Newspaper columnists typically have in their repertoire a handful of familiar, favorite and trusted topics, a wellspring of pet causes, pet peeves, individual fascinations and recurring themes into which they can dip at timely moments.

Your business columnist is not above having such a reservoir: Economic development, outsourcing, the rise and fall of American brands.

And the occasional defense of Tim Eyman.

It is not a view you are likely to hear or read elsewhere. One of the remarkable aspects of the Tim Eyman saga is the broad spectrum of opposition from Washington’s establishment he brings together whenever he ventures forth with another initiative. Business, labor, government leaders, education groups, nonprofits and media, to name but a few of the usual suspects, can be reliably counted upon to pummel whatever his latest initiative proposes, and to sum up their recurring criticisms – greedy, short-sighted, self-serving, uncaring about the poor/children/fill-in-blank, or worse – with a sort of all-purpose shorthand meme: TimEyman (pronounced as one word).

With that sort of power arrayed against him, it’s a wonder Eyman didn’t fade from the political scene years ago. Instead, when someone writes the political history of Washington over the last 20 years (and what a deadly dull tome that promises to be), Eyman is likely to emerge as the most significant figure of that era.

And why? Because no one seems to like him … except the voters.

It’s not that the electorate finds Eyman particularly charismatic, or that they like all or even a lot of the initiatives he proposes, or that they’re great fans of initiatives as a way to run government. They’ve shown considerable willingness to pick and choose among his initiatives; a muddled proposal purporting to deal with traffic was soundly defeated last year.

Instead, Eyman derives his influence, signatures on petitions and votes for those of his proposals that do pass from a principle of government that even the least attentive of civics-class students have a passing familiarity with: Checks and balances.

The voters, seeing little check on the state’s appetite for tax revenue or its fervor for spending, have turned to the only balance at their disposal.

That would be Eyman.

Ordinarily checks and balances are provided by opposing political parties. That system doesn’t work in Washington because of the long-standing enfeeblement of Republicans as a political force (voters might not have much faith in Republicans anyway, since they’ve exhibited an appetite for pork at least as voracious as that of the Democrats).

Tim Eyman is, to borrow a phrase, the closest thing Washington has to a two-party system.

And it’s a “party” with considerable clout, enough to make Gov. Chris Gregoire and legislative leaders tread carefully on the subject of taxes and spending, much to the irritation of their allies and backers. It’s enough to hold at bay the constant call for tax-system “reform” in Washington, a cause which to the ears of many voters sounds suspiciously like “increase.”

It also might be enough to pass Initiative 1033, Eyman’s latest effort. Critics lambaste 1033 for setting recession-era levels of spending that will hamstring government when economic growth resumes. Of all the arguments to be made against it, this is likely to be the least persuasive with voters. Haven’t the opponents heard? This is the “reset economy,” the buzz phrase of the moment that means everyone – consumers, employees, businesses, government – are compelled to lower their expectations about revenue, income and growth to more realistic levels.

There’s one more reason why 1033 might win and why, win or lose on this one, Eyman will have sufficient public support to return to fight another day. As long as we’re in an era of discussing all the nasty isms, let’s deal with two more – classism and elitism.

When voters are lectured to about their foolishness in voting for Eyman initiatives, they catch more than a hint of their supposed betters lecturing the unwashed masses. The constant harping that a vote for Eyman is a vote against their own interests merely heightens the suspicion among those voters that whoever is looking out for them, it certainly isn’t the Establishment.

Some votes for Eyman initiatives are votes endorsing the merits of the proposals. Others votes represent an opportunity to tweak the noses of the elite. Whatever the motivation, the combination makes for a potent electoral force that will continue to perplex the Establishment, will continue to influence debates on government in this state – and will continue to give at least one columnist a few more opportunities to reach into the quiver for a well-used but still useful arrow to load into the crossbow.

Bill Virgin’s column on business and economics appears Sundays in The News Tribune. He is the editor and publisher of Washington Manufacturing Alert and Pacific Northwest Rail News. He can be reached at bill.virgin@yahoo.com.