19 Replies to “Vote by Tomorrow”

  1. With very, very low voter participation it’s vital that people go out and vote.

    Especially since there is a risk that the homophobic, theocratic and 100% anti-transit Shamram Hadian may be the Republican nominee. So for those of you who want those kind of views silenced, please vote for Rob in the primary. Together we can stamp out a nut who wants to completly ignore the McCleary decision to fully fund schools and only Rob McKenna will do so without raising taxes. BTW, Rob McKenna is the same candidate who has promised to seek voter approval on a new transportation package.

    1. I’m skeptical that Rob McKenna will put forward a transportation plan that STB would find appealing. I would love to be wrong but if you want to vote for someone that supports the mission of this blog you’ll vote for Jay Inslee.

      1. I will vote for Rob McKenna. Even gave money to the guy. Time to clean out the state bureaucracy.

        Inslee supports things I cannot support – like raising taxes without voter consent. Furthermore, I feel there is a hidden agenda between Inslee and WEA President Mary Lindquist. Let me also add that I don’t know where Inslee stands on transportation issues, I know McKenna is a realist that has came to accept Sound Transit as a democratically-supported transit agency.

      2. I think the reason we elect politicians is so they can execute the policies we elect them on, not so we second guess them every year. Insisting that the people vote on everything is just a stalling method and supported by those that don’t have the power, in this case Republicans in Washington State.

      3. Oh and I highly doubt that McKenna would have supported the Councilmatic passage of the Congestion Reduction Charge allowing a vote of 6 council members to pass it without a public vote.

      4. Adam, I’m beginning to think the CRC was a mistake. Better to have sent it to the voters…

        Voters have said time and again – not just Republicans, but independents/moderates and even some Democrats – they want voter approval of taxes. Time you guys cut the contempt towards the same voters that are about to save Pierce Transit, and oh BTW the same voters that voted YEA in 2008 for more taxe$ in Skagit and now SKAT is growing.

      5. I don’t thing the governor had any say in the CRC. That’s starting to spread a pretty wide net. The thing that really rubs me the wrong way is that the title, “Congestion Reduction Charge” is completely bogus. Everyone knows it’s not about reducing congestion so why the lies?

      6. Avgeek – we live in a republic. That means we elect folks to makes theses decisions for us. We don’t have New England town meeting here, a form of government that has never worked well in densely and/or highly populated areas. Don’t like how your City or County Councilor or State Rep or Senator voted? Elect somebody new next time round. Greatest need? Electoral campaign finance reform to eliminate the “Incumbent Advantage” making it easier for challengers to win..

      7. Lloyd;

        We have four branches of government in this state – a republican legislature (small r), a republican judiciary (small r), an elected chief executive, and a direct democratic relief valve.

        Since Democrats are so gung ho to raise taxes, the voters have slapped a voter approval or supermajority cap. Since Democrats are so insistent on not respecting that imposed and reimposed cap, I think I just might vote for Eyman’s latest. This time.

    2. We are talking about an Eastsideepublican here; I’m pretty sire he will carry on the highway legacy in Washington. I voted for the only non-weaksauce candidate, Hadian.

      1. Why thank you Austin for supporting Hadian’s theocratic attitude towards the McCleary decision, his nutbar supporters and if you like Clint Didier you’ll love the Hadian NONconcession demands that’ll come.

    3. As far as voter participation, the secretary of state predicts this primary may set a record for participation.

    4. Together we can stamp out a nut who wants to completly ignore the McCleary decision to fully fund schools and only Rob McKenna will do so without raising taxes.

      It is not possible to comply with the McCleary decision and increase state funding to higher education as Rob McKenna wants to without a substantial increase to state revenue. This will require “raising taxes” by one or more of increasing the current rates, adding new taxes, or eliminating various tax exemptions and credits.

      1. Chris, here’s Rob McKenna’s plan: http://crosscut.com/2012/08/01/washington-governor/109825/mckenna-lays-out-plan-pay-school-funding-plans/

        “In simplified terms, McKenna proposes to spend any extra revenue beyond a 6 percent biennial growth rate on K-12 education. The idea is to shift bigger and bigger shares of the state’s money to education over the next several years.

        “McKenna’s proposal addresses the so-called McCleary decision — January’s Washington state Supreme Court ruling that the state is not meeting its constitutional duties funding and providing education.”

        http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/edcetera/2018865548_discuss_taxes_the_only_way_to.html

        “last week I questioned whether McKenna’s projections were too rosy to pencil out. The answer appears to be no. McKenna’s 9.2% revenue growth projection assumes 1.7% annual inflation, 1.3% annual population growth, and a 1.5% real economic growth rate – coincidentally, the same rate the economy is recovering at currently. Those projections roughly match OFM’s estimates.”

      2. It is still smoke and mirrors. I agree with Gregiore that the ramp up in state K-12 will need to be quicker in order to comply with the court. Furthermore there seems to be some hand-waving on the part of McKenna on where increased funding for higher education will come from. Past that his proposed budgets aren’t nearly enough to fund his higher education wish list.

        The two elephants in the room are all of the tax exemptions and tax credits granted to various special interests. While eliminating the sales tax exemption on food, services, or gas wouldn’t be popular with voters there are many other exemptions that nobody outside the industry receiving special treatment cares about. The poster child has to be the tax exemption for bull semen.

        While the legislature has so far gone along with Mr. Eyman’s interpretation of his initiative that eliminating tax exemptions should require a 2/3 vote, to the best of my knowledge there is no State Supreme Court ruling to say this is in fact the case.

        Frankly I think all state tax exemptions and credits should be subject to a sunset clause. If the tax exemption is worth keeping then they legislature should have to periodically affirm it. For that matter why not require all tax exemptions and credits to pass with a 2/3 vote?

        The other elephant is all of the money the state department of revenue is forced to leave on the table when settling with large taxpayers who are behind on their bills. If you are a large company, you can substantially lower your tax liability by not paying your taxes until sued by the department of revenue then settle for pennies on the dollar. Microsoft has raised this to an art form, but other businesses like Amazon and Boeing do it too.

Comments are closed.