May 18, 2005
I-912

The Secretary of State has given the "No New Gas Tax" Initiative the number "912". It's now in the hands of the Attorney General to prepare the ballot title.

Here is the text of the proposed initiative, as it came out of the code reviser's office. It's very simple, it basically strikes the gas tax increase from the legislation just enacted.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at May 18, 2005 08:56 PM | Email This
Comments
1. GREAT: a republican with an attitude gets to put the ballot title on the initiative that could possibly grind transportation to a halt in this state, if it passes. Let me see: How about, the "Responsible taxation initiative" or the "gas tax fraud initiative" or "vote no on any tax" initiative

Posted by: who'dathunk! on May 18, 2005 09:03 PM
2. I think the're all just tired of paying excess taxes to folks who think like you. All believing that you're entitled to get things for free, from a government built from a populace of folks who think like you.

Posted by: JT on May 18, 2005 09:10 PM
3. I know this is a waste of keystrokes to try to reason with somebody that resorts to wild-eyed hyperbole about transportation GRINDING TO A HALT (OH THE SKY IS FALLING THE SKY IS FALLING) if taxes aren't jacked up again with no accountability..

But it's not "vote no on any tax" - it's "vote no on throwing more money down more wasteful ratholes with no real accountability." And just as importantly, it's "remind the representative just who they work FOR."

If you choose not to recognize that distinction, it's pretty much impossible to discuss anything with you.

Posted by: RookieRick on May 18, 2005 09:19 PM
4. What a great coincedence. Tim Eyman is Planning on Buying a Porsche 912 or 4 or 5 of them with his sugar daddys money.

Please righties, how do you think we should pay for the services we all demand? It amazes that 29 cents to keep our infrastructure is giving you such a hard time, when $1.50 Gas price in a year means nothing to you. Do you all own Exxon stock or have relatives in Saudi Arabia?

Just answer....what do you want to do about the Viaduct, 520 and the other road projects?...now no cheating, or credit cards for your kids to pay for later...how you gonna pay for it?

Posted by: danw on May 18, 2005 09:23 PM
5. danw, maybe you missed it the first 1000 times it's been expressed around here... but a lot of folks would be happy to fund an appropriate repair/replacement of the Viaduct that is actually funded, instead of a downpayment on an elaborate boondoggle.

The notion of a huge tax increase that doesn't actually ACCOMPLISH something just doesn't sit well with conservatives. It's typical tax-and-spend garbage.

Posted by: RookieRick on May 18, 2005 09:30 PM
6. Get those initiatives printed and if the libs are so damn sure they are the party that is representing the majority of this state, that means if it makes the ballot it should surely die. I suspect however that the grand majority of the people of this state will kick this gas tax so far out of the ballfield that even a sound transit train (when ever the heck they get one up and running) won't be able to find it.

Lets see there are now around 11000 people signed up to get signatures, and so 30-50 signatures each should put this well over the top. Where is the King County Elections department when we need them?

Posted by: GS on May 18, 2005 09:34 PM
7. Please righties, how do you think we should pay for the services we all demand?

Ever think of not demanding so much and start doing for yourself a little?

Posted by: DakotaRed on May 18, 2005 09:48 PM
8. Rookie Rick,

I'm one of the 11,000 people that signed up to get signatures. I've asked to get petitions to collect 150. That's three times as many needed per person to put this on the ballot.

We are going to get this initiative on the ballot, pass it overwhelmingly with the support of the Eastern half of the state which you Seattle leftists conveniently forget even exists, and then Olympia is going to have to figure out how to better spend (or perish-the-thought, actually cut programs) to balance the budget and provide for ample transportation.

Read our lips, no new taxes!

And before you start to whine about needed road improvements, go look at this year's budget and explain why we need million dollar study after study? If we cut out all those crap studies and huge loss projects like Sound Transit where taxpayers foot 98% of the cost of each round trip, there would be more than enough dollars to keep our transportation infrastructure intact and even to fund all your pet leftist social welfare programs.

Posted by: Jeff B. on May 18, 2005 09:49 PM
9. "....what do you want to do about the Viaduct, 520 and the other road projects?..."

What do *I* want to do about them? Hmm...let me see.
First, let me count the times I have driven on the Viaduct. That makes...zero! yup, zero. I have never driven on the Viaduct.
Now, about that there 520 thing. I think I've driven on that about...oh, 5 times in my life?
So, that means that every single time I put gas in my car, which never drives on those roads, I have to fund roads and construction which I don't use, and don't plan on using? In other words, I am subsidizing those who do drive on those roads, so they don't have to pay it all themselves?

