our legal system. The efforts of the Bar should be commended in this regard. You are on the front lines, and anything you can do to make more legal services available to those who currently are unable to receive them is a step in the right direction for our state.

What role should the WSBA play in the policy-making process? Should it be more or less involved in the legislative process?

I believe the Bar is a vital part of our state’s policy-making and legislative processes. Members of the Bar have exceptional talents and skills and are uniquely qualified to advise Washington’s policy makers, especially on the intricacies of business law, property law, and tax law. Bills that are recommendations of the various Bar sections are always well received by our Legislature.

Recently, a Bar Association task force has been studying the way in which judges are selected in this state. The primary interest is to foster a fair and impartial judiciary. Do you believe that judges should be elected, or should this state create a merit selection process followed by retention elections? If the state continues to elect judges, should state law require the election of all judges, including those in municipal courts?

Our state’s tradition is of electing judges and many other officials, possibly as many or more than any state in the union. I do not think the voters of our state are prepared at this time to relinquish that cherished right when it comes to judges. I think that there would need to be an unprecedented educational effort to convince the voters that a merit or retention system would be an improvement. I think the vast majority of judges in our state would continue to serve under such a system, but I’m not sure the voters would accept it.

There has been some concern recently about judicial campaign donations from private-interest groups. Do you think that we should change the way judicial campaigns are financed, and if so, how?

Yes, I requested legislation last year to provide for public financing of appellate court elections. I was very concerned about the enormous amounts of special-interest money and independent expenditures that flowed into our Supreme Court races in 2006. I believed at the time and still believe that our judicial system would be better served with public financing. I think that in the near future the Legislature will enact such a plan.

Diversity is a core value of the Bar Association, but in reality this is not a very diverse profession. Ninety percent of WSBA members are Caucasian. Only 36 percent are women, only 1.8 percent are Asian, only 2 percent are African-American, only 1.7 percent are Latino/Latina, and only 0.8 percent are Native Americans. In your opinion, what should the Bar Association do to attract more women and people of color into the profession?

I think the Bar and all members need to start mentoring students in our high schools and colleges. This cannot be a voluntary or hit-and-miss project, but a well-organized and sustained effort to recruit underrepresented groups to our profession. We need to show students how exciting and satisfying a legal career can be.

Do you think your future involves a return to the practice of law?

Not right away.

The September 2007 edition of Bar News was dedicated to the issue of marriage equality for same-sex couples. Do you think state law should be changed to allow same-sex marriages? Why?

I have been an ardent supporter of, and signed into law, our domestic partnership act, and this year I look forward to signing a bill that will add many important rights to our existing law.

The WSBA Committee on Public Defense recently studied the death penalty in Washington and made recommendations about how to improve application of the death penalty in this state and its costs in the justice system. Those recommendations were adopted by the WSBA Board of Governors. The Committee did not take a position regarding whether the death penalty should be retained. What is your opinion? Should the state of Washington continue to use the death penalty in limited circumstances, or is it time to abolish it?

As an attorney general and governor I have supported the death penalty. In this state it is used in very limited circumstances, and that’s as it should be. I have been lucky in my first term as governor that I have not been faced with the difficult questions surrounding an execution.

When you were elected in 2004, you won by a small number of votes and the result was then unsuccessfully challenged in court. Has that experience impacted the way in which you have acted as governor or approached your job? How?

I don’t believe it has. Even from day one, I told the staff we don’t know how long we might be here, so let’s just go to work every day and do the right thing. I have tried my best to keep that philosophy at the forefront ever since.

What issues do you most want to tackle in your remaining time as governor?

We need to make sure we provide a world-class education for all our students, from pre-school through law school, med school, grad school, or trade school. We have to lower the cost, increase access, and improve the quality of healthcare. We need to continue to increase jobs and improve our business climate. We must constantly work to maintain and upgrade our transportation infrastructure, and we must ensure that our communities are safe.

I appreciate the fact that Governor Christine Gregoire was refreshingly straightforward in this interview. She did not refuse to answer any of my questions, but instead answered all of them candidly and completely. I would also like to thank her general counsel, Richard Mitchell, and her communications director, Pearse Edwards, who helped make this interview possible. 

WSBA President Stan Bastian can be reached at stanb@jdslaw.com or 509-662-3685.