Friday, January 8, 2010
To: Our thousands of supporters throughout the state (cc'd to the media, house & senate members, and Governor)
From: Our Expanded Team of co-sponsors for this year's initiative: Tim Eyman, Jack Fagan, Mike Fagan, Mike Dunmire, Senator Don Benton, Senator Janea Holmquist, Erma Turner, Nancy Nelson, Dagny Lord, Keli Carender, & Senator Pam Roach, ph: 425-493-9127, email: tim_eyman@comcast.net, http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com (go to our website to do a secure donation by VISA/Mastercard/PayPal or print out the form below, fill it out, and return it with a check or money order or credit card information)
RE: Gregoire and the Democrats owe it to the voters to at least try to abide by I-960's policies before they suspend them
I-960's policies do not make tax increases impossible -- they provide much more public transparency and public participation and broader agreement before taxes are raised, but isn't that what we all want? I-960's policies make sure that tax increases only move forward after all other options have been tried.
Politicians say that tax increases are always a last resort -- I-960 holds them to that promise.
If, during the session, the voters saw tax increasing bills being introduced and voted on, then everyone could see whether they could garner 2/3's majorities in the House and Senate to support them or not. And if they can't get 2/3's on the first try, maybe they could add more government reforms to convince Republicans to back the effort (wouldn't it be better to have broader, bipartisan support anyway?). And if they still fell short of the 2/3's, then the debate would become: how about referring, with a simple legislative majority, the tax increase to the voters? In March or April, for example. If, after the campaign for the increase, the voters still decide to reject it, then the debate would become: how about suspending I-960 to unilaterally increase taxes?
Gregoire and the Democrats want to skip past all that and go straight to gutting I-960 and raising taxes.
But that approach doesn't give the voters the respect they deserve -- all other options need to be explored, debated, and attempted before I-960's suspension and higher taxes are even considered.
But they're not doing that.
Without introducing any bills or taking any votes -- without even trying to abide by I-960's policies -- Chris Gregoire, Lisa Brown, Rodney Tom, Margarita Prentice and all the other Democrats in charge of Olympia have promised to get rid of I-960's sunshine policies and 2/3's requirement immediately.
How can Gregoire and the Democrats claim that tax increases are a last resort if they don't even try to abide by I-960's policies?
Remember, the 2008 and 2009 legislative sessions proved that they can abide by I-960.
And it's a good thing they did -- our state's fragile economy and our family budgets and our state budget would all be radically worse off today if not for the fiscal discipline that I-960 instilled.
They adopted budgets in 2008 and 2009 that didn't raise taxes -- but there really wasn't a concerted effort to even try. There was only Lisa Brown's phony liquor tax increase in 2008 which she concocted for her ultimately unsuccessful lawsuit against the 2/3's vote requirement.
Gregoire and the Democrats owe it to the voters to at least try to abide by I-960's policies before they suspend them. To do otherwise shows arrogance and contempt of the voters.
http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
Posted by Tim Eyman at January 08, 2010 11:36 AM | Email ThisThe only way to get us out of the deficit hole is to have reasonable, progressive taxes. Sorry. If that hurts your wealthier backers, too bad. They--the wealthy--are the extreme mathematical minority in this state, and they have earned no right to any greater voice in the future of Washington than every poor person.
Posted by: The truth on January 8, 2010 12:34 PMAll we're asking them to do IS FOLLOW THE LAW.
It is the law (thanks to the voters approving it 3 times) for the Legislature to receive 2/3's majorities to raise taxes. Gregoire and the Dems promise to violate/gut/ignore that law - our 2010 initiative brings it right back.
No one is above the law, not even the Legislature.
http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
Posted by: Tim Eyman on January 8, 2010 12:42 PMOf course they're not above the law, but you're very conveniently ignoring that the State Constitution allows them to modify anything you are paid to put on the legal books via our system by a simple majority after two years.
Why don't you get that pesky State Constitution changed?
Posted by: The truth on January 8, 2010 12:48 PMas you said, they are 'allowed' to violate it, but they are not required to. the law doesn't disappear after 2 years, they have to vote to violate it.
they don't have to. and they shouldn't.
I-960's policies are working exactly as voters intended and Gregoire and the Democrats should respect that and not violate the law.
They work for the people, not the other way around.
Posted by: Tim Eyman on January 8, 2010 12:55 PM"they [the constitutionally empowered legislative/law making body] have to vote to violate it. [the law]"
Pure genius.
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on January 8, 2010 01:19 PMForgot the phonetic spelling and definition now needed to post/comment. sorry.
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on January 8, 2010 01:28 PMTim, this is patently false. They're not violating the law, they're changing, amending, or discarding it, which they're ALLOWED to do per our State Constitution. Your writing that they are violating the law is completely false and if carried to extremes could even be actionable by some maverick politician as libel.
Seriously, you're defeating yourself with half-formed arguments based on ideology, which is forever a distant and irrelevant second to the rule of law.
