Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Politics Muni League Slams Eyman Initiative
Posted by Dominic Holden on Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:38 AM
The Municipal League, a nonprofit that advocates good government, issued recommendations today on several ballot measures before voters in the general election. Most relate to local elections—such as encouraging suburbs to annex Finn Hill, Kingsgate, North Juanita, and Panther Lake—but the group also takes aim at Tim Eyman's politically charged state Initiative 1033:
OPPOSES Initiative 1033, Limiting Growth of State, County and City Revenues - Washington State is experiencing a severe recession. State and local governments have instituted drastic budget cuts affecting education, health care, human services, parks, corrections and many other programs that citizens rely on, especially during hard times. Now is the worst possible time to further hamper government’s flexibility to meet public needs and to help with economic recovery. Previous initiatives have already slowed government spending significantly and elected officials are already very cautious about authorizing tax increases to meet service needs. While it may be a good idea to encourage government to prioritize services and live within its means, this initiative is filled with complex provisions that will make government’s ability to govern much harder and further exacerbate the structural problems of our system of financing public services.
Indeed, Eyamn's initiative would fuck the state of Washington. The language seems innocuous enough: It would essentially limit the amount of money the government can collect from taxpayers based on how much it collected the previous year, adjusted for inflation and population growth. Any surplus the state collects would go toward reducing property taxes. But in practice, the measure would lock Washington into its current budget—the worst budget the state has had in decades, owing to the recession—and prevent the budget from expanding when the economy improves. So the state at its leanest—like right now, with a budget requiring the state to lay off roughly 3,000 teachers and cut basic health services for 40,000 people—would become the most robust the state could ever be. Screw I-1033 and the trickster it came from.
Share via
1
Here's our update from yesterday that addresses this issue:
RE: I-1033 renews Washington's I-601 - I-1033 is very different than other state's limits - here's why
Passed by voters in 1993 during tough economic times, Initiative 601 put a limit on the growth of government (inflation plus populatution growth and required 2/3's legislative approval for tax increases). I-601 worked very well for many years until the Legislature started putting loopholes in it. Their removal of its fiscal discipline policies led directly to the fiscal roller coaster of Gregoire's first 4-year term, resulting in a $9 billion deficit.
In 2007, we sponsored and voters approved I-960 which reestablished the two-thirds requirement for tax hikes, closing the loopholes they'd put in it. In 2007, the voters approved a constitutionally-protection rainy day fund, reenacting a I-601 policy that earlier Legislatures had undermined with loopholes in I-601.
I-1033 completes the renewal of I-601 by bringing by the growth limit (inflation and population growth) with the same safety valve: higher increases are OK only with voter approval.
Rather than acknowledge and respond to our state's 16 years of personal, real-world experience with and without I-601, I-1033's opponents have tried to divert attention to other states with other limits. None of these comparisons are appropriate because, first off, Washington's initiative process allows the people to pass laws which are subject to legislative change -- other states (California, Colorado, Oregon, etc) allow their state's voters to approve changes to their state Constitutions which cannot be changed by the Legislature.
Other state's limits are immovable, unchangeable policies -- Washington's initiatives are the people pointing the politicians in a particular direction with politicians empowered to change that direction if they want to.
When opponents refer to initiatives in Washington as 'straitjackets', as they're doing now with I-1033, I'm reminded of a recent column by the Washington Research Council's Dick Davis who wrote: "there's no such thing as a statutory straitjacket."
Secondly, other state's limits are different than I-601/I-1033. One of the commonly heard claims is: “I-1033 is just like Colorado’s TABOR amendment.” Not true. Colorado voters approved the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in 1992 – Washington voters approved I-601 in 1993. They’re very different. TABOR was a constitutional amendment -- it couldn’t be amended by the Legislature; I-1033, like I-601, is a law, providing the Legislature with flexibility to change it. TABOR encompassed every government – school districts, library districts, fire districts, etc. I-1033 focuses only on the state, counties and cities. TABOR put a limit on every governmental account and every tax dollar received, including transportation funds, pension funds, capital budgets, workman’s compensation, unemployment insurance funds, federal funds, etc. I-1033, like I-601, only addresses the general fund. TABOR didn’t allow rainy day funds. I-1033, like I-601, gives ‘first bite’ of excess tax revenues to the rainy day fund. TABOR didn’t exclude federal funds; I-1033 explicitly does. TABOR prohibited governments from borrowing money except with voter approval; I-1033 has nothing like that. TABOR required voter approval for any tax and fee increase by any government; I-1033 doesn't. TABOR was very, very broad and inflexible – I-1033 is very focused with plenty of flexibility.
