This is as true now as it was at 8 pm tonight:
Whatever happens with Initiative 1033 tonight, Jack, Mike and I want everyone to know how proud we are of all our heroic supporters for getting 1033 before the voters for a vote. We respect and admire all of you for your enthusiasm and determination to make a difference.
Government doesn't get better when the citizenry acquiesces - government only gets better when the people provoke it, confront it, and challenge it. Politicians don't need adoring cheerleaders, they need the people to be hard-nosed coaches challenging politicians to do better.
To all those who supported 1033 with your vote, you sent a clear message demanding greater fiscal discipline. To all those who did not give 1033 your vote, thank you for participating in this historic debate - we listened closely to your concerns and we will work even harder to earn your vote in the future. We continue to learn, adapt, and persevere.
Regardless of the vote totals on 1033 tonight, this campaign has already proven to be a tremendous success. For the past year, 1033 has put a bright spotlight on government and the people have been given an invaluable opportunity to learn more about taxes and spending and government budgeting.
And most importantly, we heard state and local government officials say over and over again that 1033's limits weren't necessary because they promised not to raise taxes. There's no doubt that some voters voted no on 1033 because they believed these promises. With or without 1033, politicians will be hard-pressed to renege on their no-new-taxes promises.
Interestingly, the 1033 campaign is a perfect metaphor for how outgunned the average taxpayer is in the process. Opponents to 1033 were led by the government itself and all the special interest groups, billionaires, and millionaires who control and feed off the government. They spent $3.5 million. Our side raised and spent less than $700,000, most of which went just to get on the ballot. So we weren't outspent 6:1, we were outspent 3 1/2 million to none. That same David versus Goliath disparity exists in the legislative process too, but at least with our initiatives, the average taxpayer has a fighting chance to be heard.
Thanks to the voters, our initiatives over the years have produced significant savings for Washington taxpayers - over $13 billion so far. But even more importantly, our initiatives' influence on Washington state politics has been truly remarkable. Our supporters should be extremely proud of our collective accomplishments:
* Vehicle tabs are dramatically lower
* Property tax increases are six times smaller than they otherwise would be
* The State Auditor is conducting comprehensive performance audits of state and local governments for the first time in 40 years
* We've been successful at beating back Olympia's repeated legislative assault against the initiative process
* We're fighting tooth-and-nail to protect the privacy of citizen signers of petitions
* And we've made it a lot tougher for politicians to raise taxes.
Jack, Mike, and I are very lucky. We get to work with thousands of heroic supporters whose faith, hard work, and determination make our efforts a success. And we provide voters with more choices at the ballot box, giving the average taxpayer an equal voice in the process. We're proud of what we do and pleased with what we've accomplished.
But the tug-of-war over taxes continues with or without Initiative 1033.
Taxpayers all over Washington are counting on us to keep fighting for them - we won't let them down.
As for what we've got planned for 2010, stay tuned.
We ask everyone to join us in thanking our thousands of supporters who collected the voter signatures and donated the dollars necessary to qualify 1033 for the ballot. Taxpayers appreciate your efforts and so do we.
Thousands of people sacrificed a lot to make 1033 a reality. Super supporter Mike Dunmire really stepped up the plate, I took out a $250,000 2nd mortgage on my home and loaned it to the campaign, and thousands of our supporters - 2147 total - donated generously - the average was $55 - to help 1033. Our supporters also contributed tens of thousands of volunteer hours gathering voter signatures to get 1033 on the ballot this year. It was a Herculean effort that all of you should be very proud of.
Jack, Mike, and I formally declare victory with Initiative 1033 right now. It will continue to provide huge benefits to the taxpayers of Washington for years to come. Thank you.
Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. ~H.L. Mencken, 1956
Posted by: Acid Brain on November 4, 2009 12:04 AMI am disappointed in the local media at utterly ignoring the campaign-spending angle of 1033. When 45 percent of the voters are on one side, and 99 percent of the money is on the other, clearly something is wrong.
Why is local media so afraid to explore the mechanics of that? I look for explanations, and the only reasonable one I see is that reporters these days are all looking to land that media spokesperson job, and they know it is likely to come from one of the donors of the $3.5 million to 'No on 1033.'
Tim: It's not all about you. It's okay to give up. Thanks for 695, we'll always be grateful. But time has passed....
Posted by: AD on November 4, 2009 03:36 AMIt would be very interesting to see how much Eyman netted from his latest debacle. I'm betting it was well into six figures.
Pbj @6:
Since when has this initiative ever been about the little guy? This initiative was all about lining the pockets of Tim and the big guys.
