thank you for using "jibe" correctly.

and this initiative is doomed. doomed.

BOO YA!

And so the inevitable populism of the Tea Bag movement morphs into its penultimate form!

You can argue whatever you want to, but the WA Supreme Court would have to change its own precedent for this to happen. Not impossible, but counting on a state or Federal Supreme Court will overturn its own precedent in order for your initiative to be legal is problematic at the least.

You can argue whatever you want to, but the WA Supreme Court would have to change its own precedent for this to happen. Not impossible, but counting on a state or Federal Supreme Court to overturn its own precedent in order for your initiative to be legal is problematic at the least.

I don't see why we need anything this fancy. A 4% flat income tax would be perfectly constitutional, would mean pretty much nothing to most poor people, and would raise about $3 billion from the top 1% of Washington earners all by itself (never mind the windfall from the lower brackets). Then you pass a separate law providing a full tax rebate for people who make less than, say, $50,000 per year. That part may or may not hold up, but it would certainly be easier to pass an amendment creating a special income tax exemption than it would be to pass one creating a graduated income tax.

Knoll Lowney is a blowhard in the Eyman mold, albeit with his heart in a different place. The State Supreme Court figured out 50 years ago that an excise tax on income is a property tax, duh, and therefore, under our constitution, must be uniform (i.e., you can't tax income above a certain level). Apartment Operators Ass'n of Seattle, Inc. v. Schumacher, 56 Wn.2d 46, 351 P.2d 124 (1960).