More Initiative Details

I just couldn't get it done, folks. I wanted to give you my personal opinion on the referendums and initiatives for the election, but ballots must be postmarked in TWO days!!  And I've been caught up in the whirlwind of Halloween festivities, birthdays, and a few new offspring added to the family (2 in 2 days...how sweet is that!!). Plus I'm leaving my kids for a few days and the prep to get out of town without your kids is almost more than if they were going with you...

But I didn't want to leave you hanging.

A conservative friend of mine passed along Matt Shea's recommendations and I liked most of what he recommends and has to say.  Take it with a grain of salt, but if you're looking for a conservative member of our Washington State Senate for some guidance, Shea is a good one.  

Whatever you political leaning, whatever your choice, just VOTE! This election is important...and your vote is your voice.

___________________________________________________________________

Use links for full text of the Initiatives and referendums

MATT SHEA'S ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Initiative 1053 - Concerns tax and fee increases imposed by state government.
This measure would restate existing statutory requirements that legislative actions raising taxes must be approved by two-thirds legislative majorities or receive voter approval, and that new or increased fees require majority legislative approval.

Vote Yes. “All power is inherent in the people…” Washington Constitution Article 1, Section 1. The people decided to put another limitation and check on an out of control government.  What’s more Republican than that?

Initiative 1082– Concerns industrial insurance.
This measure would authorize employers to purchase private industrial insurance (a/k/a workers' compensation) beginning July 1, 2012; direct the Legislature to enact conforming legislation by March 1, 2012; and eliminate the worker-paid share of medical-benefit premiums.

Vote Yes. Washington is one of only 4 states that do not allow a private option.  This measure would lower the L&I cost and provide much 
need relief to our struggling small business owners. 

Initiative 1098 - Concerns establishing a state income tax and reducing other taxes.
This measure would tax “adjusted gross income” above $200,000 (individuals) and 400,000 (joint-filers), reduce state property tax levies, reduce certain business and occupation taxes, and direct any increased revenues to education and health.

Vote No. This violates the State Constitution Article 7, Section 1 which reads “All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax and shall be levied and collected for public purposes only. The word "property" as used herein shall mean and include everything, whether tangible or intangible, subject to ownership.” The State Supreme Court has correctly ruled on multiple occasions that income (defined here as the fruits of one’s labor) is property.  That is consistent with the founding fathers view as well.

Initiative 1100 - Concerns liquor (beer, wine and spirits).
This measure would close state liquor stores; authorize sale, distribution, and importation of spirits by private parties; and repeal certain requirements that govern the business operations of beer and wine distributors and producers.
 

Vote Yes. The role of government is to protect our God given unalienable rights to life, liberty, and property not run liquor stores.  Like taxpayer funding of abortion clinics, it is also morally reprehensible to use tax payer dollars to distribute liquor.

Initiative 1105- Concerns liquor (beer, wine and spirits).
This measure would close all state liquor stores and license private parties to sell or distribute spirits. It would revise laws concerning regulation, taxation and government revenues from distribution and sale of spirits.

Vote No. This expands the size and scope of government through new mandates and licenses effectively trading one monopoly for another.  It also proposes two tax increases.

Initiative 1107- Concerns reversing certain 2010 amendments to state tax laws. 
This measure would end sales tax on candy; end temporary sales tax on some bottled water; end temporary excise taxes on carbonated beverages; and reduce tax rates for certain food processors.

Vote Yes. Cuts taxes and eliminates a massive regulatory burden on businesses to figure out which items are “candy” and should be taxed.

Referendum Bill 52 - Concerns authorizing and funding bonds for energy efficiency projects in school per EHB 2561 as passed by the Legislature.
This bill would authorize bonds to finance construction and repair projects increasing energy efficiency in public schools and higher education buildings, and continue the sales tax on bottled water otherwise expiring in 2013.

Vote No. This is deficit spending and dishonest.  This would allow “projected energy savings” to be the asset against  which to bond half a billion dollars at a total cost to tax payers of almost $1 billion. 

Senate Joint Resolution 8225- The Legislature has proposed a constitutional amendment concerning the limitation on state debt.
SJR 8225 would require the state to reduce the interest accounted for in calculating the constitutional debt limit, by the
amount of federal payments scheduled to be received to offset that interest.

Vote No. This is an accounting trick to allow the state to borrow more money above the current constitutional debt limit while our spending remains out-of-control.

Engrossed Substgitute House Joint Resolution 4220 - The legislature has proposed a constitutional amendment on denying bail for persons charged with certain criminal offenses.
ESHJR 4220 would authorize courts to deny bail for offenses punishable by the possibility of life in prison, on clear and convincing evidence of a propensity for violence that would likely endanger persons.

