Bad Hanford bills follow bad initiative

State lawmakers should steer clear of trying to fix the flawed Initiative 297 until federal courts can make a definitive ruling on it.

Last summer, a federal judge overturned the 2004 ballot measure, approved by 69 percent of voters and intended to require the federal government to clean up the Hanford nuclear reservation before more nuclear waste is shipped from other states. U.S. District Judge Alan McDonald of Yakima deep-sixed the whole initiative, ruling it violated three clauses of the U.S. Constitution: Supremacy, Commerce and Contracts. The state appealed the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Oral arguments are expected this summer.

In the meantime, the state Department of Ecology, which regulates Hanford cleanup, is opposing two bills hailed as remedies to the constitutional flaws. If I-297 is upheld on appeal, an ecology spokesman said it would be in conflict with any remedy enacted.

The proposed law also could create other problems, including more burden for companies that handle medical-waste disposal and "significantly" delaying Ecology's closure of Hanford tanks cleaned of radioactive waste.

This page opposed I-297. To clean up Hanford, the federal government is expected to ship 90 percent of Hanford waste elsewhere — to designated sites in New Mexico, South Carolina and Nevada. If other states took the same tack, Hanford would be stuck with all of it.

Further, Washington's track record of holding federal feet to the cleanup fire is a good one. As former Ecology director, Gov. Christine Gregoire exacted a first-of-its-kind agreement with the federal government for cleanup; as, attorney general, she flexed legal muscle to enforce it. She and new Attorney General Rob McKenna remain attentive.

I-297 supporters, including Heart of America and Sen. Adam Kline, D-Seattle, now are pushing haphazard remedies to what was a flawed initiative. The position is a bleak commentary on the wisdom of advancing such a complex agenda through the initiative process rather than the Legislature.

Too bad. The defense of the initiative already has cost the people of Washington about $348,000 — and there is no way to hold the sponsors responsible.

State lawmakers should leave these bills alone and wait to hear from the 9th Circuit.