Cool.

Or we could end the tax exemptions.

"And by walling off both K-12 spending and the income tax that supports it from the rest of the budget, it eliminates the possibility of budgetary tricks through the usual fungibility of funds."

This is exactly why I cannot support it.
Because I do not believe that the "budgetary tricks" will end.
Once our government gets an additional revenue stream it will spend it.

Drop the sales tax completely and go with an income/asset tax.
Or tack on another percentage to the sales tax.
But having both will lead to our government spending both and trying to increase both later.

@2: Every substantive tax increase will ultimately come before voters regardless of the constitutional status of Eyman's bogus 2/3s initiatives. Either lawmakers will refer it to the ballot, or the signatures will be gathered to challenge it via initiative or referendum.

That's just the way things work in WA state. So to say that you don't trust government is bullshit. The people will always have yay or nay.

(And by the way, the whole purpose of this is in fact to spend more money. Billions more. On Education.)

@3,

You've railed before about the legislature taking money intended for other things (decided by initiative) and spending it elsewhere. You specifically decried it as subverting the will of the people. What makes you think the legislature won't divert these new funds for education to something else?

"as our tax structure is substantially flattened"
--> Don't say "flattened" when you mean "steepened". Your goal is to make it progressive instead of flat.

"a tax that keeps pace neither with economic growth"
--> You're saying that sales tax revenues don't track GDP?

"nor the cost of educating our children"
--> Why should education costs grow faster than GDP?

It's a good idea, but I agree with @2. This was how the state sold us the Lottery, which now goes into the general fund. Short of enshrining the education only status of an income tax as an amendment to the state constitution, I don't see how you could make it stick—and good luck with getting that done.

@5 "a tax that keeps pace neither with economic growth"
--> You're saying that sales tax revenues don't track GDP?

Actually, No - sales tax revenue absolutely does not track GDP.

The portion of our GDP subject to state sales tax (represented by the sale of consumer products) is shrinking, while the portion of GDP exempt from sales tax (professional services) is growing.

That's exactly why the state has been having trouble balancing our budget - it's not a spending problem, it's a revenue problem.

The state should either create another lottery to pay for K-12 or put it on the ballot and run ads using good looking fresh faced white children to promote the K-12 education tax. No blacks or latinos are to be used in the ads otherwise many citizens will say to themselves or their friends "I'm not paying for some S**c or N*****'s education". You don't want to tap into that latent WA state racism. It will suceed if they think they're paying for their own kind.

@7 sounds great in theory, but look at the numbers. Both GDP and sales tax revenues are matched pretty closely over the past 2 decades.

A $30 per ton tax on CO2 emissions -- the same carbon tax rate British Columbia has -- would yield $3.8 billion per biennium.

@10 for the Global Warming Means Education win!

This insane witch will not disappear!

@1, Will FTW. It really is that simple.

Sunset everything staggered over the next biennium or so and reauthorize those tax expenditures that make sense (very few, IMO).

Oh, and fuck levy equalization. I'm tired of subsidizing rural glibertarian retards.

very easy to call for tax increases you know will never happen when you're a lame duck gunning for a job in the 2nd obama admin.

If you want to lose weight. Pls contact me, you can use :Wholesale Food , Weight Loss Products or Green Coffee to keep slimming body.

Once Steve Ballmer, Theiline Sheumann, Joe Barer, Jeff Bezos, George Bartell, Paul Allen, and the Blethens get their PR, advertising, editorial, and legislative minions on the issue, the only "politically viable" solution will be a surtax on fast food, bus fare, and second-hand clothing.

But seriously, the reason ~63% of voters voted against their own interests in defeating I-1098 (income tax on the rich, property tax reduction for everyone, higher B&O tax exemption for small business) is because our local Leona Helmsleys funded an advertising blitz that scared low-information, brass-ring-fantasizing Washingtonians into believing that the legislature would extend an income tax to *everyone* in the near future and that their aggregate tax burden would go up. I'm not sure how declaring upfront that the income tax would be broad-based will be more immune to this kind of propaganda.

@5 (hrmmm): No, "flattening the tax structure" is accurate. Only Vermont has a roughly flat effective state and local tax rate. In all other states, the effective rate is regressive, and Washington's is the most regressive of all. Currently, Washington's poor pay over 17% of their income in state and local tax and its rich pay less than 3%, with a roughly linear decline in the effective tax rate between the two extremes. Income tax would be only one component in a system that includes property tax, sales tax, and various excise taxes. Accordingly, a progressive income tax would flatten our otherwise very regressive tax structure. (Nice try though. It reminds of the flacks at Fox News, dutifully executing their orders to rant about how half of Americans "pay no tax" -- meaning federal income tax -- while conveniently omitting any mention payroll tax and state and local tax.)

You mean the solution to the budgetary crisis may ultimately mean that you have to somehow raise revenue?

huh, guess we have to do irreparable harm before we think of obvious things like this.

oh, and go ahead and put the burden on the poor and working people of Washington. The more the downward pressure, the closer the Capitalists get to paying us starvation wages, the more it sharpens the anger and outrage. No better way for more people to start understanding that government is an agent for capitalist interests. In the end this will equal more rebels taking to the streets. Acceleration for the win : )

@22: so call it "a progressive tax on income designed to right the terrible wrong that the rich spend less of their income on consumption". whatevs.

There are several reasons state income taxes are unpopular. First for most is the hassle and cost of filing every year, even if it is piggy backed on the Federal Tax. The bureaucratic cost to administer an additional form of taxation somewhat negates it effectiveness as well. Many living or working in states with income taxes come to dislike them, but they are extremely difficult to abolish once passed. Having read a few ideas on how to address the perception of "regressive" taxes, I like the idea of a flat rebate best. Have the overall rate higher, then periodically rebate an equal amount to all taxpayers. While say $1000 to someone with $10K in income would be significant, it might mean little to a person earning $100K. I would like to see more discussion of this idea.because it seems to fairly address the regressive nature of "flat" taxes without exorbitant administrative cost.