Oh, wait--there's a solution that comes to mind--here it comes--T-O-L-L. Hmm...so the user of these roads pays the cost of driving on them? What a silly concept!

Posted by: Pseudotsuga on May 18, 2005 09:55 PM
10. he said: "Please righties, how do you think we should pay for the services we all demand? "

DanW, frankly I can't think of any particular services that I demand. Maybe national security, although I think DHS would more properly be renamed Dept of Homeland Insecurity.

I find government provides some services that I find useful and efficient, but I reckon I could do without most of the rest of 'em.

"We" don't demand them. Seems to me it's folks, perhaps like you, who think they are entitled to cradle-to-grave support and mollycoddling to support every single event that occurs in their life.

Posted by: MikeF on May 18, 2005 09:58 PM
11. dan w whodathunk - are you just pretending to be naive and ignorant or is it for real ? If the government were better able to be trusted with our money, we would have swallowed a tax like this without an initiative.

Where have you been the last 10 years - Sound Transit Light Rail, Taxpayer Stadiums #1 and #2 in Seattle - one that overturned the will of the people are the big reasons why this initiative will make the ballot and will win overwhelmingly in November.

How would trust be restored in the State Government. One step would be to pass I-900 for Performance Audits - that would be a step in the right direction. Another step would be to elect Dino Rossi as Governor - hopefully sooner than 2008.

Posted by: KS on May 18, 2005 09:58 PM
12. supplemental:

I really don't particularly give a rat's a$$ about your precious viaduct, either.

Posted by: MikeF on May 18, 2005 10:02 PM
13. You know the nails are being driven down on the coffin lid when the troll count is this high
:-)

It's like in the horror movies when the villain sees the end is near.

trolls- I know its hard for you ambulence chasers to believe this but there's easier ways for smart people to make money than debunking fraudulent taxes.

Stop passing stupid legislation and we will stop repealing them with initiatives.

Posted by: Andy on May 18, 2005 10:05 PM
14. The initiative is not a vote for "no taxes" it's a vote for better spending of the taxes that we already pay. We all strive to live responsibly within our own budgets and it should be no different for the state. Come on now, should government be the largest employer in the state? It is already and needs to change.

Personally, I think that we, the people, should go further and propose a Proposition 13 to limit property taxes and an Initiative 37 (Oregon) to compensate property owners for land use laws that legislate value from the rightful owners (AKA GMA/CAO). It is not the role of the government to redistribute the wealth. It's just a matter of time before the pendulum of outrage for wasteful spending will hit this state full force.

Bring on the bold leaders of change and hail the dismantling of the trainwreck in Olympia!

Posted by: Elvis is the King County on May 18, 2005 10:05 PM
15. If 9.5 cents collects 8.5 billion over the next 16 years, then the 28 cents we currently pay will generate roughly 28 billion. Where is this money going? Is it being spent wisely? With this type of money rolling in, why were there so many "safety" projects as yet unfunded that it forced the new tax increase to be tagged as an emergency?

With traffic congestion, mileage goes down, more gas is used, and more taxes are collected. Maybe this is their plan for additionally increasing revenues - to spend who knows where?

Posted by: Jack on May 18, 2005 10:07 PM
16. MikeF--
With you 100%

I formerly scoffed at initiatives and the like, until I noticed our politicians basically ignoring our votes and wishes repeatedly. It wasn't just a one-time fluke. Business expense accounts & budgets taught me fiscal restraint and protecting "other peoples' (company) monies." This is lost on elected officials. People do not mind paying taxes for effective, reasonable public works and services. Just give us our due--act like the fiduciaries that you took an oath to be.

Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on May 18, 2005 10:15 PM
17. Jeff B, I'm on your team. :)

Posted by: RookieRick on May 18, 2005 10:16 PM
18. Ya know, if the taxes were actually DEDICATED to transportation, and would be IN ADDITION to existing funding levels for transport, and were spent wisely, with auditor oversight, I'd be all for it.

What will happen is that $8.5 bilion will come in for transportation. Of course, the normal transportation budgets will be cut by nearly $8.5 billion, so the actual INCREASE in transit spending will be a lot less than $8.5 billion (if any). It's just a way to do a "bait and switch" to get a plain tax increase.

