The math is pretty simple. You cannot erase Washington State’s $2.8 billion budget shortfall by just trimming more and more fat from government spending. It will not work—unless by “fat” you mean entire state programs such as, say, Basic Health, which gives some 60,000 low-income residents access to rudimentary health care. (And even if you did cut that program, the outcome would, like many similarly drastic proposals, come with some pricey blowback—in this case, skyrocketing costs to hospitals and the public from people using emergency rooms as primary-care facilities.)
This is why state lawmakers and the governor believe the only way to balance the state budget is by combining cuts and significant tax increases. But here in Seattle, over at the offices of the state’s largest newspaper, the Seattle Times, the thinking—or, perhaps more accurately, the obsession—is all about one thing: fighting new taxes tooth and nail.
Ever since the budget crisis came into focus, the Times has been lambasting lawmakers in Olympia with a series of angry, Tea Party–ish editorials that first argued against any tax increases whatsoever and then, when that position became untenable, argued for very limited tax increases and a slash-and-burn approach to finding budget savings.
The paper’s opening position was rigid and unsentimental: no new taxes, and let the chips fall where they may. On January 15, seeing that this view wasn’t widely shared by state leaders, the paper’s editorial page warned legislators that they would be “playing with dynamite” if, in an effort to raise taxes, they suspended Tim Eyman’s I-960. (That initiative, passed by voters in 2007, requires an unworkable two-thirds majority of both houses of the legislature to raise taxes.)
Earlier this month, the Democrat-
controlled legislature ignored the Times—which further warned on February 4 that “this is not tax party time”—and temporarily suspended Eyman’s I-960 in order to responsibly deal with the current budget crisis.
After which, the Times latched firmly onto the idea that an out-of-control money party was getting underway. “Tax increases are now the preferred inhalant in Olympia,” the paper charged in a February 10 editorial, expressing regret that legislators (whom it seemed to view as a bunch of junkie pickpockets) couldn’t “just say no” to taxes.
People trying to balance the budget don’t have many kind words for the paper’s crusade. Representative Ross Hunter (D-48), chair of the House Finance Committee, said that approaching such a huge problem from an “absolutist” position “is not a helpful way to think about the decisions you have to make.”
To be fair, the Times stepped slightly away from its absolutist position after it became clear that taxes were going to be raised. Now the paper’s editorial board feels it can accept increased levies on out-of-state banks and food companies, members of corporate boards, and purchasers of manure-handling equipment. Those narrow revenue measures won’t even come close to balancing the budget, however, and the Times‘ tear continues, including headlines like “Legislature shouldn’t smother state in taxes.”
For example, on February 18, the paper came out against the governor’s proposed $148 million tax increase on “hazardous materials.” This tax increase was “unacceptable” to the Times because it would supposedly hurt the state’s five oil refineries (which collectively made $52 billion in profits last year). Then on February 21, with the Times‘ antitax rage apparently building toward uncontrollable levels, the paper’s editorial page barked out that it wanted to “take the legislature by the lapels and shake it.”
My, my.
Let’s put this whole tantrum in some context. What Governor Gregoire has actually proposed is $1 billion in painful cuts—suspending funding for smaller class sizes and halting subsidies for child care for low-income families, for example—mixed with $700 million in fund transfers (for example, dipping back into the state’s “rainy day fund”) and $435 million in help from the federal government. The governor is only pursuing $600 million in new taxes, which is less than a quarter of the amount of the budget shortfall. (Some Democratic legislators are considering raising even more money through new taxes—perhaps $900 million to $1 billion worth, which is still a fraction of the budget hole.)
Nonetheless, any of these new tax numbers are way too much, says the infuriated Times. The people can stand $300 million in new taxes, tops, the paper now believes, and if some “culling” of well-paid state employees needs to be done, and if the state’s entire disability assistance program needs to be jettisoned, so be it. (Not offered by the Times as a money-saving measure: repeal of the new 40 percent break on business and occupation taxes for newspaper publishers, which the Times lobbied for and benefits from, and which costs the state $1.3 million a year.)
“There’s a disconnect between what those in the senate see as the size of the hole and the smallness of the solutions that the Seattle Times has offered,” a senior senate staffer complained. Senator Ed Murray (D-43), chair of the Senate Democratic Caucus, said: “The editorials don’t completely come together for me.”
And how does the Times explain itself?
Apparently it’s been “smothered” into silence—editorial page editor Ryan Blethen did not respond to multiple requests for comment. 
They’re a hack propaganda outfit serving their corporatist masters. They’re completely irrelevant except to 1) Their wealthy stockholders/owners; 2) The ultra fringe that loiter in places like http://www.soundpolitics.com and Tim Eyman’s social circles.
Shame that the PI died rather than the Times.
The wealthy have successfully sold their greed to the people as some kind of common cause, largely through outlets like the newspapers they own. The current teabagger hysteria — rallies organized on Clear Channel and Fox, talking points distributed from Populist Movement Central ™ — is proof that it works.