The reason one side had all the money is because that same side had all the good arguments. I-1033 was an incredibly dumb idea.
Walters @7:
I couldn't agree with you more. They continue to sign petitions, donate money, and then vote for half-baked initiatives, put forth by a deadbeat watch salesman who steals money from his own campaign.
Duffy @8:
See above, despite your optimism, I've no doubt they will do it again.
Posted by: Rush Limbaugh Fan on November 4, 2009 05:32 AMInsanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results. This state has reaffirmed time and again for the last 30 years that it is politically insane.
Posted by: Rick D. on November 4, 2009 05:49 AMThe reason one side had all the money is because that same side had all the good arguments. I-1033 was an incredibly dumb idea."
That begs the question. You need to offer a theory as to why 'no on 1033' outraised 'yes' by 5 to 1, when the voting was only 55-45 or 1.2 to 1.
The obvious answer is that the interests who combined to raised the $3.4 million profit from taxes/spending, in fact probably it is their livelihood.
Poor REBEL. He sits at home and imagines that someone, somewhere is stealing all of his money to get rich while he toils away, saving up to own a home.
He somehow believes that Tim Eyman, a man who admitted stealing money from his contributors, is going to deliver him from this and make it better. And he thinks all those public services just ARE, and don't need to be funded.
He's angry right now, very angry. He's angry because a bubble headed newscaster didn't get elected King County Executive. He angry because Tim's latest, and most absurd tax initiative got trounced. He's angry because the fags look like they are going to get some validation. And he's angry because there is a liberal black man in the White House.
A man can just take so much before he has to lash out and start calling people names, like (gasp) "unconscionable swine."
Are you referring to Kemper Freeman who's real estate holdings have been vastly increased in value by the freeways and roads built on the public dime?
Perhaps you mean Rush Limbaugh, my hero, who uses the public airwaves everyday to put forth a screed so hateful and racially biased that he's been precluded from owning a sports franchise.
Or maybe you mean Eric Prince, the CEO of Blackwater, who has milked the war in Iraq for billions.
Are those the millionaires you were referring to?
Who are the thieves?
Where is the waste?
Why are my points in #15 laughable?
If those aren't the millionaires you referred to, who are?
You say you are a homeowner, is your home in a Fire District?
Is it in a school district?
Does it have roads that enable you to get to it?
Does someone answer when you dial 911?
So you have a job?
Do you drive on a road to get to it?
Do you eat?
Do you drive to the store to buy food?
Does someone else use the roads to get the food to the store so you can buy it?
How do you think all this stuff happens?
Who should pay for it?
Why do you think YOU are paying too much?
Thank you and the Fagans for representing us, the taxpayers. No one down in Olympia does. You gave us the chance to vote. You have done more for us over the last decade than ALL the politicians in Olympia combined.
We are very grateful.
Posted by: RushIsGreat on November 4, 2009 08:35 AMYes, yes. The ignorance and insanity (and cost) of constantly having to deal with this never ending string of asinine initiatives promulgated by a man who has admitted to stealing from his own campaign contributors.
Why, oh why would anyone take this fool seriously; much less give him more money.
The gods themselves must weep.
Not millionaire, BILLIONAIR - Paul Allen. He got his Eastlake Choo Choo and oh by the way he just bankrupted a company too. Do you think Paul Allen will be on the street begging for his meals?
Posted by: Marxism Fan on November 4, 2009 09:30 AMPeople tend to want more government services...but don't want to pay for them.
In some communities, which vote for inflated School Levies, Library Levies and other heartstringtugging issues, the day of reckoning is when they get the tax bill for 2010 tax payments. There is no free ride.
The question is, where is the tipping point??
Obviously we haven't reached it yet.
The point where no matter how many folks will starve & die as opponents claim....it doesn't matter. Taxpayers are tapped out.
Perhaps 2010 is the year.
I have repeatedly suggested someone publish a list of ALL government workers, their salaries, benefits (31%) and Paid time-off (18%)....that number is called TOTAL COMPENSATION.
Unions hate discussing it. They focus solely on salaries which is only 2/3 of the TOTAL COMPENSATION.
I really think getting an updated Bloom list of salaries and adding the 31% Benefits and 18% Paid Time-off and showing TOTAL COMPENSATION would seriously turn some folks around.
Is that too personal??
Heck, I pay taxes. When I write that check, it's personal. Why shouldn't Public Servants have their names and TOTAL COMPENSATION made clearly & easily available to the Tax-Paying Public??
This must be done Tim.
If you can get the Salaries (that's easy)...adding the Benefits and a factor for Paid Time-off (Vacation, Sick Leave, Holidays, Personal Days etc @ 18%) can't be that difficult.