Governor Gregoire has said "don't vote for I-1033 or else we'll turn into California." Please. The insanity that is California is a perfect storm of rip-tide pressures tearing that state apart at the seams. But once again, even if you buy the argument that all of California's dysfunction is a result of initiatives (which we don't agree is their biggest problem), their initiatives are part of their state Constitution and thus cannot be amended by the Legislature. That is not the case in Washington. We accept that it is part of the checks and balances of our state's initiative process that voter-approved initiatives are subject to legislative change.
But with I-1033, the policy is eminently reasonable -- allow government an automatic increase every year with a built-in safety valve, the same one that was in I-601: if government thinks the automatic increase isn't a big enough increase, they can go to the voters and ask for more. I-1033, just like I-601, allows the people, and not the politicians, to decide how fast government grows and how big a tax burden we can afford.
Remember, I-1033's opponents can't/won't answer this simple question: what's wrong with going to the voters?
Here's another question opponents can't/won't answer: what's wrong with bringing back I-601's fiscal discipline?
Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to lower property taxes (they actually think taxpayers are UNDERTAXED!??!!). Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to get government off the fiscal roller coaster. Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to stop politicians from unilaterally raising taxes and fees. Opponents want us to trust the politicians, despite their insatiable appetite for higher taxes.
More...
RE: I-1033 renews Washington's I-601 - I-1033 is very different than other state's limits - here's why
Passed by voters in 1993 during tough economic times, Initiative 601 put a limit on the growth of government (inflation plus populatution growth and required 2/3's legislative approval for tax increases). I-601 worked very well for many years until the Legislature started putting loopholes in it. Their removal of its fiscal discipline policies led directly to the fiscal roller coaster of Gregoire's first 4-year term, resulting in a $9 billion deficit.
In 2007, we sponsored and voters approved I-960 which reestablished the two-thirds requirement for tax hikes, closing the loopholes they'd put in it. In 2007, the voters approved a constitutionally-protection rainy day fund, reenacting a I-601 policy that earlier Legislatures had undermined with loopholes in I-601.
I-1033 completes the renewal of I-601 by bringing by the growth limit (inflation and population growth) with the same safety valve: higher increases are OK only with voter approval.
Rather than acknowledge and respond to our state's 16 years of personal, real-world experience with and without I-601, I-1033's opponents have tried to divert attention to other states with other limits. None of these comparisons are appropriate because, first off, Washington's initiative process allows the people to pass laws which are subject to legislative change -- other states (California, Colorado, Oregon, etc) allow their state's voters to approve changes to their state Constitutions which cannot be changed by the Legislature.
Other state's limits are immovable, unchangeable policies -- Washington's initiatives are the people pointing the politicians in a particular direction with politicians empowered to change that direction if they want to.
When opponents refer to initiatives in Washington as 'straitjackets', as they're doing now with I-1033, I'm reminded of a recent column by the Washington Research Council's Dick Davis who wrote: "there's no such thing as a statutory straitjacket."
Secondly, other state's limits are different than I-601/I-1033. One of the commonly heard claims is: “I-1033 is just like Colorado’s TABOR amendment.” Not true. Colorado voters approved the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in 1992 – Washington voters approved I-601 in 1993. They’re very different. TABOR was a constitutional amendment -- it couldn’t be amended by the Legislature; I-1033, like I-601, is a law, providing the Legislature with flexibility to change it. TABOR encompassed every government – school districts, library districts, fire districts, etc. I-1033 focuses only on the state, counties and cities. TABOR put a limit on every governmental account and every tax dollar received, including transportation funds, pension funds, capital budgets, workman’s compensation, unemployment insurance funds, federal funds, etc. I-1033, like I-601, only addresses the general fund. TABOR didn’t allow rainy day funds. I-1033, like I-601, gives ‘first bite’ of excess tax revenues to the rainy day fund. TABOR didn’t exclude federal funds; I-1033 explicitly does. TABOR prohibited governments from borrowing money except with voter approval; I-1033 has nothing like that. TABOR required voter approval for any tax and fee increase by any government; I-1033 doesn't. TABOR was very, very broad and inflexible – I-1033 is very focused with plenty of flexibility.