Posted by: The truth on January 8, 2010 01:29 PMSources say Gregoire's looking for a way out
January 7th, 2010 19:40 ET
http://lizmair.com/blog.php?Index=549
Posted by: RagnarDanneskjold on January 8, 2010 01:43 PMAt the end of the day as a middle class guy I will lose my house just because of death care taxes alone not to mention what you bitter jealous whores will do this year at the state level. But I am clean and we'll fight to keep it that way.
Posted by: Col. Hogan on January 8, 2010 02:03 PM"Well my hands are clean and so are Tim's."
Congratulations! You found Purell?
Regarding your comment on your employment history, too bad about applying, interviewing and accepting a job with tax cheats who don't pay. Darn LIBERALS!
If only there had been some way to learn something about a company before just taking the job. :'-(
And paradoxically, you support Tim Eyman. Nobody could have predicted.
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on January 8, 2010 02:25 PMIt was 35 years of "progressives" that gave us this deficit because they couldn't control their spending. Why should we have to continuously bail out irresponsibile and incompetent Democrats who've run this ship into the proverbial rocks?
If that hurts your wealthier backers, too bad. They--the wealthy--are the extreme mathematical minority in this state
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."~ Margaret Thatcher
"Well my hands are clean and so are Tim's."
Congratulations! You found Purell?
Regarding your comment on your employment history, too bad about applying, interviewing and accepting a job with tax cheats who don't pay. Darn LIBERALS!
If only there had been some way to learn something about a company before just taking the job. :'-(
And paradoxically, you support Tim Eyman. Nobody could have predicted.
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on January 8, 2010 02:29 PMAll we're asking Eyman to do is FOLLOW THE CONSTITUTION.
It is the constitution (thanks to the voters approving it in 1878 by more than a 2/3 margin) for the Legislature to make and modify laws by majority vote. Eyman and his rich patrons promise to violate/gut/ignore that constitution -- and whine when the Legislature follows it.
No one is above the constitution, not even when they're getting paid to try to confuse us.
there's nothing confusing about it at all. Voters said 2/3's 3 times, Gregoire and the Dems are ignoring that, we're working hard to give voters their 4th opportunity.
if politicians won't listen to the people, then they/you shouldn't be surprised when the people respond by speaking even louder.
Posted by: Tim Eyman on January 8, 2010 02:44 PMBut they've earned their wealth and would like to keep that wealth. People who work hard and succeed shouldn't live in fear of government confiscation of their wealth.
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on January 8, 2010 03:44 PMThis is pretty funny. I didn't know you to be a comedian, Rick. The loss in revenues due to the economy tanking has nothing to do with this state (and every other state) economic situation. Those darn legislators should predicted the downturn in revenues and budget accordingly. Darn those lawmakers.
Posted by: tc on January 8, 2010 03:58 PMMy hands are clean...A Nation cannot live with this embittered anger and I will not let it continue. Can we once see the value of the check and balance of Tim's team hard work. The Queen would be in much worse shape.
Posted by: Col. Hogan on January 8, 2010 04:17 PMIn the end there will be consequences for these factional forms of dictatorship. That means the government will crumble and more jobs will be lost unless they tighten their waistlines in Olympia instead of spending other people's money like it's Monopoly money.
Clearly Gagwire had no ethics and would never consider honoring the law. Why would she when there's a growing fad across the nation to eschew laws and usurp more power in the executive role. There are the kind of moves dictators make.
Gagwire sure spent a lot of money flying to Europe for the Global Warming summit. What was the result of that for our state? Nothing. Why was she wasting her time there when we are at an economic crisis here? Because she is an irresponsible lout. Gagwire certainly doesn't care about the constitution. She only cares about usurping power.
Posted by: The Real Truth on January 8, 2010 04:24 PMSoooo... you don't think the legislature has done anything wrong? Really?
"A Nation cannot live with this embittered anger"
It's called projection.
The 2003-04 budget was $25 billion. By 2008 the budget was up to $32 billion. Even though revenues were up, it wasn't enough. Those darn lawmakers raised taxes as well. They were still looking at tax increases when the slump hit - because no matter how much they have, it is never enough.
If we were spending at 2004, or even 2006 levels, would we have enough revenues? If we had frozen spending at 2008 levels, would our "deficit" be as big?
Those darn lawmakers overspent and then were hit with a recession that only made their overspending look even worse.
The majority of voters voted multiple times to reign in the legislature's prolific spending habits. Those darn lawmakers should take the hint.
PREAMBLEPosted by: SouthernRoots on January 8, 2010 04:31 PM
We, the people of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this constitution.ARTICLE I
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 1 POLITICAL POWER. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.
You are correct. The current liberal government has completely evaded, and rejected the formal direction of their constituents. THEY work for US.
Their inability to keep their hands out of the cookie jar has led to poor legislative habits and minset.
This kind of government action is what revolution is made out of.
Posted by: The Real Truth on January 8, 2010 04:41 PM"Gagwire sure spent a lot of money flying to Europe for the Global Warming summit."
WRONG
"The Climate Registry and the Georgetown Climate Center, who are paying for the governors' trips."