Cutting off your nose to spite your face remains a popular American political pastime.
@2 it’s more simple than that. The wealthy are for tax cuts because if you pay $10,000,000 a year in taxes, and that tax liability is cut by 1%–a paltry number, right?–you’ve saved $100,000 per year. So it’s in your interests to spend $2,000 to someone like Eyman to get your taxes cut. For a business that pays $100,000,000 a year in taxes–yeah, right–that’s $1,000,000 a year in savings.
It’s a business investment to the rich and nothing more.
The evil trick of this all is that they’ve sold that 1% cut as some American Eagle-delivered Liberty matter, to save that 1% in tax liability for the average poor person who pays $5,000 a year in taxes in Middle America. That 1% save him $50 a year, but how much more would he save if everyone, including business, paid another 2% to help cover say emergency health care costs?
That’s what they don’t sell or teach.
Let’s eliminate the sales tax exemption for newspapers. Let’s eliminate the B&O break for newspapers.
Let’s implement a 10% surcharge on print advertising. Let’s implement a $5.00/head surcharge on club and concert goers. Let’s implement a $1.00/alcoholic drink charge on all facilities that serve beer, wine, and spirits; and $2.50/alcoholic drink on facilites in legislative district 43.
It’s educational to browse the reader posts on the seattle times web site. It’s educational in the sense that there are so many canned talking points and blatantly false statements being thrown around and repeated as fact.
Readers make claims such as “Washington has the second highest tax burden in the country” (false, by any measure, but the conservative TaxFoundation.org puts WA at #35) or “government has expanded 33% under Gregoire” (on the surface this seems like only a small exaggeration: $53.5 in 2003 to $69.4B in 2009 or about 29.7%. Adjusted for inflation: $62.38B to $69.4B, or about 11%. It’s worth noting that the population increased about 10.4% in WA during the same time period and the cost of infrastructure projects far outpaced the CPI during that time period…but, I digress).
I encourage everyone to fact check the posts there and unemotionally rebut with solid logic and research. It’s probably hopeless, but maybe a few will be smart enough to crank up the skepticism level.
While there are a number of crazies ranting about the tax situation, there is a decent point that many are making. And that point is that governor and democrats appear to be exempting state employees from any possible pain. There’s been little or no talk of layoffs, larger employee contributions to health care by state workers, or suspension of automatic raises.
When you basically exempt government payroll from the cuts, you’re left with some really ugly choices.
While there are a number of crazies ranting about the tax situation, there is a decent point that many are making. And that point is that governor and democrats appear to be exempting state employees from any possible pain. There’s been little or no talk of layoffs, larger employee contributions to health care by state workers, or suspension of automatic raises.
When you basically exempt government payroll from the cuts, you’re left with some really ugly choices.
Jesus Christ, Eli.
So yes, the Seattle Times is the largest paper. So yes, its editorial board has issues with tax increases.
WHO THE FUCK CARES? How is this even worth writing about? They’ve endorsed Republican candidates before…guess what? People elected the other candidates.
This is lazy ‘opinionated journalism.’ The Stranger’s self-absorbed staff often posts on its blog about how msm journalism is dead, blah blah blah blah.
But what are they doing? How are they stepping up? Articles like this one just show laziness. How easy is it to scan 300-word editorials and then call a legislator? Palin’s retarded kid could do it.
Then we have their obsession about the Seattle Weekly. Lest not forget their nauseating coverage of the PI’s downsize.
That is not journalism. That is just lazy self-absorbed journalism.
Report on the community. Report on issues that matter, on issues the community doesn’t know about. How about filing some public records requests, for fun? Hmmm?
As a paper that is not held back by ‘balancing’ a story, they should go after entities, politicians, and businesses with force.
(Sure, sure, the Times could be considered an entity, but my points are that this is journalists reporting on journalists, like a circle jerk.)
But no, they go after a newspaper, as if people still read the newspapers.
(Mudede is a waste of space, and West can be funny, but most of her talents go toward the entertainment side. Constant is so far up his own ass, I can’t make a comparison. Holden sometimes writes good stuff! Hurrah!)
I agree with the above comment.
Hey, Enumclaw Eli, leave the fisking of Seattle Times editorials to Goldy at horsesass.org. That’s his beat. And that beat is for unoriginal, unimaginative deadbeats. You and Goldy write as if we can’t find and read them for ourselves.
You need an editor to kick your lazy ass. You spend too much time in Enumclaw and not enough time reporting. publicola.net is kicking the Stranger’s ass daily.
Eli is so on the mark with this column, and provides one of the many reasons why I stopped getting a local paper (except for picking up The Stranger) when the PI folded. The Seattle Times has an editorial page COMPLETELY at odds with the liberal population base of Seattle. They are for status quo, conservative bullshit, and print primarily AP stories I can get elsewhere. I went directly to the NY Times and The Stanger when the PI left us – screw the Seattle Times and its 1920’s point of view.
Lorie
I’d hate to be Eli’s ex boyfriend.