Governor Gregoire has said "don't vote for I-1033 or else we'll turn into California." Please. The insanity that is California is a perfect storm of rip-tide pressures tearing that state apart at the seams. But once again, even if you buy the argument that all of California's dysfunction is a result of initiatives (which we don't agree is their biggest problem), their initiatives are part of their state Constitution and thus cannot be amended by the Legislature. That is not the case in Washington. We accept that it is part of the checks and balances of our state's initiative process that voter-approved initiatives are subject to legislative change.
But with I-1033, the policy is eminently reasonable -- allow government an automatic increase every year with a built-in safety valve, the same one that was in I-601: if government thinks the automatic increase isn't a big enough increase, they can go to the voters and ask for more. I-1033, just like I-601, allows the people, and not the politicians, to decide how fast government grows and how big a tax burden we can afford.
Remember, I-1033's opponents can't/won't answer this simple question: what's wrong with going to the voters?
Here's another question opponents can't/won't answer: what's wrong with bringing back I-601's fiscal discipline?
Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to lower property taxes (they actually think taxpayers are UNDERTAXED!??!!). Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to get government off the fiscal roller coaster. Opponents have no alternative to I-1033 to stop politicians from unilaterally raising taxes and fees. Opponents want us to trust the politicians, despite their insatiable appetite for higher taxes.
3
@1: Oh, PLEASE. You have a habit of cutting and running, so it's obvious why you would claim to have an exit strategy if this doesn't work. Except the voters would be voting when it was far too late, and you know that. Then, as you always do with your measures, you come back and blame the aftermath on whatever Democrat is unfortunate enough to have to get their leg humped by you.
Like the last one, this measure is timed to coincide with a recession-era budget so that it purposely starts from a baseline far lower than what would meet the needs of the current population and would continuously fall below needs. When the legislature or voters overrule the initiative, we will still have to contend with the aftermath of your measure and you can come in again like a white knight and claim "see, they screwed up again!"
You don't care about the voters, not if you're penalizing the state for social services like education and poverty relief. Seriously, knock it off.
Like the last one, this measure is timed to coincide with a recession-era budget so that it purposely starts from a baseline far lower than what would meet the needs of the current population and would continuously fall below needs. When the legislature or voters overrule the initiative, we will still have to contend with the aftermath of your measure and you can come in again like a white knight and claim "see, they screwed up again!"
You don't care about the voters, not if you're penalizing the state for social services like education and poverty relief. Seriously, knock it off.
4
No on 1033 has a fb page with only 168 fans. That seems low. Sign up here and spread the word among your friends, then heed the call to volunteer, donate, whatever you can. 1033 will be a disaster for WA state if it passes.
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/pages/…
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/pages/…
5
"Remember, I-1033's opponents can't/won't answer this simple question: what's wrong with going to the voters?"
Let me answer this for you, dismantling your vapid and inane talking point. What's wrong with going to the voters? Nothing. Go to the voters all you want. And the voters will tell you that your initiative is a stupid piece of shit and you will lose. Opposing an initiative is not the same as saying initiatives are categorically illegitimate.
Of course, you already know that, you're just obfuscating the heartlessness of your efforts with fake populism.
Let me answer this for you, dismantling your vapid and inane talking point. What's wrong with going to the voters? Nothing. Go to the voters all you want. And the voters will tell you that your initiative is a stupid piece of shit and you will lose. Opposing an initiative is not the same as saying initiatives are categorically illegitimate.
Of course, you already know that, you're just obfuscating the heartlessness of your efforts with fake populism.
