January 30, 2010
ASSOCIATED PRESS ANALYSIS: Eyman, foes need each other in tax fight - ASK EYMAN ABOUT IT

Analysis: Eyman, foes need each other in tax fight

By CURT WOODWARD, Associated Press Writer

OLYMPIA, Wash. -- As conservative activist Tim Eyman and his adversaries on the political left clock in for their annual donnybrook, an intriguing facet of their relationship stands out: This year, perhaps more than ever, these sworn enemies need each other.

Reprising his role as the Legislature's chief antagonist, Eyman hit the streets last week with his 2010 effort, the newly christened Initiative 1053. If it wins, I-1053 would reinforce a difficult two-thirds vote threshold for the Legislature to raise taxes.

That's where the symbiotic relationship comes in.

For Eyman's campaign to really catch fire, he needs the Democratic majority to follow through with its plans to amend the existing two-thirds vote hurdle, most recently enacted under 2007's I-960.

And in their quest to convince lawmakers to jack up taxes during a recession-warped election cycle, the Democratic Party's base can use Eyman's next campaign to show that this is the Legislature's one good opportunity to bankroll their priorities.

In a nearly statesmanlike tone, Eyman claims he'd be perfectly happy to see I-1053 rendered irrelevant - if only the Democrats would "do the right thing" and resist the pressure to raise taxes. (Jan. 12th Seattle Times story: Voters have endorsed the two-thirds requirement three times. "You'd think that a fourth time shouldn't be necessary." Whether the initiative is really needed may be in the hands of the Legislature, Eyman said. "The more they restrain themselves and the more they can actually hold back from raising taxes, it actually kills our signature drive. But that wouldn't make us very sad at all. That would actually be a good outcome.")

"Our secret weapon is their arrogance," Eyman said. "The more arrogant they are, the more taxes they raise, the more they're going to create enthusiasm for this initiative."

Of course, the Legislature's Democratic majority isn't really willing to acknowledge the Eyman factor. Their standard reply is something along the lines of, "Tim who?"

"We're just going to do what we think is the right thing to do," said House Speaker Frank Chopp, D-Seattle. "He may do whatever he does in order to earn a living, I guess."

Nevertheless, just as the Democrats' actions will fuel his campaign, Eyman's latest initiative has to factor into the Legislature's plans.

Economic jitters are still high, and the usual anti-incumbent tide of a post-presidential year could reach down to local elections.

That means it's not outlandish to think that Eyman could win with I-1053, and legislative Democrats could lose a few of the marginal seats they picked up in the waning years of the Bush administration.

Under that scenario, raising taxes could be virtually impossible in 2011, when the Legislature will have to combat another budget deficit already being pegged at several billion dollars.

This is where Eyman's opponents could be thanking him: The threat of another two-thirds vote hurdle in 2011 is an obvious answer to any skittish legislators who want to punt on a big tax vote.

"The kind of cuts we're talking about implementing this year would be devastating," said Sandeep Kaushik, spokesman for the Rebuilding Our Economic Future Coalition. "To try to put off dealing with those problems for another year would potentially make it harder to take action."

And since supporters of more revenue must expect an initiative campaign challenging the tax package, it's probably better to fight that battle this year. In 2011, it'll be a much quieter election year, which usually translates to a smaller, more conservative voter pool, Kaushik notes.

The pro-tax coalition can also draw a big dose of positive reinforcement from Oregon, where voters just upheld higher income and business taxes to rescue threatened parts of our neighbor's state budget.

"What the Oregon vote shows is that when the public is presented with what is at stake, they will be supportive of new revenue," Kaushik said. (COUNTER-ARGUMENT: Seattle Times editorial "Washington is not Oregon")

The first thing that has to happen, of course, is the long-rumored suspension or amendment of I-960's existing two-thirds vote requirement. Look for the House to potentially take up that task next week, likely tied to a bill that closes some tax loopholes.

Once the Legislature changes I-960 to make tax hikes easier, Eyman's latest campaign will really kick into gear. But House Finance Committee Chairman Ross Hunter, D-Medina, isn't convinced that simply altering I-960 will give Eyman a free pass to victory in November.

With a targeted approach that respects the broad message of the voters' mandate, Hunter said, the Legislature could have a chance at depriving Eyman of some anti-establishment fuel.

"I'd like to do some long-term surgery on this bill to make the thing function in a reasonable way," Hunter said. "And if I can convince the voters that I've done a good job of that, then, you know, maybe we won't have Eyman's latest debacle on the ballot, or maybe it won't pass."

