KING5 went after Tim Eyman's initiative 1033 on Up Front today, trying to claim that we're not overtaxed and that our services will need to be cut. The former is an opinion, and the latter isn't true. You can watch the whole piece here.
Eyman didn't get much time to speak, and while he gave the basic idea for I-1033, he didn't really get into the details of how government has been growing out of control. But he did win the argument anyway.
(By the way, last week I commented to KING5 that it was odd they did a whole story on health care reform, with everyone agreeing we needed a government plan. Well, this week, they interviewed someone who was against a government plan. Good for them for correcting their error.)
Cross-posted on <pudge/*>.
Posted by pudge at July 12, 2009 09:39 AM | Email ThisHere's the comment I left at KING5 UPFRONT's website:
The description of I-1033 provided in this story isn't accurate. This story says that I-1033 "limits growth of property taxes" -- an initiative that voters approved in 2001 did that -- I-1033 is different.
Here's the official description of I-1033 as written by the Attorney General: This measure would limit growth of certain state, county and city revenue to annual inflation and population growth, not including voter-approved revenue increases. Revenue collected above the limit would reduce property tax levies.
Here�s what we�re debating with I-1033: how fast should the government grow and who should decide? I-1033 takes the position that the public sector should grow no faster than the private sector (with some reasonable exceptions) and it should be citizens, and not politicians, who decide.
I-1033 brings back successful policies and principles passed by the voters previously. In 1993, during tough economic times, voters approved I-601 which put reasonable limits on government�s fiscal policies. I-601 established a sustainable rate for government to grow.
I-601 worked very well for many years until the Legislature started putting loopholes in it, resulting in major deficits � $3.2 billion in 2003 � $9 billion in 2009. I-1033 reestablishes I-601�s same reasonable allowance for growth (inflation plus population growth) and includes a safety valve allowing higher increases with voter approval. I-1033 gets government off the �fiscal roller coaster,� allowing it to grow at a sustainable rate that doesn�t outpace taxpayers� ability to afford it.
I-1033 puts a reasonable limit on how fast government will automatically grow. If government decides that I-1033's automatic increase isn't big enough, then I-1033 has a safety valve which allows them to go to the voters and ask for a bigger increase.
What happens to excess tax revenues that government collects above I-1033's limit? After a fixed percentage of excess tax revenues is transferred into the constitutionally-protected rainy day fund, the remainder of excess tax revenues is refunded back to taxpayers via lower property taxes.
Property taxes keep going higher and higher and government keeps getting bigger and bigger. The people are losing control. I-1033 allows the state, counties, and cities to grow, but at a rate that citizens can control and taxpayers can afford. I-1033 gets government off the �fiscal roller coaster,� allowing it to grow at a sustainable rate that doesn�t outpace taxpayers� ability to afford it. I-1033 is needed now more than ever.
for more information on I-1033, check out our website: http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
Glad we can be clear on whose side the media is on.
Posted by: Andy on July 12, 2009 11:35 AMI guess if you're saying whether or not we're overtaxed is an opinion, then you're not disputing that factual statement by the Tax Foundation.
That same Tax Foundation chart shows these rankings in state and local tax burden:
NJ 1
NY 2
CT 3
MD 4
HI 5
CA 6
etc.
MS 36
MT 40
LA 42
TX 43
WY 48
NV 49
AK 50
It's interesting to look over the list and ask yourself, gee, IMHO what is the right level ....would I rather live in a place like Maryland (for example) or Wyoming or Mississippi (for example)?
One of the highest sales taxes, one of the highest gas taxes, the only state with taxes on gross revenues of business (B&O taxes). And yes, property taxes are a huge, huge burden to everyone, but most especially struggling working families and fixed-income senior citizens. They're getting kills by our state's crushing property tax burden.
I-1033 is needed now more than ever.
http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
Posted by: Tim Eyman, I-1033 co-sponsor on July 12, 2009 12:35 PMThe "right level" is up to the individual states. You could be the lowest taxed state in the Union and STILL be overtaxed ... obviously. If you can't understand this truism I am not sure what else to say to you.
Go back to 1989 when our state budget was $10.7 billion annually. Adjusted for pop. growth and inflation, that would have come to $23.4 billion annually in 2009, whereas the actual budget we have today is $34.5 billion. In other words, state spending has grown almost 1.5 times more than population+inflation.