6
The super conservative Yakima Co. Commissioners said that 1033 was a "simplistic approach to a complex problem" and it was later revealed that this initiative would strip millions of dollars from Co. criminal justice budget.
Eyman can't even get the choir to buy into this stinker. He needs to go get a real job and stop living of political idelogues who are out to circumvent the will of the majority in this state.
Eyman can't even get the choir to buy into this stinker. He needs to go get a real job and stop living of political idelogues who are out to circumvent the will of the majority in this state.
7
We could always impose a 500 percent income tax on anyone who proposed more than two initiatives which were found unconstitutional.
8
Here's our update from today:
RE: Groups don't vote, people do
Just finished an UPFRONT KING 5 debate on I-1033 that will air on Saturday and Sunday. I-1033's opponent touted the 'impressive' list of groups opposing I-1033. Look at all our groups, he said.
Groups don't vote, people do.
Voters decide how to vote on initiatives based on their own experiences and values -- they don't look to 'groups' to tell them how to think -- they think for themselves.
During the campaigns for I-695, I-722, I-747, I-776, I-900, and I-960, we were always asked: "there's a long list of groups opposed to your initiative, how can you possibly win?" Because none of those groups truly speaks for all their members, let alone the broad electorate -- if they did, none of those initiatives would have passed.
When filling out their ballots in the privacy of their homes, absent fear of harassment or retaliation, there will be large numbers of Democrats, teachers, librarians, firefighters, PTA members, police officers, AARP members, realtors, and state, county, & city workers -- members of groups supposedly opposed to I-1033 -- who will mark their ballots for I-1033.
And why shouldn't they? They're taxpayers just like everyone else. They own homes and are getting killed by our state's crushing property tax burden. They get hurt by governments' fiscal roller coaster where politicians overextend themselves during good times -- creating unsustainable budgets -- which makes the bad times even worse. We all lived through Gregoire's first term when at its outset they repealed I-601's growth limit, and we saw the result: a $9 billion deficit. Like everyone else, they're frustrated by politicians' lack of action on the very real concerns addressed by I-1033 (a complete lack of fiscal discipline, unsustainable budgets which consistently outpace taxpayers' ability to afford them, and out-of-control property taxes).
Taxpayers will benefit from I-1033, our economy will benefit from I-1033, and, yes, government will benefit from I-1033 the same way they benefited from I-601 (prior to Gregoire's repeal of it in 2005). I-1033 will prod them to NOT reflexively increase taxes, instead focusing on using existing revenues more effectively by prioritizing and reforming government. And if the automatic increase under I-1033 isn't a big enough increase, they can always go to the voters and ask for more.
We're very proud of the 315,000 citizens who signed I-1033's petitions. We believe they spoke for the majority of Washington's voters and support I-1033's renewal of I-601, I-1033's reduction in property taxes, and I-1033's empowerment of the citizens to decide how fast the government should grow and how big a tax burden we can afford.
http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
More...
RE: Groups don't vote, people do
Just finished an UPFRONT KING 5 debate on I-1033 that will air on Saturday and Sunday. I-1033's opponent touted the 'impressive' list of groups opposing I-1033. Look at all our groups, he said.
Groups don't vote, people do.
Voters decide how to vote on initiatives based on their own experiences and values -- they don't look to 'groups' to tell them how to think -- they think for themselves.
During the campaigns for I-695, I-722, I-747, I-776, I-900, and I-960, we were always asked: "there's a long list of groups opposed to your initiative, how can you possibly win?" Because none of those groups truly speaks for all their members, let alone the broad electorate -- if they did, none of those initiatives would have passed.
When filling out their ballots in the privacy of their homes, absent fear of harassment or retaliation, there will be large numbers of Democrats, teachers, librarians, firefighters, PTA members, police officers, AARP members, realtors, and state, county, & city workers -- members of groups supposedly opposed to I-1033 -- who will mark their ballots for I-1033.