Vote Yes. This would restore the original understanding of when bail could be denied for “capital offenses.”  Had this been in place it likely would have prevented the infamous Lakewood shootings.

I-1107

"The Columbian recommends a 'Yes' vote on Initiative 1107, which would repeal the tax increases. We do so for three reasons: our belief that an economic crisis is the worst time to increase taxes, the unpardonable secrecy that ushered these tax increases to reality, and the abject silliness nestled in the details of the legislation."

 - www.stopgrocerytaxes.com, 10.28.2010

I love candy. We call it "nannies" at my house. We love soda. It's my therapy. I really do NEED Diet Coke. I just do, okay? But if you're concerned, I can assure you I'm not addicted...I recently went nine weeks without my beloved Diet Coke and managed just fine, thank you! No convulsions, withdrawals, or headaches. I know I have now alleviated all your personal concerns about my DC consumption...moving on...

Initiative 1107 is an easy one for me. I was mad about this from the get-go. I-1107 ends the recent tax on candy, soda and bottled water. This was an arbitrary tax to add revenue to our state's general fund. 

Taxing these items was a simple solution for our legislature to neglect their job, which is to prioritize spending and government services. They simply tacked on a tax to soda, bottled water and candy, but made it more arbitrary than anything else. A Snickers bar is taxed, but not a Twix. Say what? This tax also hurt local manufacturers because they previously had a lower B&O tax; this advantage was taken away.

Opponents of I-1107 are mostly unions. I say this time and time again...unions need tax dollars to keep their jobs and their amazing pensions and amazing health care. When they are voting NO on I-1107 they are essentially voting for themselves. I-1107 opponents claim community health care centers and school class sizes are all at risk if 1107 passes...and honestly, they're right...because EVERYTHING SHOULD BE ON THE TABLE. All government programs should be analyzed with a microscope because when 1107 is approved, cuts WILL need to be made. And in my opinion, it's about freakin' time.

Another easy one. Washington friends: Vote YES on I-1107.

I-1053

"We simply can't afford to have it all. With I-1053, Olympia will finally be forced to reform government, prioritize spending and re-evaluate existing programs.  Without I-1053, they'll resort to job-killing, family-budget-busting tax increases."

 - Argument For I-1053, State of Washington Voter's Pamphlet

This is to counteract what our state legislature suspended earlier this year. I blogged about my disgust when I-960 was about to be overturned here (It was overturned a short time afterwards). I-960 required a 2/3 legislative majority vote to increase taxes, and I-1053 re-instates this requirement.

This is an issue voters continue to make clear: we want the legislature to be prudent when raising taxes. 

In general, raising taxes should be a BIG deal. I want the state to make the tough decisions about what to change and where to cut back when state's revenue contracts. It's what people do in their everyday lives when times get tough. Sometimes you just have to cut your HD-programming...or cable altogether. I LOVE Project Runway (season finale tonight!), but if my husband loses his job, I know I am losing cable, and in turn, my dear, sweet Tim Gunn. (sigh!...Make it work!)

Not everything in the state budget is a priority and I refuse to accept that as an excuse for raising taxes. Three times previously, voters have approved initiatives requiring majorities to raise taxes. We are the people. This is our state...quit overturning OUR voice.

This is an easy one. My fellow Washingtonians: Vote YES on 1053.

I-1100 and I-1105---thoughts?

I'm sorting through our almost record number initiatives here in Washington state and am wondering what you're thinking. My question with I-1100 and I-1105 is whether or not this is a MORAL issue or a GOVERNMENT MONOPOLY issue. For most, I doubt this is a moral issue, but for me personally, as one who does not consume alcoholic beverages, I'm trying to decide if my moral stance affects my choice. 

Here are some facts about I-1100 and I-1105 (as I see them...)

