Bankrupt budgets, political paralysis, collapsing schools, shuttered parks: Tim Eyeman’s latest assault on state government—Initiative 1033—makes the ballot and could remake Washington state in the image of California. Goldy breaks it down:
I-1033 is a “TABOR” initiative, one of many, similarly constructed spending-cap measures that have been peddled in the initiative states nationwide, and have been funded by a shadowy network of ultra-wealthy, right-wing extremists. Thus, unlike most of Eyman’s initiatives, don’t be surprised to see a fair amount of out of state money flooding into Washington to fund the “Yes” campaign.
The Washington State Budget and Policy Center has a great analysis of I-1033 and its consequences, and I encourage you to watch their slideshow, but don’t think it an exaggeration to summarize the measure as the end of Washington state government as we know it.
I-1033 caps government spending at the previous year’s spending, plus population growth and inflation, and while that may appear to be a formula for fiscal stability, it is in fact entirely and intentionally the opposite.
Read the whole thing here.
It is the Collapse of the Morally and Financially Bankrupt Liberal Welfare State.
Look for it coming to a state near you soon…
Dan, I’ve been sick all this week with the flu and have only kinda sorta been in touch with the news but wasn’t there supposed to be some big something or the other yesterday in CA about Prop 8’s legality? Did we miss it because it was over shadowed by Jackson’s memorial news or did it just quietly not happen at all?
It’s nice to see that y’all in Washington have your own Bill Sizemore type in that Tim Eyeman. Now maybe we can get a ‘group discount’ when we rocket them to Mars.
@ 3, I think every state has one. Ours is the father of TABOR, Doug Bruce, who distinguished himself by kicking a photographer when he was briefly a member of the state house. He’s also a slumlord.
@2, here’s a 2-day-old story that will give you enough info for further Googling…
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-…
In case the link doesn’t work (it just did for me), U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who was assigned a lawsuit over the constitutionality (state) of Prop 8, does not want to issue an injunction and prefers a trial (for what are probably very good reasons).
Matt, this is the wrong place to get into Colorado politics, but I’m of the opinion that TABOR is the best thing that ever happened to this state.
Doug Bruce, though, is unarguably a jerkoff.
File this one under How America Committed Suicide, Chapter 38.
From: Tim Eyman, I-1033 co-sponsor
read a ‘one page’ on I-1033 at: http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
here’s an excerpt:
In January, we started a debate over lowering property taxes and over the past 6 months, we’ve discussed 1033’s policies and principles with the people. And thanks to the 314,227 citizens who voluntarily signed a petition, that debate will continue until election day when a decision will be made by the people. We’re grateful to our supporters for providing us with the opportunity to make the case for 1033.
The Lower Property Taxes Initiative substantially reduces property taxes by controlling the growth of government. 1033 says that the growth rate of state, county, and city general fund revenue cannot exceed the inflation rate plus population growth. Revenues collected above the limit will reduce property taxes. Not only does 1033 provide meaningful property tax relief, but it stops politicians from shifting the tax burden by raising taxes someplace else. 1033 provides ‘net’ property tax relief.
Property taxes are a huge problem, especially for struggling working families and fixed-income senior citizens. Too many are being taxed out of their homes. We don’t want Washington to be a state where only rich people can afford to buy and own a home. Citizens desperately need and deserve property tax relief, especially now, during these tough economic times.
No state, county, or city politician can say they didn’t see this coming. For decades, citizens have told politicians about their own personal property tax horror stories — and politicians consistently ignored them. For decades, during both good times and bad, governments allowed taxpayers’ property tax problems to fester, arrogantly dismissing the people’s repeated, urgent call for relief. Why is Initiative 1033 necessary? Politicians need to look in the mirror — it is their decades of inaction and greed, as well as their complete lack of empathy and compassion for the taxpayers’ struggles, that necessitated 1033.
Hey Tim… How much did you pay signature gatherers to coerce 314,227 to voluntarily sign I-1033? How much of that money came from out-of-state? How much did you make?
Grassroots, my assroots.