And why shouldn't they? They're taxpayers just like everyone else. They own homes and are getting killed by our state's crushing property tax burden. They get hurt by governments' fiscal roller coaster where politicians overextend themselves during good times -- creating unsustainable budgets -- which makes the bad times even worse. We all lived through Gregoire's first term when at its outset they repealed I-601's growth limit, and we saw the result: a $9 billion deficit. Like everyone else, they're frustrated by politicians' lack of action on the very real concerns addressed by I-1033 (a complete lack of fiscal discipline, unsustainable budgets which consistently outpace taxpayers' ability to afford them, and out-of-control property taxes).
Taxpayers will benefit from I-1033, our economy will benefit from I-1033, and, yes, government will benefit from I-1033 the same way they benefited from I-601 (prior to Gregoire's repeal of it in 2005). I-1033 will prod them to NOT reflexively increase taxes, instead focusing on using existing revenues more effectively by prioritizing and reforming government. And if the automatic increase under I-1033 isn't a big enough increase, they can always go to the voters and ask for more.
We're very proud of the 315,000 citizens who signed I-1033's petitions. We believe they spoke for the majority of Washington's voters and support I-1033's renewal of I-601, I-1033's reduction in property taxes, and I-1033's empowerment of the citizens to decide how fast the government should grow and how big a tax burden we can afford.
http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
10
Here's an update from reality, @8 - preying on the ignorant and the weak to line the coffers of your buddies who peddle initiatives is just wrong.
11
@8: You operate like a shady insurance salesperson, burning down someone's house and then knocking on the door of their new home to sell them insurance. You're trying to set up an economic collapse so you can blame it on the government and then come back again with another initiative that serves no purpose.
You use the truncheon of "our property taxes are too high" but forget that the quality of life in this state is pretty high and our property taxes aren't as high as you pretend they are.
You should not penalize a state for caring about its citizens.
You use the truncheon of "our property taxes are too high" but forget that the quality of life in this state is pretty high and our property taxes aren't as high as you pretend they are.
You should not penalize a state for caring about its citizens.
12
see, this is why my son didn't want a class ring or jacket, cause he thought some of the money might go to this jerk.
13
Timmy:
Will you please dry up and blow away?
I have writer's cramp from filling in the "NO" oval next to your stupid annual initiatives.
You pull an idea out of your ass that will appeal to the gut instinct of the uninformed. It gets voted down, or if for some reason it passes it is declared unconstitutional. Lather, rinse, repeat!
Please stop wasting everybody's time.
Sell wristwatches! Do what you're good at!
Will you please dry up and blow away?
I have writer's cramp from filling in the "NO" oval next to your stupid annual initiatives.
You pull an idea out of your ass that will appeal to the gut instinct of the uninformed. It gets voted down, or if for some reason it passes it is declared unconstitutional. Lather, rinse, repeat!
Please stop wasting everybody's time.
Sell wristwatches! Do what you're good at!
14
Believe Tim Eyman at your peril. I-1033 is just another of his anti-government, anti-tax initiatives cloaked in falsehoods unfortunately. Here's what I-1033 really does:
INITIATIVE 1033 FREEZES STATE AND LOCAL SPENDING AT THE CURRENT LEVEL.
It says that none of the cuts made in public services as a result of the current recession can be restored without a public vote. Public votes take time, cost money and allow politics and special interest money to influence the outcome.
INITIATIVE 1033 IS A RADICAL SHIFT AWAY FROM REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT. It would take away the current power of our elected public representatives to make budget decisions and turns the process over to budgeting by referendum. It does this not just at the state level but also for all 39 counties and all 281 cities in our state. It is a blatant attempt to undercut efficient and deliberative government by Tim Eyman whose goal is to shrink the powers of representative government.
INITIATIVE 1033 IS A COMPLEX WEALTH TRANSFER SCHEME. It would transfer sales tax dollars collected from everyone and use them to only pay property taxes for property owners. The problem is that not everyone owns property. This scheme increases the unfairness of our tax system. Renters will pay the same taxes as before under I-1033 but will both get no tax rebate and see no increased public services for their tax dollars.
I-1033 is special interest legislation designed to hamstring government from operating efficiently. It is a complex wealth transfer scheme that benefits rich property owners. And it is not needed. There is no fiscal crisis demanding radical change of this nature. It is a dream scheme by anti-government anti-tax fanatic Tim Eyman and deserves a resounding NO vote this November. We don't need to make our current recession permanent.