"Why was she wasting her time there when we are at an economic crisis here?"
Interesting question.
Gagwire submitted the 2010 supplemental budget on December 9th. That published budget contains no tax increases.
Have the legislators who are co-sponsoring this initiative, Senator Don Benton, Senator Janea Holmquist, & Senator Pam Roach published a 2010 budget that shows how they would balance the budget without a tax increase?
Wrong. the democrat lawmakers in Olympia failed. I'll let the House Republican's op-ed explain it to you in part, the rest can be found here:
Two years ago, Washington had a $2 billion budget surplus. Although revenues were up, the Legislature approved a 2007-09 operating budget that spent $1.3 billion more than the state expected to take in. That irresponsible overspending of $3.3 billion, combined with an economic recession, is what sent Washington spiraling into a deep budget crisis this year.
Before the Legislature adjourns this Sunday, it must adopt a new two-year operating budget. You would think lawmakers would avoid making the same mistakes that got us into this mess. Unfortunately, this latest budget proposal would continue to INCREASE spending. It would also rely on one-time money from the federal stimulus package and other state funds to pay for ongoing programs. That's $5 billion the state will not have in two years. The Legislature is essentially punting its problems into the future.
So, the only comedy here is the comedy of errors by Democrats in Olympia that have run this ship aground and have us on due course for Californias position,which, the last time I checked, wasn't a very enviable spot to be in. But by all means, keep your head firmly buried in the sand with pom-pom's in hand.
Posted by: Rick D. on January 8, 2010 07:03 PMThe cost to go and see our maverick Sarah is only $549.00.
The convention is aimed at bringing the Tea Party Movement leaders together from around the nation for the purpose of networking and supporting the movements' multiple organizations principle goals.
www.nationalteapartyconvention.com
Seriously, Tim Eyman... I'll vote for your initiative. But the people who send you money.. wow. well, if they send it your way, then you obviously deserve their hard earned money more than they do. :)
Posted by: AD on January 9, 2010 03:20 PMWhat's particulary galling is that Gregoire and the Democrats want to not just repeal the 2/3's vote requirement of I-960, but also the sunshine provisions of it.
I-960 requires the state budget office to do a 10-year cost projection on any bill increasing taxes and fees with email announcements sent to willing participants from the public and the news media of the costs, hearing dates, legislative votes, and contact information for lawmakers. On the TVW's THE IMPACT, Democrat Senator Rodney Tom complained "As many as 8 notices are sent out each day -- it's ridiculous." (who's fault is that?) He went on "Some bills are never going anywhere, so why analyze them." (maybe they're not going anywhere because their costs are being calculated and publicized).
When we first filed I-960 back in January, 2007, Senator Don Benton (R-Vancouver) said: "Too many of our citizens find the legislative process a mystery. And too often, legislators hear more from the lobbyists and the special interest groups than from average citizens. The sunshine provisions in the Taxpayer Protection Initiative will aim a needed spotlight on Olympia and will provide valuable information in a user-friendly format to my fellow representatives, the public, and the press. They promise increased dialogue between the people and their representatives. I'm proud of my contribution to the drafting of this important initiative and sincerely hope the voters will support it this year."
Lisa Brown calls these policies �ludicrous.�
Again, Gregoire and the Democrats owe it to the voters to at least try to abide by I-960�s policies before they suspend them.
you know, i think it's kind nice that you are no longer just fagan & dunmire's puppy, but that you now have an 'expanded team' you'll be turning tricks for.
Posted by: mike on January 10, 2010 09:10 PMRick D @27
All I am going on is the officially published information on the OFM's web site (http://www.ofm.wa.gov/budget09/default.asp).
Comparing today's dollars to several years ago is a false comparison. At the minimum, you have to adjust for the time value of money. Further, you have to adjust for differences in state population and other factors. This will affect both revenues and certain budget items that are in direct proportion to population (like education). These adjustments may be both up and down, depending on the direction of the factors (e.g., if we have less students, then the education dollars should adjust downward in relation). Then, you need to also factor in unfunded mandates, like Bush's Medicare expansion and No Child Left Behind (not sure what year this started to kick in). Finally, you also need to factor in the growth in prison population.
As far as including one-time revenue for capital project (e.g., Stimulus funds), this again should be excluded from the comparison. They are not ongoing revenue or budget items that indicate how good the balance of revenue to expenses is. In fact, one could argue that the Capital Budget, in general, needs different evaluation than the ongoing state budget.
Don't get me wrong, I do think that there has been growth in the budget. I just don't believe that 100% of the current shortfall can be blamed on budget growth. I feel one also needs to take into account the revenue downfall due to the economy. Our revenue system, in this state, is dependent on economic conditions. Unfortunately, our budget is not set up to be flexible enough to adjust to economic downturns. This is what the Rainy Day fund was supposed to be for, and where I would say the biggest mistake in the past was made it was from both sides wanting to touch the Rainy Day fund (Democrats wanting to use it to fund programs and Republicans wanting to use it for tax cuts and/or rebates). This economic downturn demonstrates why the Rainy Day fund is necessary.