•  Our state has a monopoly on the sale/price and distribution of hard liquor.
•  Currently, the state sets the price of hard liquor by two facets: markup and taxes. Last year, rather than increase taxes on liquor, they chose to increase the markup (from 39.2% to 51.9%), to allow greater generation of tax revenue. Either way, the government holds all the cards.
• Private businesses would love the opportunity to sell liquor, which is what I-1100 would allow. Should 1100 pass, businesses would apply for a general liquor retailer's license, meet the requirements, pay the fees, and be in the game.
• Costco and Safeway have contributed millions to this campaign. Most supporters are private businesses knowing they could expand and grow their companies with the addition of hard liquor to their inventories.
• Opponents of I-1100 express concerns with safety, foreseeing that if prices become cheaper, which is inevitable, people will drink more and children will be able to get their hands on liquor easier. 
• Smaller liquor producing businesses believe they will be forced out of the business altogether because they will not be able to compete with the volume discounts larger retailers will receive.  
• I-1100 provides a timing window to close the state-run liquor stores and authorize the operation of new privately managed liquor stores.
• Opponents of I-1100 are obviously concerned about the loss of revenue, which would provide a gap for our state....but this is where I-1105 comes in. 
• I-1105 directs the state legislature to create a "new tax on the sale of spirits to spirits distributors." AKA...bring in the middle man.  
• I-1105 also requires contracting retailers to pay the state 6% of their gross annual spirits sales during the first five years of sales. 
• Between a new tax code and the retailers paying 6% of gross sales, I-1105 states the revenue to the government must at least stay the same, plus add an additional $100 million over a net 5-year period.

A SUMMARY OF REESE'S THOUGHTS:

As a conservative thinker, I love the idea of taking the government out of most anything. A bureaucratically-run "business" is usually not run very efficiently. What's in it for the government to cut costs when they can simply raise taxes and/or markups? Private businesses must sell at a certain profit level and manage their costs enough to make the sale worthwhile. I want private businesses to grow, which in turns add jobs. Sure, state-run liquor stores will close, but how many more private jobs will be created? All without taxpayers footing the bill.

  

On the other hand, as a non-drinker, do I really care/want liquor to become cheaper? Do I care that hard liquor may be more visible as I take my daughters to the grocery store with me? As of now, we usually just avoid those aisles. My children are well aware about my choice of not drinking alcohol and it's not something we revisit weekly. I doubt I will ever point out the distinction between wine vs. beer vs. liquor in terms of one being "better" than the others. They are all off-limits in my book.

Do I think liquor will become more accessible to minors if 1100 and 1105 pass? Not really. Retailers are still on the hook not to sell to minors, lest they lose their license. And as proponents of 1100 point out, without a monopoly to run, the State Liquor Control Board can focus on just that...control and enforcement. 

Initiative 1105 makes it necessary to adjust the tax code to maintain the existing revenue stream to the state (plus a little extra). So as far as the government feeling a pinch, I-1105 makes it so that won't happen. 

So, I'm leaning to Yes to I-1100 to take the government out of the business of selling liquor, and Yes to I-1105 so that taxes are still a big part of the equation. I am a believer that taxes influence choice and just like I don't mind cigarettes being expensive, I won't mind if liquor continues to be on the pricier side. Prices and taxes mold behavior in all facets of life.

So what are your thoughts on these two initiatives???  

Sources:

State of Washington Voters' Pamphlet Guide

King5 News Up Front with Robert Mak, Voters Guide

Washington Voters Guide Tonight

From the King5 News website:

There are six initiatives on this year's ballot.  And, that doesn't include two proposed constitutional changes and a referendum.  How can you figure out what all these ballot measures mean? Don't miss the KING 5 News Up Front Voters Guide.  Robert Mak breaks down the complexities and helps you make the right decisions. Tune in Tuesday night at 7 p.m.


I've said it over and over (but I will say it again!) there is a lot at stake with this year's election and the best thing a voter can do is be informed. Some of these initiatives will have a significant impact on our state's economy and future. Tune in or TIVO if you are interested...

1098 Union Power

At issue on this Washington ballot is how government is to respond when it is spending more money than it takes in.  The answer may help tell the rest of us whether our future is to be government of the public employee, by the public employee and for the public employee."

 - William McGurn, WSJ

Have you heard the phrase, "FOLLOW THE MONEY"? 

Finding out where the money is coming from and where it's going can give a person the truest sense of what's really going on.

With I-1098, the money here is VERY important. The Wall Street Journal has a great piece by William McGurn today about how Unions are (by far) the largest supporters of the "Vote Yes" campaign for 1098.

Just a few great snippets from McGurn:

"Far from a civil war among the rich, the push for I-1098 is being led and financed by unions. In a day when organized labor claims more members in government than in the private sector, it's not surprising to learn that public-employee unions are front and center. Their leadership raises a question asked by beleaguered taxpayers across America: Do state budgets exist to serve their citizens or their government employees?"

"The unions are involved in this initiative because they see it as the only way to maintain vital health-care and education services."

"Of the roughly $6.2 million raised by the lead group urging a "yes" on 1098, $4.1 million comes from unions. The largest chunk of this money comes from two unions and their local affiliates: the Service Employees International Union and the National Education Association (the teachers union)." 