Oh, and the viaduct? Replace it with another viaduct, not a boondoggle of a tunnel!

Posted by: Edmonds Dan on May 18, 2005 10:23 PM
19. I really like the "vote no on any tax."

Posted by: cc on May 18, 2005 10:26 PM
20. This is not just about a gas tax. This is about the will of the people being ignored time after time. After twenty or more of these initiatives of the people pass, maybe the, smarter than the people, politicians and judges in this state will figure out that they work for us, we don't work for them, and they had better start listening.

Posted by: Glenn on May 18, 2005 10:30 PM
21. It's always will of the people here. I will leave you to your selfish selves. How hard is it to pass a bill that says " I want to pay less taxes"......as long as you don't list the items that needed to be cut.
You know you always talk about makeing better for commerce. Boeings biggest complaint was the Traffic...not the tax structure. So have a great time with this weeks circle jerk.

Mike F. unless you are a survivalist(which you probably are, but you still need roads to get your AK47's to the camp) in Idaho...rethink which services you REALLY don't need.

Goodnight, I will be counting you in my sleep.

Posted by: danw on May 18, 2005 10:39 PM
22. The tea is being thrown overboard and the Olympiacrats have got to be taking notes. Covington, yes Covington with two liberal state reps (simpson and Sullivan) voted down a tax 3 to 1. The "pro" tax side said it failed because they didn't educate us enough. Imagine the education Olympia would think we need if the gas tax goes down like that.

Posted by: PC on May 18, 2005 10:40 PM
23. Elvis - how can we have a train wreck in Olympia? Comrade Sims has stolen all of the railroad tracks to use for trails for the "people". He took a little bit of private property all over the county while he was at it. The people for whom he is making the purchases certainly do not belong to the landed gentry! On top of that, they won't be paying the gas tax because they probably ride bikes on "private property" trails, wearing those ridiculous little biker outfits. Let's see . . . they don't own property (or pay property tax), but they want the best parts of what somebody else WORKED for. They don't care how high gas taxes go because they don't own cars. Hmmm . . . no wonder they like taxes . . . OTHER people pay them!

Posted by: lksimstrailgrammy on May 18, 2005 11:06 PM
24. By jove...I think he's finally got it. Yer right Danw...it is "THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE."

No we just gotta get Oly to unnerstand it.

Posted by: Blueknight on May 18, 2005 11:07 PM
25. When Sound Transit "Whoops on Wheels" gets cancelled, we will once again have money for these massive projects that really move people. Until Railroad Ron and many other of the current politicians get removed, there will never be enough money to move people. Sound Transit will not do it. Higher taxes will not either!

Posted by: GS on May 18, 2005 11:17 PM
26. If I-912 passes, it will prohibit the state legislature from increasing the gasoline tax again for the next two years without a 2/3 majority of all the members of each house of the legislature. This is because the people are specifically voting on Section 2 of I-912, which will expressly set the gasoline tax at 28 cents per gallon.

If the Legislature had sent the gasoline tax increase to the voters in a referendum, and that referendum had failed, things would be different. The Legislature could simply come back the following year and enact the gasoline tax by a simple majority vote of each house.

If John Carlson and Kirby Wilbur pull this one off, they will have basically prevented any gasoline tax increase from being passed by the legilsature until at least the 2008 session -- since it would be really hard to get a 2/3 absolute majority after the people voted it down.

Posted by: Richard Pope on May 18, 2005 11:28 PM
27. How long after I-912 passes with an overwhelming majority, do you think it will take the Democrats to be in court challenging it? Seems I remember them doing just that back when we voted down the high Excise Tax on car tags and wanted new taxes to go before the voters.

"Will of the people" is meaningless until we get some Judges who realize that concept as well.

Posted by: DakotaRed on May 19, 2005 12:51 AM
28. Someone above asks how we think the state will pay for all the transportation projects it needs. Well here is an answer:

1) Kill the monorail and use that money to build the new viaduct.
2) Kill light rail and use that money to build a new 520 bridge.
3) Kill social service programs that are designed to combat marriage in the state, us that money to build more roads.
4) Get rid of all the HOV lanes on all highways. Open them up and let traffic flow.
5) Tear down the convention center built over I-5 and expand I-5 through downtown Seattle. Privatize the ferry system and use the savings in subsidies to pay for removing this idiotic I-5 bottleneck.
6) Eliminate the onerous taxes, regulations, and requirements placed on businesses in the state, so they prosper, increasing employment, increasing income and greatly expanding the amount of sales tax received by the state.

Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on May 19, 2005 12:52 AM
29. If you folks on the left are o.k. with throwing more of your weekly paycheck away into the transportation money pit of Washington State then go for it!...but don't expect me to go along for the ride. I'm not interested in giving more of my check to a system run by a bunch of idiots who only have social engineering at heart and want me by hell or high water to ride a bus, fund bike paths and help build something called a viaduct!

Posted by: Route101 on May 19, 2005 03:27 AM
30. I second pseudotsuga's response. Tolls. If they're good enough for SW Washingtonians that use the Interstate and Glenn Jackson Bridges, it should be good enough for Seattleites.

Posted by: Andy on May 19, 2005 04:26 AM
31. I love the way lefties think.

Well, perhaps not "love," exactly. But I do find it amusing.

First, the government spends tax money on anti-smoking propaganda, "diversity" education, the Office of Minority and Women's Business, the Commission on Asian-American Affairs, the Commission on Hispanic Affairs, the Commission on African-American Affairs, the Washington State Arts Commission, etc., etc., etc.

Then they tell us they need to raise taxes to provide essential services.

Here's a radical thought: Pay for the essential stuff first. Then tell the people they must pay more taxes to supports the Commission on Disabled Lesbian Farmers and Performance Artists.

Posted by: ScottM on May 19, 2005 05:42 AM
32. Interesting...if you don't demand to be spoonfed by the government cradle-to-grave, you're a survivalist with an AK47, according to DanW. My, what a perverted, paranoid, intolerant, and arrogant attitude that is.

Posted by: MikeF on May 19, 2005 05:53 AM
33. danw,
You realize, of course, that the cost of gas to fuel your lawn mower, you know, that thing you use to make a little extra pot money, will increase. You may have to mow a couple of extra lawns in order to fund your lifestyle.

Posted by: REBEL on May 19, 2005 05:56 AM
34. Andy - We would be doing the entire state a huge favor if we put a toll on all roads leading into & out of Seattle, and used the proceeds to fund some mental health interventions ;'}

Posted by: alphabet soup on May 19, 2005 06:52 AM
35. I changed my name to Andy SW as I only later discovered there was already an "Andy" on here. My apologies...


Alphabet Soup - good idea, however we would then be no better than the libs - reallocating funds that should be used for essential services. :-)

But seriously, Interstate Bridge is not getting any younger and can't handle traffic any more. So a new bridge (incl. light rail) is being proposed. It's supposed to be funded by tolls, just like the original span and the addition 50 years ago. Fair enough. But shouldn't WSDOT apply the same logic and policy to the Alaska Way Viaduct and that other bridge up there? In all honesty, the whole tax bill sounds like a payback of the former Attorney General to her King Co. constituents.

Posted by: Andy SW on May 19, 2005 07:14 AM
36. "It's always will of the people here." - danw
Your God dam right.

So who's will is it for you? The Government?

P.S. danw, "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." Keep that in mind.

Posted by: Son of Liberty on May 19, 2005 07:16 AM
37. SW- It makes us twice as right. Especially on the tolls.

Posted by: Andy on May 19, 2005 08:08 AM
38. There are a lot of problems with the way this state runs transportation issues. Mass Transit make people pay the cost to use it and no one will use it. Would anyone pay $20 one way to take the train. No they would not. Yet the Taxpayer picks up the difference. Why do tax payers have to pay 80 to 90% of the cost of Mass Transit. The riders are getting a free ride of taking other peoples money to use mass transit.
Likewise the way the government spends money on road projects. Why is the number one priority being setup to make HOV lanes? Have we not had 2 decades of no new general purpose roads. WHy is it that HOV lanes or SPecial Mass Transit only lanes are the priority. Unless there is a change in the mindset in Olympia this will continue to be money to fund anything but general purpose lanes. That is where I have problems with this gas tax. 2Billion for a project that has not been designed yet. 2 Billion on exisiting jobs ready to start seems a better way to spend the money.

Posted by: David Anfinrud on May 19, 2005 08:18 AM
39. DeadManVoting has got it.

It's about reprioritization. No one is denying that Boeing had issues with traffic. We all know that our current roads are lame. But let's fix the problems in a reasonable order.