More...
INITIATIVE 1033 FREEZES STATE AND LOCAL SPENDING AT THE CURRENT LEVEL.
It says that none of the cuts made in public services as a result of the current recession can be restored without a public vote. Public votes take time, cost money and allow politics and special interest money to influence the outcome.
INITIATIVE 1033 IS A RADICAL SHIFT AWAY FROM REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT. It would take away the current power of our elected public representatives to make budget decisions and turns the process over to budgeting by referendum. It does this not just at the state level but also for all 39 counties and all 281 cities in our state. It is a blatant attempt to undercut efficient and deliberative government by Tim Eyman whose goal is to shrink the powers of representative government.
INITIATIVE 1033 IS A COMPLEX WEALTH TRANSFER SCHEME. It would transfer sales tax dollars collected from everyone and use them to only pay property taxes for property owners. The problem is that not everyone owns property. This scheme increases the unfairness of our tax system. Renters will pay the same taxes as before under I-1033 but will both get no tax rebate and see no increased public services for their tax dollars.
I-1033 is special interest legislation designed to hamstring government from operating efficiently. It is a complex wealth transfer scheme that benefits rich property owners. And it is not needed. There is no fiscal crisis demanding radical change of this nature. It is a dream scheme by anti-government anti-tax fanatic Tim Eyman and deserves a resounding NO vote this November. We don't need to make our current recession permanent.
15
As the Washington Research Council notes in their recent analysis of I-1033, current projections show the state budget for 2009-2011 having a negative balance of $195 million. I-1033 would increase the budget shortfall to $871 million. This is for a maintenance budget- no new programs.
The impact on the 2011-2013 state budget is even worse. Here's what the Washington Research Council says the Impact on the 2011 -2013 State Budget would be:
"Even without passage of I-1033, the budget outlook for 2011–13 is grim. While the 2009 legislature did make substantial real cuts in spending, it also relied heavily on onetime money to balance the 2009–11 budget. Incorporating the June forecast, general fund spending for the biennium exceeds revenues by $1.4 billion. In addition, $2.5 billion in federal stimulus funds are being used to sustain programs that would normally be funded through the general fund. For 2011–13 these programs will shift back to the general fund.
Using OFM’s revenue growth assumptions, general fund revenues are expected to grow by $3.5 billion from 2009–11 to 2011–13.
We have yet to see projections of “maintenance-level” cost increases for 2011–13. Looking backwards, the maintenance level increase for the 2007-09 biennium was $1.4 billion, while the maintenance level increase for 2009-11 was $2.1 billion.
With a $1.4 billion maintenance level increase, the budget gap for 2011–13 would be $1.8 billion; with a $2.1 billion maintenance level increase the gap would be $2.5 billion. I-1033 would expand these gaps to $3.8 billion and $4.5 billion, respectively."
The impact on the 2011-2013 state budget is even worse. Here's what the Washington Research Council says the Impact on the 2011 -2013 State Budget would be:
"Even without passage of I-1033, the budget outlook for 2011–13 is grim. While the 2009 legislature did make substantial real cuts in spending, it also relied heavily on onetime money to balance the 2009–11 budget. Incorporating the June forecast, general fund spending for the biennium exceeds revenues by $1.4 billion. In addition, $2.5 billion in federal stimulus funds are being used to sustain programs that would normally be funded through the general fund. For 2011–13 these programs will shift back to the general fund.
Using OFM’s revenue growth assumptions, general fund revenues are expected to grow by $3.5 billion from 2009–11 to 2011–13.
We have yet to see projections of “maintenance-level” cost increases for 2011–13. Looking backwards, the maintenance level increase for the 2007-09 biennium was $1.4 billion, while the maintenance level increase for 2009-11 was $2.1 billion.
With a $1.4 billion maintenance level increase, the budget gap for 2011–13 would be $1.8 billion; with a $2.1 billion maintenance level increase the gap would be $2.5 billion. I-1033 would expand these gaps to $3.8 billion and $4.5 billion, respectively."