No one wants to do it...or feels it is that important. They are wrong.
Posted by: Mr. Cynical on November 4, 2009 09:36 AMYou have always been a supporter of letting citizens have their say.
They have spoken VERY LOUDLY.
No more Eyman initiatives! Please find a different way to earn a living...that's what the citizens want.
Posted by: Listen to the Voters on November 4, 2009 09:37 AMEveryone better grab their ankles, as the Marxist government establishment has now been given a green light to tax us to oblivion. Thanks RLF, Todd, MikeBS and 'Shiftless mike'.
Posted by: yaddacubed on November 4, 2009 09:45 AMhow is salary 2/3 of total compensation. you do realize 2/3 = 66.666%, right?
public servants pay taxes as well. writing that 'personal' check.
also, public servant salary is available online.
Posted by: mike on November 4, 2009 10:02 AMMy porcine snout is in the trough of private enterprise. I work for a large corporation and draw a salary. Unlike my hero Rush, I have never been on the dole.
However I do use the roadways, appreciate the security our local constabulary provides, and enjoy reduced homeowners insurance rates due to our local and very effective fire district.
My children attended excellent public schools and now attend even more excellent public universities. My boss, fellow employees, clients, and the economy in general also reap the benefits of universal public education.
So I guess you could say I'm doing well off of all of the other taxpayers. Not as well as Kemper Freeman, or Bill Gates, or a whole lot of other folks here in the great Northwest. But compared to the most of the planet's population, I'm doing fabulous.
In short, I'm a pretty happy camper who just can't believe his good luck, being born here in this time and place. So to me, the taxes I pay are no big deal.
How about you, you doin' OK?
It's defeat speaks more to our collective aversion to self control than anything else.
Posted by: mark on November 4, 2009 01:25 PMI asked Rebel earlier to tell me where the waste was. So far, no attempt to answer.
Maybe you can fill me in.
While you are at it, tell me what are the burdens on your small business? Do you mean taxes? Is your small business somehow taxed differently than your competitors? Or are there other burdens?
I would be interested to hear more about this and even learn something.
You're right, I work for a large corporation. How do I feel about the "czar" controlling salaries? He doesn't have anything to say about my company, we're not a financial institution taking money from the govt.
How would I feel about it if they did? My theory is that the shareholders should ultimately control salaries. If the govt is a shareholder, then I've no problem with their exerting their control.
Not sure where you got the idea I was pissed. I'm not. I'm certainly astonished at the gullibility of folks who continue to give money to someone like Tim Eyman, but hey, those same folks give money to their churches every year and get about the same thing Eyman delivers; nothing but false hope.
Anyway, glad I could make you smile.
I must respectfully disagree.
These folks regard liberals as "the enemy of the nation", right up there, if not more dangerous than Islamic Fundamentalists.
I've actually heard Rush Limbaugh say all liberals should be eliminated, save maybe one or two for a museum somewhere so they can be regarded with the opprobrium we save for say, the perpetrators of the holocaust.
So yes, they need to be teased, mocked, and subject to the ridicule they have so richly earned. They should be held up to the polity for all to see in the harshest light we can shine on them. Let the American people decide if they want this group taking us "forward" into the 21st century.
Rebel and Bob took up the torch and responded. Good for them. But they stopped way short of discussing the issues and lapsed into name calling.
Bob implies he is a small business owner, burdened by onerous and pointless government regulation; which limits his business' productivity and competitiveness.
OK, I'm all ears. What is the burden? How does it reduce your ability to compete?
No response.
Rebel says:
"Rush Limbaugh Fan, Todd Reeves, Quincy:; Three friends of millionaires who make their money off of other peoples taxes and are not ashamed to soak them for more and give them less. Three suckers who continue to reward mediocrity and incompitence in government. Three people who no doubt somehow have ill-gained at the average taxpayers expense. Three people who help evict grandma from her home. Three people who make it near impossible for a young person to own their own home. Three people who are unconscionable swine."
Yet when I ask to name the millionaires, thieves, and waste, he too becomes strangely silent.
So yes, they need to be teased, mocked, and subject to the ridicule they have so richly earned. They should be held up to the polity for all to see in the harshest light we can shine on them. Let the American people decide if they want this group taking us "forward" into the 21st century.
I vote not.
Your thoughts?
And, of course, Eyman now promises to fine tune this proposed legislation and try again. Why shouldn't he? He has a mortgage to pay, like most of the rest of us.
Could it not be any clearer, with this result, that the emperor has no clothes? Time for a new emperor. One with clothes.