Forcing our society’s most vulnerable groups–children, the elderly, the poor, and the disabled–to bear the brunt of the economic collapse is just amoral and evil. And I’m not talking about the phony morality espoused by America’s professional Pharisees.
One of my buddies went to a town hall meeting sponsored by his state rep which focused on trying to get an income tax in place on people making over $250K per year. One of the loudest anti-tax voices was from an older, greasy, banged up gent in a wheelchair who looked like he depended on the state for all kinds of aid. Every time the rep tried to explain that there has to be some kind of relief from the imminent implosion of education and already bare-bones social services–-which this guy obviously receives benefits from–-his reply was the same: “NO INCOME TAX!!”
Independent experts from all over the country have examined Washington State’s government and found that we have one of the most efficiently run, least wasteful in the nation, # 3 out of 50 according to one study, so it’s not like we’re just crazy-pissing money away. We also have billionaires out the yin-yang, and the nation’s most regressive tax structure.
In short, our state’s nihilistic citizens have decided they would rather see society collapse than pay for it. The End.
@8: Tim, I hate to break it to you, but there’s already a challenge analysis that’s saying your initiative can be overturned by the single-item rule and analysis that shows your measure would overtax and underfund a lot of small towns, where the highest percentage growth is happening based on OFM projections of population growth.
Basically, all your purported benefits are going to benefit larger cities and severely harm smaller ones.
Why are you going after the small towns? Do you want to get the bigger cities with more moderate growth and their subsequent monetary bases?
I thought you were all for small towns and thumbed your nose at the Seattles and Spokanes of the world?
@ 12,
A big part of the deal with roads is they get tons of federal money. A friend works for WSDOT, and they’ve got more money and projects than they can handle largely thanks to the federal stimulus, while his colleagues at the state DSHS are desperately trying to figure out which employees can be laid off and which families with children can be kicked off WIC and welfare during our Great Recession. Meanwhile, school districts are also laying off teachers and increasing class sizes.
This initiative will make a Kuleefurnya-style implosion an ongoing event. If that sounds great to you, then fine, vote for the fuckah.
I guess I don’t care anymore. Maybe people are getting the destructive, psychopathic guvmit they deserve.
@12: You clearly don’t understand how the law funds things, and you also have no idea how property taxes work.
In terms of property taxes, your property is serviced by the city with goods and services that fluctuate in price, typically leaping upward year over year. In order to offset these increases in things like pipe cost, utility costs, asphalt costs, public benefit costs, property taxes increase at a rate that follows the CPI and appraised values. Demanding it stays the same price year over year is like someone as old as Eyman walking into Safeway demanding that bread be 2 cents, since that’s the price his family paid when he was born.
Depending on what are essentially stopgap schemes like you’ve proposed is making the economy less tied to need and more tied to want.
5280, except for TABOR’s rachet you may be right. But that’s all I’m going to say – as you said, this is the wrong place.
If you want to get into Colorado politics more, check out Coloradopols.com.
It is not the cost of services that is bankrupting government. It is the cost of the generous pension and health care benefits promised to government workers. Those benefits are completely out of sync with the private sector. When was the last time anyone heard of a government worker losing their pension benefits or having to contribute more to their health care? To my knowledge – never.
@ 16,
Are you writing that public sector employees don’t have a right to secure pension and healthcare benefits, and that they should be fucked over as badly as private sector workers?
17
yes
The initiative process is killing states with it’s right wing assault on the quality of life and it’s appeal to selfishness and ignorance. Laws should be made by the legislature.
#12 – No, that’s not what will happen. Every state that puts in a TABOR like initiative finds pretty much every program (including all those ones you claim you like) in a world of hurt. You simply can’t make up for the lost revenue from the general fund through targeted initiatives (at least not fast enough to make a difference).
Colorado passed a similar law in the early 90s, and was, luckily, smart enough to repeal it about 6-7 years later after it nearly decimated the state. And we’re all aware of what’s happening in CA right now.
