A collection of citizen groups filed suit with the Supreme Court to allow a referendum on the legislature's evisceration of voter-mandated budget restraints:
The suit was filed by the Washington Farm Bureau and other groups after Secretary of State Sam Reed rejected a referendum that would let voters accept or reject recent changes made by the state Legislature to Initiative 601 tax and spending limits. Reed did so because lawmakers invoked an emergency clause when approving the I-601 bill, making it immune to ballot challenges.The same bogus declaration of an "emergency" was used to defend the life-saving baseball stadium tax of 1997.
Shawn Newman, who argued against the stadium tax e-mails:
I suspect Justices Sanders and Johnson would want to revisit that decision but, unless there's more, it will be an uphill battle. Just another illustration on how the Supreme Court eliminated the people's check and balance on legislative power since an emergency clause eliminates the people's right to referendum on the particular legislation.Sigh. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at May 04, 2005 12:36 PM | Email This
I've never lived in a state where the organs of government not only act in exact opposites to the people's wishes, but flaunt their authority when they do so. If only the GOP here were better, these psycho dems might have some competition...
Posted by: Steve_dog on May 4, 2005 12:48 PMAfter all, they once asked for our opinion (vote) and we gave it to them. How dare they cancel out our votes with the stroke of a pen?
This is real close to the reason we fought a revolution, if I remember my history.....
Posted by: Elmo on May 4, 2005 12:59 PMTo carry the process forward. When they are no longer getting a paycheck because they have talked about raising my taxes too much they can start paying to show up for the session.
Actually, to use their process against them, not 50 cents, lets make it 75 cents.
No, lets make it a dollar for every 30 seconds....
I fully except next year we'll have another emergency increase in pork spending, followed by another round of emergency tax increases.
Now...if Rossi wins the election challenge and the judge rules that Former Attorney General Gregoire never legitimately won, thus never legitimately had the authority to sign bills into law...can citizens sue to have the laws revoked, on the premise that Gregoire never had the authority to sign them?
I have a feeling that the answer is no, or that the emergency clause would exempt them...which could be why they're attaching it to everything.
Posted by: DarthDogbert on May 4, 2005 01:32 PMWashington state is in a total mess (transportation, education, etc.) because the likes of Eyman bastardize the citizen-right of initiatives.
Representative governments are just that. If we wanted a vote on some things (only the things King (please ignore when I steal money from my own supporter) Eyman wants...then we should vote on each and every thing with the FULL understanding of the ramifications of our votes.
Of course people say YES to "PAY LESS TAXES". That's because Eyman, et. al. have no responsibilit for running a government...for dealing with all the things government has to do.
This makes it really awful to live here. Eyman has never been elected to anything...and makes more money (and has stolen more money) than any official yet he, with the help of "duh, let's pay less taxes without having to balance the equation" lemmings) have made Washington state a HORRIBLE place for business and for people who want to have a decent transportation and education system. Not to mention heealthcare.
Eyman has abused this citizen right to the point of destructive self-motivated (and self-paying) ends that do him GREATness and do the rest of us (even those who like less taxes) a huge disservice.
hey, why isn't the guy in jail for stealing money? Wouldn't that happen to most ordinary citizens? What's really going on there anyway?
Posted by: Peter Franklin on May 4, 2005 01:33 PMThis state is really messed up. I truly wish it could be run much, much better. What will it take?
Posted by: Michele on May 4, 2005 01:39 PMMaybe because the people of this state, whom you respectively call lemmings as you disagree with them, think that the government has enough money to "deal with all the things government has to do." The governemnt doesn't properly account for the money it currently takes. Maybe the citizens of this state have a different opinion of the things with which the government has to "deal", and therefore does not provide it money to do more. This current government thinks it knows better than the people. I don't know about you, but I would call that arrogance, in order to keep it polite.
Posted by: Fred on May 4, 2005 01:43 PMActually, what you'll see next year is a rise in general fund revenue that the dems will claim is a result of their masterful handling of the economy. What will it really be from? The state diverting 10% of the gas tax revenue into the general fund. They'll then feel free to pork up some other project for an extra 10, courtesy of the transportation plans. Sheesh, what a mess.
Posted by: Steve_dog on May 4, 2005 01:45 PMI'd be interested in seeing ther net fiscal impact of the legislature's "emergency" bill to fund Safeco Field. As you might remember, the people voted it down twice. I'd bet real money that the fiscal impact to the region has been negative, not positive. At least Qwest Field has an events center tehy can rent out for special events, thereby defraying the building costs.
When I was lad in California, the peopl got all uppity and passed Prop 13. It too required a "supermajority" to raise taxes or introduce new ones. Of course, the tax and spend types cried that the sky was gonna fall down on us all, but it never came to be. Government had to go on a diet. Local governments started prioritizing. Police, Fire, Infrastructure became their priorities.
I can say in all honesty having come back to WA a year ago from Ontario, CA, that CA is definitely on the ball, moreso than WA. Our Police protection was better, (one of the best in the state), the fire department knocked 'em down and the roads were a damn site better than anything I've yet to drive here in WA state.
Why is that? Because in 1977, the people reminded their "elected representatives" who was actually footing the bill.