We don't need a billion dollar tunnel, we need to shore up the viaduct, or replace it with a cheaper structure. We don't need mass transit, when noone rides is and our roads are a more pressing problem. We don't need HOV lanes, when they are seldom used, and the traffic is so bottlenecked that every little bit of capacity will help.

Etc.

When Olympia shows us that they can act and spend responsibly, then we give them back their allowance.

Posted by: Jeff B. on May 19, 2005 08:21 AM
40. To all of the idiot lefties, just a reminder.

This initiative doesn't eliminate the new gas tax! With enough signatures (hopefully) it will simply be put on the ballot so that the TAX PAYERS can vote on it. Stop your "f"ing crying until the vote of the TAX PAYERS determines an outcome.

Until our representatives actually start representing us, we will continue to take the government into our own hands.

Posted by: Jeffro on May 19, 2005 08:37 AM
41. Danw,

"It's always will of the people here. I will leave you to your selfish selves. How hard is it to pass a bill that says " I want to pay less taxes"......as long as you don't list the items that needed to be cut."

With socialists it is always the will of the government elite instead of the people - they are just a damn nuisance anyway. I know which I prefer. If Oly gave us an accounting of where the money went I would more than gladly tell them which ones I want cut. That is the issue, they do not account for where the money is going. Until they do, they don't get more!

Another thing, considering how this is such a dem state, and dems are so enlightened, how could a selfish bill pass. I thought it was just reps that are so selfish?

Posted by: Fred on May 19, 2005 08:40 AM
42. I'm sure this will pass with overwhelming support and I will get out and do everything I can to help.

But...if we don't start pooling together to support Repbulican candidates (even if they're not in our district) it will just be more of the same.

Let's change the balance of power in Olympia so we don't have to go through this every year!!!

Posted by: No Phony's Allowed on May 19, 2005 08:56 AM
43. No Phony's - I agree 100%

Let's also not forget the Rs that voted in favor of the gas tax which not only allowed this tax to pass but took away the partisan blame they could have used in the next election.

Let's vote in true Rs or we'll still get more of the same.

Posted by: Jeffro on May 19, 2005 09:07 AM
44. No Phony's Allowed, Jeffro,
105% with ya (If the demo's can over count, I can too)

Posted by: Son of Liberty on May 19, 2005 09:12 AM
45. Jeff B. - "It's about reprioritization. No one is denying that Boeing had issues with traffic. We all know that our current roads are lame. But let's fix the problems in a reasonable order."

I'm afraid that it's worse than that. If the current DOT/political crowd runs these projects, reprioritizing won't help, because when they are all done spending the billions, we will have no more capacity than we had before. Look at the Tacoma narrows bridge. They are building an entire new bridge:

Before: 2 lanes each way, free.
After: 2 general purpose lanes each way, with tolls, plus an HOV lane each way.

This is not progress. The entire DOT orginization has to go, down to and including the janitor.

Posted by: Dogbert on May 19, 2005 09:18 AM
46. It has always amazed me that governments feel the need to raise tax rates. In most cases, in an expanding economy, the raise in tax rates is unneccesary. I have not taken much time to analyze Washington State's financials like I have the Federal Government's so I can't speak with any surity on the need for increased tax rates, but in regards to our federal budget, I can say with certainty that tax rates actually need to be DECREASED on a regular basis. The federal revenue stream has continually outstripped both inflation AND population growth COMBINED from 1960 to present, and that INCLUDES accounting for the Kennedy, Reagan and Bush roll backs in tax rates. In other words, tax revenues are higher per capita today than they were in 1960, and that is adjusting for inflation.

As for Washington state, the only data I have begins in the 1993-1195 budget. Taking each 2 year budget from then to current, I see that our state expenditures have increased an average of 1.3% per year adjusted for inflation and population. Transportation has also increased, but only by .3%. I am assuming that the lower rate of growth is due to the Eyman initiative and the subsequnt drop in Ferry funding a few years back as the transportation budget was growing at a fine clip until a couple of years ago.

Anyway, in an expanding economy, state revenues should AUTOMATICALLY outstrip inflation and population, so the need for a tax increase should almost never be needed to fund existing programs AND add new ones along the way as revenue increases.

Now, as far as our transportation needs are concerned, if the Government can make a clear case why it's existing budget is insufficient for its long term needs and show me how it will spend the money it is asking for, I will be more likely to give them that money.