"In a recent article for the Seattle Times, one local businessman pointed out that 60% of the state budget is untouchable because it relates to salaries and benefits for public employees that are governed by union contracts. At a time when the government is facing shortfalls totalling $4.5 billion, he says that the government unions 'have more control over our state budget than we the people have.'"

Doesn't it make sense the Unions are all over 1098? The livelihood of their outlandish health care benefits and retirement packages are all based on a tax structure that can keep up with their demands. And who is responsible for the bill? Private sector taxpayers who fund these benefits while getting by with their more market-driven benefit plans. 

Do you see a trend here? The Unions have P-O-W-E-R...more than you or I realize. 

Just today, Boeing announced increases in 2011 health care contributions for their non-union employees.  The unions, however, are untouched because they are bound by union contracts. And you can bet the unions will put up a huge fight when negotiations begin and an increase in personal benefit contributions are at the table (can you say strike?). 

Yes, Bill Gates is out there saying 1098 is such a good thing (and in my opinion he can go ahead and write a bigger check to the government out of the goodness of his heart if he so chooses), but the real backers of 1098 are Unions who refuse to accept a contraction in their way of life. 

But where does that leave you and I? 

Sources:

WSJ: William McGurn 10.19.2010

Boeing Raises Health-plan Costs for Most NonUnion Workers, 10.19.2010

Ballots are Coming

The ballots are coming. Voting day is approaching...can you feel the intensity? I'm already feeling bombarded with the print ads and TV advertising, but it will still heat up as November approaches.  Here's what I have to say about our Washington races:

(1) DINO vs. MURRAY

Stick with the issues. Murray continues to attack Dino with half-truth allegations and forgets that she's the one on the hot seat. She's part of a Congress that's made our economic situation go from bad to worse. She's part of a Senate which has neglected to pass a budget, and has avoided a vote for our tax structure which is set to begin in 2 1/2 months. She has been a proponent of the stimulus, and Obamacare, which they continue to say, "You're gonna like it, I promise" (Obamacare) and "It will eventually create jobs" (Stimulus).  The problem is we don't like it because the only way to support these programs is through OUR precious tax dollars. 

Do you find it interesting there isn't a single incumbent Democrat around the country running on how they passed milestone legislation for health care???  They know Obamacare was rammed through without support of the American public and they won't win any points by touting such a shameful, unconstitutional "achievement."  

This election is about jobs, the economy and reigning in government control over our lives. What has Patty Murray done to make any improvement?  She's been in office during our boom and now through our recession and yet still is mum about her track record and how that's affected me and you.

Just remember to stick to the issues. Stick to the issues. JOBS and the ECONOMY. 

(2) I-1098

It appears the State Income Tax initiative is in a dead-heat. I am so passionate about defeating 1098 but I think a lot of Washingtonians are feeling indifferent since it's only written to tax wealthier Washingtonians. 

Please share these facts with your friends and neighbors...two years, people...TWO SHORT YEARS and our State Government can make this income tax apply to ALL income-earning Washingtonians. And since our state re-wrote the law on tax hikes a few months ago, it only requires a simple majority vote. And if you trust them to hold back just look at our Sales Tax. It's one of the highest in the country and it continues to go up.  

1098 will not exist in a vacuum either. The effects of a state income tax will filter down to negatively affect our state economy and job growth. A state income tax will deter businesses from relocating to Washington and will deter businesses from expansion. That is job growth and we will see less of it. 

I am probably a broken record...but PLEASE, speak up. Share the details. And VOTE. Vote Vote Vote.

Business speaking out

"For years, the lack of a state income tax has been a powerful selling point to companies and individuals looking to move to Washington. This November's vote will have a big impact on our region's future growth opportunities."

 - Mike Hughes, President of Safeco Insurance

The State Income Tax debate is in full force here in Washington. If Initiative 1098 passes, our state will go from having the lowest state income tax (ZERO) to the fifth highest in the nation. 

Are you eyes wide open now?!...yes, the FIFTH highest.

And some of you are saying...well, that's only for the rich. I'll be fine.

But, like I've blogged about before, just give it two years, my friends, and we'll all be paying into this system.

Want to know who's speaking out against 1098?  Businesses. LOTS of them.

To see a list of businesses that have publicly come out against I-1098 and some great press releases from leaders at some of our largest businesses (Microsoft, Boeing, etc.), click here.

Even if you STILL believe the state income tax won't affect you, you should STILL oppose I-1098 to give our state the best advantage in retaining and attracting businesses to Washington State. It's not just a tax on the super rich...the effects will be far more reaching.