Battle Ground resident Gary Obermeyer says the GOP/Walsh proposal would not strengthen election integrity — it would burden existing, lawful voters
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and may not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com
Paul Valencia’s Nov. 17 story opens with a misleading headline, referring to “the state’s voter ID initiative.” Initiative 26-126 is a partisan GOP campaign led by Rep. Jim Walsh, built on the unsupported claim that large numbers of non-citizens are voting and that “restoring trust” requires new barriers to voting.
The facts show otherwise. Washington already requires every voter-registration applicant to attest to U.S. citizenship under penalty of perjury. Violations are a Class C felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine (RCW 29A.84.130). In addition, the state maintains a strong system for cross-checking and verifying voter data. There is no evidence of widespread non-citizen voting.
The GOP/Walsh proposal would not strengthen election integrity — it would burden existing, lawful voters. Under IL-26-126, anyone without an Enhanced ID would have to make an appointment with the county auditor, appear in person, and present documentary proof of citizenship just to keep their current registration. This requirement would fall hardest on elderly voters, low-income residents, rural communities, naturalized citizens, people who changed their names after marriage, Puerto Rico–born U.S. citizens, and anyone with older or technically non-compliant birth records.
Walsh has publicly acknowledged that this initiative is “the first step.” The end goal is to eliminate Washington’s vote-by-mail system and force a return to in-person voting lines — a dramatic rollback of a system that has served voters well for decades. Petitioners must gather just over 308,000 valid signatures by January 2, 2026, to place this on the 2026 ballot, and any qualification would almost certainly trigger legal challenges.
In the meantime, we should call this initiative what it is: a partisan effort to restrict access to the ballot. Despite claims to the contrary, Initiative 26-126 functions as voter suppression — plain and simple.
Gary Obermeyer
Battle Ground
Also read:
- Vancouver Police investigate fatality collision
Vancouver Police are investigating a vehicle versus pedestrian collision on NE 162nd Avenue near NE Poplar Street that resulted in a fatality. - Washington governor talks potential return of SuperSonics with NBA commissioner
Gov. Bob Ferguson spoke with NBA Commissioner Adam Silver about the possibility of bringing the Seattle SuperSonics back as the league weighs future expansion decisions. - Opinion: The income tax proposal has arrived
Ryan Frost of the Washington Policy Center argues that a proposed Washington income tax creates a new revenue stream rather than delivering tax reform or relief. - Is it time to lower the legal limit for blood alcohol content to 0.05 in the state of Washington?
Mothers Against Drunk Driving and families affected by impaired driving are urging Washington lawmakers to lower the legal BAC limit to 0.05, citing prevention data and personal testimony from Clark County residents. - Expert in homebuilding has several tips on how to make housing affordable
Veteran homebuilder Tracy Doriot shares his perspective on why regulations, taxes, labor shortages, and permitting delays are driving housing costs higher in Clark County and across Washington. - Opinion: ‘If they want light rail, they should be the ones who pay for it’
Clark County Today Editor Ken Vance argues that supporters of light rail tied to the I-5 Bridge replacement should bear the local cost of operating and maintaining the system through a narrowly drawn sub-district. - POLL: If a sub-district is created, what area should it include?
Clark County residents are asked where a potential C-TRAN sub-district should be drawn if voters are asked to fund light rail operations and maintenance costs.
mRestricts voter access? Absurd. What voter access is being restricted? Proof of citizenship and residence is not restricting anything. So lets be real, Mr. Obermeyer, what is it you fear by simply verifying the legality of voter roles?