I work for a private company that seeks investors to fund new growth. I build the spreadsheets that demonstrate how that money will be spent and what kind of return they can expect from that investment. I know that I will be crucified if I can't clearly account for how our company's money is spent now and clearly explain how we will spend new money in the future. I think our government owes it's "angel" investers the same consideration. If they can't do it honestly and in an upfront manner, then we should shoot it down every time.

Posted by: Eyago on May 19, 2005 09:22 AM
47. Well said Eyago!

Posted by: Fred on May 19, 2005 09:27 AM
48. If Boeing moved because of traffic and taxes, then they made an unbelievably stupid choice with Chicago. I always thought they moved so they didn't have to fly five or six hours to and from DC, etc...

Posted by: CandrewB on May 19, 2005 09:42 AM
49. DakotaRed wrote, "Ever think of not demanding so much and start doing for yourself a little?"

Like rebuilding entire highways?

Posted by: Daniel K on May 19, 2005 10:39 AM
50. No Daniel K, like supporting yourself instead of society supporting people that are too good to work and for some jobs. That is why the illegal immigrants are coming here for the jobs that are beneath the lazy. They figure it is easier to let the state take care of them then actually working. We could learn from the illegals what work and trying to improve your lot is all about.

Posted by: Fred on May 19, 2005 10:43 AM
51. Too fast on the "post" button (or a very bad proof reader...

"We could learn from the illegals what work and trying to improve your lot is all about." was meant to be

We could learn from the illegals what work really is and what trying to improve your lot in life is all about.

Posted by: Fred on May 19, 2005 10:46 AM
52. Fred wrote, "No Daniel K, like supporting yourself instead of society supporting people that are too good to work and for some jobs. That is why the illegal immigrants are coming here for the jobs that are beneath the lazy. They figure it is easier to let the state take care of them then actually working. We could learn from the illegals what work and trying to improve your lot is all about."

Huh??? And this is relevant to a transportation bill that includes a gas tax targeted for highway repairs and replacement how?

Posted by: Daniel K on May 19, 2005 10:54 AM
53. Daniel K - good non answer. Here is the sequense:

danw: Please righties, how do you think we should pay for the services we all demand?

That is a general statement on government services. Then DakotaRed wrote IN RESPONSE to danw:

Ever think of not demanding so much and start doing for yourself a little?

Context on government services.

You wrote:

Like rebuilding entire highways?

A small part of government services to which I responded. That is how it is relevant to the thread. Make sense now?

Posted by: Fred on May 19, 2005 11:06 AM
54. Tell you what Fred, you can finance your inch of the road you take responsibility for, but don't you start driving on my inch of the road unless you pay for it. Do you think that is a better solution? Didn't think so.

Our transportation infrastructure is a shared responsibility. The maintenance of that infrastructure is our shared responsibility. The funding for that maintenance is our shared responsibility. Paying the taxes needed to fund the maintenance is our duty as citizens of this state.

You folks were all hooting and hollering a few months ago when Shark was on his man-hunt for out-of-state voters. You were all screaming and yelling that they don't pay taxes here and therefore have no right to a vote here. Well, then if paying your taxes is the barometer for one's worthiness to engage in the political future of our state, step up to that responsibility and pay the taxes needed to maintain our transportation infrastructure.

Posted by: Daniel K on May 19, 2005 11:22 AM
55. Daniel K - I really need to save the following as it has been said soooo many times by so many people.

No one minds paying the taxes IF (please note the IF, it is rather important) the taxes already collected for the infrastructure are properly and fully account for. Until then, I for one, do not want to pay more taxes, as I feel the billions already collected are not being spent for what they were intended.

The state has one of the highest gas taxes in the country. With all the people moving here far more has been collected than anticipated (that must be true, as if they anticipated the influx more roads would have been built). Where is that money? Which infrastructure that the people wanted has been built? Which roads have been repaired? They now have developers building the roads for them for all the new people moving in? Doesn't it bother you at all that we have no real accounting of where this money goes?

Posted by: Fred on May 19, 2005 11:32 AM
56. Fred - If you have a problem with your insight into "where the money goes" then fight that battle. When was the last time any anti-tax crusader actually wrote an initiative that addressed that issue specifically. Your argument comes across as nothing but a smokescreen, even if you honestly are concerned about it.