16
From: Tim Eyman, I-1033 co-sponsor
RE: Research Council's I-1033 graph makes opponents look foolish
We've spent months verbally describing I-1033's policies and how they will reduce property taxes by controlling the growth of government.
There's an old saying: A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS.
The Washington Research Council created a very straightforward graph, using the state's own numbers, illustrating I-1033's policies. Here it is:
http://www.permanent-offense.org/pdf/Bri…
This graph makes several things abundantly clear:
1) This graph shows that I-1033 will substantially REDUCE our state's crushing property tax burden. I-1033 will, for the first time, actually LOWER property taxes for everyone in the state by refunding excess revenues back to taxpayers via lower property taxes.
2) This graph shows that I-1033 allows the government to grow, but at a more affordable, sustainable rate. Without I-1033, government will get back on the fiscal roller coaster, overextending themselves in good times -- creating unsustainable budgets -- which inevitably leads to slashing during bad times (Gregoire's first term shows what happens when politicians have no limits on how fast they can grow government -- the result? A $9 billion deficit).
3) This graph shows that I-1033's opponents are laughably inaccurate when they talk about 'cuts in government' or 'slashed budgets' under I-1033. That's clearly absurd. Their Chicken Little, sky-is-falling statements about I-1033 are ridiculous in light of this graph which tracks the growth of government under I-1033.
4) This graph shows the automatic increase in government under I-1033 ASSUMING VOTERS NEVER GIVE THEM MORE AT THE BALLOT BOX. Remember, I-1033 has a safety valve that gives the citizens control over how fast government will grow and how big a tax burden we can afford. Under I-1033, if government decides that the automatic increase provided by I-1033 isn't a big enough increase, they can go to the voters and ask for more.
Take another look: http://www.permanent-offense.org/pdf/Bri…
How can opponents of I-1033 look at this graph and say with a straight-face that I-1033 will 'destroy' government?
More...
RE: Research Council's I-1033 graph makes opponents look foolish
We've spent months verbally describing I-1033's policies and how they will reduce property taxes by controlling the growth of government.
There's an old saying: A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS.
The Washington Research Council created a very straightforward graph, using the state's own numbers, illustrating I-1033's policies. Here it is:
http://www.permanent-offense.org/pdf/Bri…
This graph makes several things abundantly clear:
1) This graph shows that I-1033 will substantially REDUCE our state's crushing property tax burden. I-1033 will, for the first time, actually LOWER property taxes for everyone in the state by refunding excess revenues back to taxpayers via lower property taxes.
2) This graph shows that I-1033 allows the government to grow, but at a more affordable, sustainable rate. Without I-1033, government will get back on the fiscal roller coaster, overextending themselves in good times -- creating unsustainable budgets -- which inevitably leads to slashing during bad times (Gregoire's first term shows what happens when politicians have no limits on how fast they can grow government -- the result? A $9 billion deficit).
3) This graph shows that I-1033's opponents are laughably inaccurate when they talk about 'cuts in government' or 'slashed budgets' under I-1033. That's clearly absurd. Their Chicken Little, sky-is-falling statements about I-1033 are ridiculous in light of this graph which tracks the growth of government under I-1033.
4) This graph shows the automatic increase in government under I-1033 ASSUMING VOTERS NEVER GIVE THEM MORE AT THE BALLOT BOX. Remember, I-1033 has a safety valve that gives the citizens control over how fast government will grow and how big a tax burden we can afford. Under I-1033, if government decides that the automatic increase provided by I-1033 isn't a big enough increase, they can go to the voters and ask for more.
Take another look: http://www.permanent-offense.org/pdf/Bri…
How can opponents of I-1033 look at this graph and say with a straight-face that I-1033 will 'destroy' government?
Most Commented on Slog
-
Stephen Fry v. the Catholic Church by Dan Savage
-
Straight Up by Dan Savage
-
Neologism Needed by Dan Savage
-
Palin's Cheat Sheet by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Toilet Brush Off by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
Tea Party Crowd Believes That Only Good Spellers Should Vote by Dan Savage
-
How's That Hopey, Changey Stuff Working Out For Childhood Obesity? by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
The Green Police Super Bowl Commercial by Charles Mudede
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (16) RSS