Yet if you could get in a time machine and go back to 1989, would WA "look like" MS. No, not in the least. Thus the whole idea is absurd.
Posted by: travis t on July 12, 2009 02:44 PMCarolyn ?Douglas was lame and couln't keep her personal opinions out of the questioning and reporting
Posted by: Green Lake Mark on July 12, 2009 02:54 PMhttp://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009456950_streets12m.html
I spend a lot of time in Texas (number 50 on the list).
Their economy is still growing most places.
They are building new highways.
People there are pretty happy and (with the possible exception of in Austin) don't want more government.
I'd like Washington state government to be a lot more like Texas's personally. They spend their time and money on education, transportation, fire and police and that's about it.
Posted by: johnny on July 13, 2009 07:13 AMIt showed Texas as #43 on the list. I mistakenly referenced to it as if it had been #50 on the list.
(Though I could still use more coffee. What a dreary day out there. What happened to July???)
Posted by: johnny on July 13, 2009 09:56 AMWith that said, I am always for reducing taxes. Let me tell you what it is like here in Ellensburg, WA. Some reality for you.
Mr and Mrs Farmer inherited their house and small family farm from their parents. They have lived in their home now for 30 years and it has been in the family since it was built 60 years ago. Tax increases have forced them to sell most of their property over the last 15 years. That property has been parcelled out and is now 5 acre ritzy family homes instead of the open space it once was. No tresspassing signs are everywhere now. Seems these new folks from the city are not as friendly. Now along comes the state to triple the tax rate. Now of course, Mr and Mrs Farmer are now in their 70's and living on fixed income. And they are forced to give up not only their land, but now their home as well...
This happened two years ago. What I wonder is why they did not put a 'grandfather' clause in the tax increase legislation. Let's say something like a limitation where taxes would not increase (or at a reduced rate) for people over 50 and that have lived in their homes for more than 20 years. Quite reasonable. Certainly some avenue could have been found. Certainly it was thought of. And certainly it was left unspoken and denied so that politicians could again leverage their careers and put more money in their pockets... at the expense of the old and disabled.
The politicians in Olympia have no soul. One of the prerequisites of being a crook. They will take whatever they can to furthur themselves. They live in their white castle of maincured lawns and now have lost all sense of what it is like to live in the real world. This is politics in America - and yes, I know, that is a contradictive statement. Because America was not suppose to be like this.
As previously stated, our politicians have no sense of reality of what life is like out here under their imposed mis-management. Either that or they just do not care about people like the typical farmer communities. (The latter I think is the case.) They intentionally isolate themselves in Olympia so they do not have to experience the social and individual pain they cause. They are simply driven by the greed of profits of their legislation and advancement of their careers. Anonymity is a thing of the city, intentionally so that people can take advantage of one another without feeling 'bad about it', and a contradiction to the sense of community and connectiveness we have here in the country. Quite frankly, it is at the root and causing the decline in this country. Instead of caring about one another we victimize one another. For Gods sake, most of you do not even have tea with your neighbors anymore. You live closer together but live worlds apart from one another.
Tim Eyman is right on the mark here (as usual) and why I support him in any reasonable and sustainble limitations on what they do in Olympia.
"FULL STEAM AHEAD!"
Posted by: Ken Boettger on July 14, 2009 10:58 AMReally? Bullcrap. You obviously don't know how to read a spreadsheet.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/336.html
Washington is #35 on the lst. Why? We have no income tax. We have relatively low property taxes. And unfortunately, we get what we pay for. Crappy roads. No decent transit. Sub-par schools.
Posted by: Proteus on July 15, 2009 10:16 PMAlso, don't give me this nonsense about "crappy roads" and "decent transit" and "sub-par schools." Environmental insanity is the biggest reason the costs of roads and transit projects go so high they don't get done, not lack of revenue. And schools have MUCH MORE than enough money ... like $13K per student per year.
There's no serious attempt in state government to keep costs down: THIS is the problem. When our budget grows 33 percent in four years, so we SHOULD have MORE than enough money for projects we need, Gregoire says we have "a revenue problem," even though that massive increase is paid for. It's pure nonsense.
Finally, property taxes are only high or low based on what WE think, not what any other state or district or country has "relative" to us. By the "relative" argument, you should be all in favor of lowering corporate tax, as the U.S. has the highest in the industrialized world ... but I won't hold my breath for you to favor that.