Posted by: Daniel K on May 19, 2005 11:45 AM
57. Daniel K,
It isn't very hard to understand Daniel K. What are they doing with the money they already took?

Son calls from College.
Dad, Can I get $150 bucks for books.
Dad - OK
Son calls from College.
Dad, I need another $200 bucks.
Dad - Hmm, OK
Son calls from College.
Dad, I want $500 buck!
Son calls from College.
Dad - $500 bucks, what for now...
Son calls from College.
Dad, Hey now I want $1000 bucks.
Dad - Hang on son, tell me why and for what?
Son calls from College.
Mom, Dad's being stingy, send me $1500 or else.

Do you understand now...? What in God's name are they doing with our money??????

Posted by: Son of Liberty on May 19, 2005 12:20 PM
58. Daniel K - I am fighting the battle, take the money away. I'm sure the dems would have resepct for any accountability initiative just like they did 601. And anyway, isn't the government meant to be accountable to the people already? and that is being ignored.

Posted by: Fred on May 19, 2005 12:29 PM
59. Son of Liberty asks, "What in God's name are they doing with our money??????"

Ask that question of your legislator. Write an initiative that asks that question. With respect to the recently approved transportation plan they have specifically listed what they intend to do with the money.

Here's a good SoundPolitics article someone should write about: "Anchorage given a cool $1.5 million to build bus stop" (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002280354_busstop19.html)

Posted by: Daniel K on May 19, 2005 12:40 PM
60. "Ask that question of your legislator."

Unfortunately, my "legislator" is a liberal democraTIC, and doesn't know or care where the money is going.......

Posted by: alphabet soup on May 19, 2005 12:56 PM
61. alphabet soup - Have you ever asked him?

Posted by: Daniel K on May 19, 2005 12:59 PM
62. Danw,

"Please righties, how do you think we should pay for the services we all demand? "

Which services would those be? The emergency funds for millionaire sports stadiums or the $300,000 toilets for the homeless?

I don't demand Ron Simms' choo choo and yet $800 million is scheduled to go to that boondoggle from the gas tax ripoff.

As far as the viaduct goes, Seattle can pay for it with tolls just like the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. If they cannot afford it, then tear it down and leave it as a park as they did in Portland.

When you waste your money on frivolous things like space age toilets for the homeless, you shouldn't come to the state begging for another allowance. We aren't your father.

Posted by: pbj on May 19, 2005 01:07 PM
63. As a matter of fact, yes.

I do correspond with many of our state officials - regardless of district, or party. When I see one act decidedly imbecilic, or unprincipled, or just plain against my interests, I let them know it.

I have stated on other threads my frustration with the incivility (non-responsiveness) of our state officials (in both parties).

These people work for me, and I deserve a reply at the very least!

Unless, and until I see evidence that these people are minimally competent to be the steward of my money, they won't (willingly) get a dime!

Posted by: alphabet soup on May 19, 2005 01:13 PM
64. Just a question for you lefties, would you be happier of your car ran on Milk? How about bottled water?
Yessir, we have three levels, regular, Aquafina and Evian.
Or how about Starbucks?
Gasoline is cheaper by the gallon than the above products. C'mon libs, make a car that can run on those and you won't be lining the pockets of "Bushs' fat cat oil friends"
But a highway tax on milk is a bit wierd.

Posted by: PC on May 19, 2005 01:41 PM
65. I don't get folks sometimes...

For starters, the high cost of gas today is precisely why the tax needs to be raised occasionally. The gas tax is not a percentage, it's a flat rate. So, paying more money for a gallon of gas, which encourages people to drive less, LOWERS the taxes brought in.

Someone above asks how we think the state will pay for all the transportation projects it needs. Well here is an answer:

1) Kill the monorail and use that money to build the new viaduct. -- Why would any of you care? Seattleites voted to tax themselves because y'all refused to support Seattle-only transit. Don't complain when we don't want to pay for YOUR projects.

2) Kill light rail and use that money to build a new 520 bridge. -- Same as above, only covering approximately three-counties. Unless your beef is that Sound Transit isn't building what voters said yes to, in which case I agree with your anger...

4) Get rid of all the HOV lanes on all highways. Open them up and let traffic flow. -- Opening up HOV lanes does not significantly improve traffic flow. Why don't you try carpooling if you don't like it?