Here's Saturday morning's Seattle Times' post of the story above

-- END --

There is no action taken by government that has more impact on the taxpayers and the economy and our freedom than when it takes more of the people's money.

And in the tug-of-war over taxes, there are incredibly powerful special interest groups, powerful people, powerful press, and powerful politicians pulling the rope for higher taxes -- with the initiative process, we work really hard and do our best to give the average taxpayer a fighting chance to fight back and pull the rope against higher taxes and in favor of more freedom.

We will stay focused on that cause with this year's I-1053, the "Save The 2/3's Vote For Tax Increases Initiative".

Regards, Our Expanded Team of initiative co-sponsors: 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, Rep. Matt Shea, John Ahern & Ken Morse, ph: 425-493-9127, email: tim_eyman@comcast.net, http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com


Posted by Tim Eyman at January 30, 2010 09:13 AM | Email This
Comments
1. We are building a long list of legislators with contempt for the will of the people. Hunter is at the top.

Posted by: Fighting Mad on January 30, 2010 10:51 AM
2. The more taxes are raised the greater the reward for evading them.

Posted by: jimt on January 30, 2010 12:04 PM
3. Perhaps if we actually HAD high taxes in this state, I'd be more concerned. Right now, we only pay a 9.5% sales tax, and fairly reasonable property taxes (by national standards..mine works out to just under 1% of assessed value). No income tax. Yeah, so we pay a few extra pennies at the pump for gas.

Compared to most states, which have both an income, AND a sales tax, AND usually higher property taxes, we really need to stop whining.

Posted by: Proteus on January 30, 2010 04:02 PM
4. Proteus,
"We only pay a 9.5% sales tax" - ONLY 9.5% - this is outrageously high! Who gives a rip about national standards! The lower the rate the better!
"Fairly reasonable property taxes" - tell that to the folks in this state that are taxed out of their homes!
Proteus, what you do with your money is your business - I respect that. If you want to turn more (or all) of your money over to bloated and inefficient governments, be my guest. But many others feel we are paying far more than we should be in taxes and want accountablity and efficiency in government - more value for our tax dollar. And since the legislature doesn't listen to us, we applaud and support Tim Eyman.

Posted by: GoTim on January 30, 2010 04:30 PM
5. What would be a reasonable tax rate? 6%? 3%? zero? I maintain that our state taxes are very reasonable, compared to other states, and our total tax burden is far lower than most civilized nations. (of course, they get better education, healthcare and infrastructure for their tax money, so its a tradeoff.

Who needs government? Why don't we all just go down home on the range, and live in anarchistic bliss?

Someone has got to pay for transportation, schools, business development, police, firefighters, libraries, universities, and basic infrastructure. That money has to come from somewhere.

Posted by: Proteus on January 31, 2010 12:49 PM
6. Proteus: "Someone has got to pay for transportation, schools, business development, police, firefighters, libraries, universities, and basic infrastructure. That money has to come from somewhere."

Right on. Its easy. Pick up your phone book, look up our various government entities, state and below (city, county). Select all agencies and sub-agencies that DO NOT provide one of your enumerated services. Shut them down, and give their budgets to the agencies and sub-agencies that DO provide your enumerated services. Once these agencies have enough budget to efficiently provide your enumerated services, continue shutting down non-essential agencies and give their back to us: we from whom it was stolen. Voila, sanity restored.

Posted by: srogers on January 31, 2010 05:21 PM
7. Proteus: oops! my typo (omitted word): "give their "budgets" back to us . . . "

Posted by: srogers on January 31, 2010 05:24 PM
8. "Our tax rates are lower than in other states." So What?
I don't live in Other States. I live in Washington State, where the Government is doing poorly what it should not be doing at all, and charging far too much in taxes while it does so. I don't care that Washington State and the several Counties charges less in sales tax than does California, they still charge a high sales tax. And I don't care that their property tax rates are less than Oregon, my house is not in Oregon.

So what if the cost of living is higher/lower some where else - I don't live there.

Posted by: pyotr on January 31, 2010 11:04 PM
9. off topic

Posted by: Politically Incorrect on February 1, 2010 03:42 PM
10. The reason Tim Eyman files an initiative every year (and pumps it up on blogs like this) is not because he has a great idea, like clockwork, every year around filing time. It's capitalism. And Tim Eyman eyman EYMAN is a businessman.

He files these initiatives because he makes a good living off running them (and losing them). He used to lie about his personal profit stealing from his own donors, but now he seems to have come clean (thanks, PDC!)

So make sure this latest initiative succeeds! It may not win (most don't) but we can put bread on Tim's table if we give, give, GIVE!

Posted by: AD on February 2, 2010 03:52 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?