I’ve got some “not news”: Your taxes will go up in the future to pay for everything we’ve been neglecting for 30 years (infrastructure, schools, mass transit, parks, social services, healthcare, regulatory enforcement, etc.). And yes, they will pay for some stuff you don’t want or don’t need (like schools if you’re childless, or stuff for old people if you’re young, or war-related stuff). Voting for Eyman’s initiative will make the problem worse in the short-term, make the hike in taxes much, much steeper when the correction is needed.
The better alternative is to vote for people the more closely represent your interests, and to make sure tax increases happen in a progressive manner.
@20, don’t know where you’re getting your information, but Colorado hasn’t repealed TABOR, and we’re doing pretty well, thank you. Better than most states, even with this recession.
Wonderful. We can follow California into the Prop 13 black hole—the state that puts the “fun” in “dysfunctional”!
@16 – Clearly, you don’t know anyone who works for the state of Washington. Many employees have faced reductions in benefits, including retirement, have seen increases in their share of health care premiums on par with private sectors, have seen mandatory reductions in hours and pay, and have had their salaries frozen repeatedly in the past 10 years. The idea that working for the state (can’t say about the Feds) is some kind of precious cradle is the result of misinformation and confusion with Federal jobs.
Also, the current retirement plans that state employees have are managed very well. The state takes a lot of care that their employees, union or not, have a safeguarded retirement. Washingtonians should be pleased that their government’s employment programs are run so well.
From: Tim Eyman, I-1033 co-sponsor
In 1993, the voters of Washington approved I-601, a spending limit that said government can grow at the rate of inflation plus population growth, the same formula as that used in I-1033. So it’s not necessary to look to Colorado or other states who have constitutional amendments that aren’t repealable or amendable — Washington has years and years of personal experience with this same kind of thing with I-601.
And I-601 worked very well. At least, that is, until the Legislature did what it tends to do with initiatives in Washington … and that is to put loopholes in them to get around them. That started with the Republicans in 1998 and later by the D’s in 2000, 2001, and 2002. Had they not done so, if they had abided by its limits on growth, there would not have been a $3.2 billion deficit in 2003 for Locke and Rossi to address. Further, there would not have been a $9 billion deficit in 2007 for Gregoire and the Democrats to address. If they had allowed the public sector to grow at the same rate as the private sector, then there wouldn’t have been such high peaks and deep valleys.
For decades, they’ve taken their budgets on a fiscal roller coaster, overextending themselves in good times — creating unsustainable budgets — and then slashing during bad times. I-1033 gets us off that roller coaster, allowing sustainable, predictable growth, inspiring them to reform and prioritize using existing revenues (and always with the safety valve that I-1033 has which says that if they need more money, they can go to the people and ask for more — voter approved revenue is exempt from the limit)
that’s reasonable, that’s sustainable, that’s what these 314,000 citizens believe is a better way to go.
We can’t keep pouring tax revenues into a bucket that has a big hole in the bottom — it’ll never be enough. The state, counties, and cities need to learn that taxpayers don’t have bottomless wallets.
http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
I have to agree with Tim on this one. The state, counties, and cities DO need to learn that taxpayers don’t have bottomless wallets!
Our liberal fiscal folly here in this state never has any limits on the lengths it will go to to increase Social services in this state.
I for one will definitely be supporting this measure. Since our state representatives at all levels refuse to rein in their projects or ambitions, we as citizens will do it at the ballot for them.
If they run into budget deficits, then they do just like the rest of us and slash our budget in other places. This means they will need to make tough choices and do their jobs balancing what budget they have, and not simply skirting their responsibilities by throwing more $$ at pet projects.
Tim, go fuck yourself. Please.
The previous post’s argument by Andy is certainly persuasive — voters should consider it when deciding whether to support I-1033.
http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
Liberals will obviously hate the measure because they love raising budgets to start countless new programs, and finding new ways to spend money. The cuts from the current deficit must be killing everyone.
What we need to do is thoroughly audit every inch of state government, find and cull inefficiencies. And there’s enough spendy events and luncheons that I’m certain there’s a ton of them. Dems love spending money but they don’t really understand how to manage or budget money. Their fiscal philosophy is always MORE MORE MORE.
Tim Eyman? Already voting no.