5) Tear down the convention center built over I-5 and expand I-5 through downtown Seattle. Privatize the ferry system and use the savings in subsidies to pay for removing this idiotic I-5 bottleneck. -- *L* Why don't we just tear down I-5? I don't use it. I live IN the city.

6) Eliminate the onerous taxes, regulations, and requirements placed on businesses in the state, so they prosper, increasing employment, increasing income and greatly expanding the amount of sales tax received by the state. -- How about getting rid of the stupid sales tax and B&O tax which are inherently unstable and replace them with a state income tax like almost every other state?

Posted by: Mickymse on May 19, 2005 05:52 PM
66. I have a better idea - just get rid of the democrats, who have proven themselves totally untrustworthy to deal with issues any more important than what sort of cupcakes to serve at a Bush-bash, and then the rest of us will sit down and sort out all of the important, adult stuff.......

Posted by: alphabet soup on May 19, 2005 06:24 PM
67. "For starters, the high cost of gas today is precisely why the tax needs to be raised occasionally. The gas tax is not a percentage, it's a flat rate. So, paying more money for a gallon of gas, which encourages people to drive less, LOWERS the taxes brought in."

Two problems with this:

1. Demand for motor fuel is very inelastic. The reduction in consumption is minimal. You think people are going to bike to work? Get real.

2. If the public has to tighten its belt, that is precicely when government should do so also. Why should the public get double whacked so that they get spared?

And for good measure, a third thing:

If taxes go up when revenues go down, why don't taxes go down when revenues go up?

Posted by: Dogbert on May 19, 2005 07:19 PM
68. DanielK, you asked me how does asking less of our government cover highway rebuilding and were aptly answered by others (thanks to you all).

Let's start with the 1.7 million dollar "study" Gregoire authorized on how the education department spends their money.

Not being in the government, I have to ask, don't we have a State Auditors Department? Doesn't the education department maintain financial records of what they spend? Isn't the auditors staff already paid to oversee State Expenditures?

I see it the same as borrowing money to get out of debt. You're still in debt, you just transferred to whom it is owed. Likewise, why waste more money to end wasteful spending when you already have people on salary to oversee that? If they can't be ebtrusted with the task, why are they on salary?

1.7 million won't fix everything, but it's just one example of how money is being thrown away that could be used better elsewhere.

As a man who has raised a family and lived on a limited income, at times, I was never able to just raise my pay as I deemed necessary. Sometimes, I had to go without a new jacket to ensure my children got what they needed. I see no reason the State of Washington, or any State, for that matter, should be able to operate differently.

I might also ask, since you are in favor of all these tax increases, do you support and wish to add the Latte tax in the Seattle area? Or, are you one who voted against it, when it came time for you to pay a little more?

Posted by: DakotaRed on May 20, 2005 12:58 AM
69. For all those whinning about the gas tax being raised to fund King County area improvements...its about time!

Over 65% of the transportation money in Washington state is used east of the cascades..where only 45% of the population resides. Its fascinating that this trend is nationwide, with the majority of tax revenue flowing from the productive "socialist" blue states to the "independant, don't need no gov'ment assistance" red states.

Maybe succession isn't a bad option. Let Western Washington, and Western Oregon join up. Eastern washington and Oregon can go join Idaho, and get the third world level of services they richly deserve.

I say we localize all funding for transportation. After all, you right wingers don't need government roads, or any help from the government. You're all rugged independant individualists. Spend King Country tax revenue locally, please! You guys can just tootle away cross country on your tractors and pickup trucks.

Posted by: Proteus on May 20, 2005 11:15 AM
70. Proteus - why don't you speak to something you know something about - like peanut butter sammiches or sumpthin...

Posted by: alphabet soup on May 20, 2005 03:33 PM
71. proteus, the majority of those big trucks that bring your tofurkey and faux leather furniture come across those roads in eastern WA. You wouldn't want them all shook apart would you? Besides, it's a helluva lot easier to get a permit to fix a road over there than it is to fix one over here. Drive throught the SODO area and observe.

Posted by: PC on May 20, 2005 03:58 PM
72. When they have cut out significant amounts of the waste, then they can come ask me for more money.

I don't need artwork for every publicly funded construction project.

Giving a bicycle helmet and pads to every scholl child is a waste of money... many already own the equipment, or will lose & abuse it.

The list goes on... go ahead, let's here some more waste stories.

Posted by: Mark on June 17, 2005 03:20 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?