November 01, 2006
Ballot measure policy briefs

If you're trying to decide how to vote on the state, King County and Seattle ballot measures, the Washington Policy Center has detailed policy briefs about some of these:
State I-920 estate tax
State I-933 property fairness
State I-937 renewable energy
King County Prop. 2 higher sales tax for buses
Seattle Prop. 1 property tax levy for street repair

My endorsements are here. For comprehensive analysis, read the WPC briefs.

UPDATE: A reader recommends the Washington Research Council briefs on I-920 and I-933.

The WPC brief entirely misses the shell game done with the estate tax last year to make it look like it's needed to fund education. That is a bad omission. The revenue expected to be raised by the estate tax was simply swapped with the same amount of property tax revenue that would otherwise have gone into the Student Achievement Fund for purposes of I-728. Net impact on General Fund: $138 million in revenue it otherwise would not have had (and so $138 million to spend on various stuff). Net impact on Student Achievement Fund: zero. It gets no more and no less money than it had before the estate tax. The Research Council makes that point in its piece.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 01, 2006 11:05 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Stephan, have you looked at the insane number of Seattle City Council's 'charter changes'? Because.. they're all precisely as clear as mud.

Posted by: Al on November 1, 2006 11:33 AM
2. You may want to find out how Seattle has spent the 11 cents / gallon they already get as their share of the state Gas Tax revenues before voting yes on this. These links talk about how Tacoma spends them.

http://www.geocities.com/newtakhoman/101606.html

http://www.geocities.com/newtakhoman/101706.html

http://www.geocities.com/newtakhoman/101906.html

Posted by: JDH on November 1, 2006 11:39 AM
3. The WPC did its usual excellent job on what as Stefan already said is a comprehensive analysis of I-920, I-933, and I-937. Anyone who wants to get a full, dispassionate, and objective view of on these 3 initiatives should put a visit to the WPC website at the top of their list.

The WPC analysis confirms Stefan had it right:
YES on I-920 and I-933;
NO on I-937.

I'll add a recommendation of my own:
YES on the Constitutional Amendment (haven't heard much controvery on this one; I expect it to pass by a wide margin).

Latest WA-PDC #s show that the left-wing eco-extremist, big-government crowd has now raised just a hair under $3.7 million to fight I-933. Last update I got shows only about $6000 of that $3.7M was from Eastern WA; it's overwhelmingly from ''Greater Seattle'':
Wealthy Microsofties (including Gates and Ballmer), Bullitt and Brainard Foundations, and activist groups based on the east coast like the Nature Conservancy (take a look at who's on the Nature Conservancy board some time).

Meanwhile, the WA State Farm Bureau and friends at www.propertyfairness.com have raised just under $1.2 million from all over WA. Contrary to claims by I-933 opponents, Americans for Limited Government has only provided 30 percent of that total. And of course a lot of that went to gather signatures

SUMMARY: We in the Farm Bureau can't match the super-rich contributors to the anti-933 campaign in dollars. But we are talking to all our neighbors. Hope the non-moonbat readers of SP will do the same, and urge THEIR friends to follow Stefan's good recommendations.

Posted by: Methow Ken on November 1, 2006 01:28 PM
4. I am dumbfounded by your claim in your "General Principles" that one of the reasons you are not a Democrat is that Democrats "limit your freedoms". What!? The Democrats didn't vote in the Patriots Act which is more limiting to individual freedoms than any legistration brought into Law since the founding of this Country. Democrats believe in Women's right to reproductive choice. Republicans clearly do not. And, what about land use? I could go on with examples for quite some time.

There may be many issues which the Democrat party supports that you don't agree with, but if there one clear theme that is the Democratic party, it is "PERSONAL FREEDOM'S OF THE MANY OUTWAY THE SPECIAL INTERESTS OF THE FEW". In fact, from my perspective one of the major challenges that the Democrats have is that their base is so extremely diverse it is hard many times to find common ground throughout the party.

I think you need to re-evaluate what drives your principles. If you typically vote republican and you are honest with yourself, I think you would find that your wallet drives you far more than your own personal freedoms and integrity.

Posted by: Harold on November 1, 2006 01:35 PM
5. The WPC provides a thorough analysis of the death tax in Washington state. However, it is important to understand that Washington's death tax is not indexed for inflation. A $300,000 house in Seattle appreciating at 10% per year will be worth more than $2,000,000 in 20 years, subjecting a high percentage of middle class citizens to the death tax. WPC analysis does not take the non-indexing factor into consideration. As inflation inexorably drives death tax revenue higher, government will become more hooked on it. At some point the death tax in Washington will become an issue similar to the IRS Alternative Minimum Tax (a non-indexed tax)that is ensnaring an ever-increasing number of taxpayers every year. The devil remains in the details.

Posted by: Hunter on November 1, 2006 01:49 PM
6. Harold, do you really want to get into that argument? For example:

"Democrats believe in Women's right to reproductive choice"; Republicans (some, anyway) believe in a child's right to not be killed for a woman's convenience.

Land use: Democrats are fighting 933, claiming owners have no right to be paid full value for land taken from them by government fiat; Republicans (most of us) are supporting 933.

That whole line is a no-win situation.

As to individual rights with regard to the Patriot Act, habeas corpus, etc., check out what the FDR administration did in WWII to AMERICAN CITIZENS: Japanese-American internment, for example, and internment of U.S. citizens thought to be security risks in the psychiatric ward of St. Elizabeth's hospital for the duration of the war - specifically to avoid having to allow those citizens the right to habeas corpus. The Bush administration has only been denying it to non-citizens, who have no such right under the Constitution anyway.

Try to improve your research.

Posted by: sro on November 1, 2006 01:56 PM
7. I thought the links were very helpful and informative with no bias. Thanks.

Posted by: MEGABRAD on November 1, 2006 02:44 PM
8. If opponents (can we say liberals?)really believe it will "cost the state $8 billion" then that must mean they think the state plans on taking away $8 Billion worth of value from land owners.
One other point about the supposed cost to the state of I-933. The "best use" of the land will almost always involve an increase in value of that land. The state stands to gain considerable tax revenue from the increased assessed value of that land. So what's all the complaining about?

Posted by: Scott C on November 1, 2006 03:49 PM
9. GS is weighing in:

Hell Yes - State I-920 No more estate tax
Hell Yes - State I-933 We need property fairness
Hell No - State I-937 renewable energy
Hell Hell No - King County Prop. 2 higher sales tax for buses
Hell Hell Hell No - Seattle Prop. 1 property tax levy for street repair

Hell Hell Hell Hell Hell Hell Hell No - You have to be kidding.......Burner?

Hell Yes - Reichert

Hell Yes - Mc Gavick

Help save this state from these Dumb Shit Democraps!

Yee Haw!

Posted by: GS on November 1, 2006 05:48 PM
10. My guess is that harold has a low "dumbfound" threshold...

Posted by: alphabet soup on November 1, 2006 08:29 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?