I-2111 and whatever the “Parental Bill of Rights” are clearly not needed - only exist to drive turnout. I’d say pass I-2111 as the majority needed to overcome the constitutional bar is the same to overturn this (unnecessary) initiative (like pointed out in the article).

So taking steps aimed at reducing turnout of legally registered voters is a good thing now? :)

Good, another nail in the coffin of an income tax.
No long-term care tax, no capital gains tax, no income tax. No compromise.

@2 I was thinking the same thing. I thought disenfranchising voters was a bad thing? I guess only if you disenfranchise people who vote your way. In all honestly it probably doesn't matter though. The big dog on the ticket is the climate cares act which is going to drive a massive amount of turnout because the Dems lied about it and keep lying about it (see Marko Liias). On a tangential note its not just gas prices that are being impacted by this "pennies on the dollar" legislation. PSE announced yesterday they are seeking a 20% rate increase over the next two years in large part of pay for investments to meet the standards required in the act.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-lab/puget-sound-energy-proposes-rate-hikes-to-pay-for-hydro-and-wind-power/

@2 and @4, No one is talking about suppressing turnout. It's about not encouraging the turnout of the worst voters over an issue that won't change policy a bit. Not encouraging bad voters is not the same thing as putting up obstacles to voting that single out that group of voters, which is the implication you are both making.

This is the usual dishonest Republican bullshit. The only thing they have is public opposition to paying for the government they otherwise vote for, along with demonizing homeless people, immigrants, and trans people. Fear-mongering works. Actually governing not so much.

@5 people are the “worst voters” because they don’t want to give more of their money to the state via an income tax? You know that’s about 60% of voters you are hating on?

@5. Shouldn’t every single legal voter in the state be encouraged to vote? Encouraging turnout now a bad thing. Got it. So democratic of you 😂

1098 lost 46-54 in King County!

https://results.vote.wa.gov/results/20101102/initiative-measure-1098-concerning-establishing-a-state-income-tax-and-reducing-other-taxes_bycounty.html

If that doesn't tell you income taxes are totally radioactive, nothing will. The smart thing to do is keep it off the ballot. Let Ds in swing seats vote in favor of banning it along with Rs.

"According to the Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), the lowest-earning workers in Washington state pay almost 10 times more of their income—about 13%—in sales taxes than the wealthiest Washingtonians...."

How can that be, when the sales tax max is about 10.3%?

@2,4 Oh, for God's sake. If you support I-2111 yet decry its (possible) passage by the legislature, you are not a serious person. You're no better than the Republicans who demanded a harsh immigration bill, got exactly what they wanted, and then renounced it just because Trump said his chances of winning were better without it.

@9 I believe the 13% figure is all state taxes combined, not just sales taxes.

@10. I have no particular opinion on the measure. Seems unnecessary as income tax is already illegal (despite the cognitive dissonance on that point by certain city councils). But it’s disgusting that the democrats in Olympia would pass something simply to reduce turnout by voters they fear. We all should want every legally registered voter to turnout to voice their preferences. Even if that means that some democrats in Olympia lose their jobs. If you really think otherwise, you’re not a “Democrat”.

I loved #5s "bad voters" quip. Deplorables! How'd that work out for Hillary, anyway?

@5: I guess shouting "Look! It's Halley's comet!" doesn't work too well anymore.