We need to do the same thing here.
Posted by: Robert on May 4, 2005 01:49 PMWe need a law that says if you use the "emegency" clause indiscriminately, you are PERSONALLY liable for some type of "false report filing." Or at a minimum, you better be damn sure it's a REAL emergency.
I don't want to hamper an elected official's duties. I don't want to discourage good people from sensibly serving in the public realm. However, there ARE laws against false 911 calls, "yelling fire in the theater" and other non-sanctioned uses of powers like false arrests.
Why shouldn't lawmakers be held to the same standards as the electors--their bosses?
Posted by: Jimmie-howya-doin on May 4, 2005 01:51 PMDon't like the initiative/referendum process? Fine. Change the Constitution.
You lay the blame at the feet of Tim Eyman, but it was this same iniative process that other special interests 'bastardized' when they shoved teacher pay raises and reduced class-size bs onto the ballot - both of which are now being paid by the latest round of tax increases.
Question for you Peter - where do you send the money you save every year now that you're paying 30 bucks on your car tabs? You certainly wouldn't be so hyprocritical as to bash the process and the people who put this into place, yet reap the rewards at the same time. Would you?
Posted by: jimg on May 4, 2005 01:59 PMInteresting
Pudster
Posted by: Puddybud on May 4, 2005 02:01 PMWhy do I get the impression that you wrote your little screed in crayon?
Is that the best you got?
Posted by: alphabet soup on May 4, 2005 02:08 PMYeah, you're right they'll claim an accomplishment, but it won't stop them from another round of tax increases. They'll cite how successful the first one was as justification for doing it again.
Yeah, I'm afraid you're right. Maybe we should start a pool on what batch 'o bacon they'll go for next?
My guess is they'll couch it in some "save the kids" terms, i.e. if the teachers' unions don't get an immediate 60% increase in funds our children won't be able to read and write next year.
Posted by: Steve_dog on May 4, 2005 02:29 PMWhen we can't vote the rascals out because of institutionalized vote fraud, when our "representatives" won't debate the issues with us (or even respond to our pleas), it leaves us little choice.
To the likes of PPUCE* I urge you to reconsider your stance, or exercise a bit more caution in how large a target you present ;'}
*Peter-Peter-Urinal-Cake-Eater
Eyeman has been successful because the legislators have been for decades ignoring the will of the people. We passed Initiative 601 long before Eyeman, at a time when gov't spending far outpaced the economic growth. 601 limited growth of gov't to inflation and an adjustment for growth.
Since then Olympia has found ways over, under and around 601. The stadium "emergency" being a prime example of out of control Olympia.
Eyeman's first initiative the car tabs was a reaction to paying $400 tabs for a $1000 car every year.
What we ask of Olympia is accountability, responsibility and to simply to live within ones means. We all do it, we don't spend more than we earn, is it to much to ask that of gov't?
A couple of years a ago Olympia had a budget surplus. Some of us asked Oly to put the money aside for potential future shortfalls. But no, Oly went on a spending spree reminiscent of a drunk with a windfall. Not only did Oly spend the surplus, they started new spending programs that would insure shortfalls in the coming years.
This year revenue has increased around 7%, almost triple the rate of inflation with enough to deal with population growth. Yet we have a have a budget shortfall of a billion dollars.
That is simply insane.
Olympia has been so out of control for so long that the people are sending a message. Yes on 601, 695 no on 51 and the list goes on.
Remember Chris "no new taxes" Gregoire. What recourse do the people have we elected do not do what we elected them to do? The initiative process is our corrective recourse. My preferred method would be to march on Olympia with torches and pitchforks, tar and feather everyone there but the janitor, then run them out of the state on a rail (metaphorically of course).
Yes we by law, tradition, and intent we have a representative republic. Would you prefer the torch and pitchfork, revolution, or a peaceful, legal method the initiative?
Posted by: JCM on May 4, 2005 02:39 PM"Ron Sims needs another $500 million to throw at Sound Transit. If he doesn't get this, kids will be denied the joy of seeing an inefficient, almost empty bus rolling down their street. Not to mention his political crownies won't get their cut of public funds and won't be able to buy their kids a new SUV. So please, think of the children. You don't HATE children...do you?"
Posted by: DarthDogbert on May 4, 2005 02:43 PM-- Robert
If that had happened, I'd have remembered it, but it didn't. The people of King County voted down a different measure -- not the one that later passed the Legislature -- in the spring of 1995. There was never a statewide vote on Safeco Field. There was a statewide vote on the Seahawks stadium bill in 1997, which narrowly passed. It's easy to get those publicly financed stadiums confused, so I don't blame you for the error. I have a hard time keeping them straight myself sometimes. Could be worse. Could have done a Key Arena bill this year, too.
Posted by: jsa on May 4, 2005 03:21 PMIf you are referring to the so-called "performance audit" that comes with the gas tax, forget about it having any teeth. The auditor's office can review and report, but the Gov. can just toss the audit in the round file.
Nice accountability.
Posted by: Shaun on May 4, 2005 08:52 PMWell, the Russians have arrived and are running King County and Olympia and they are saying, "E-mer-gen-cy, every body to pay more taxes."
And we will. For it's been a long time in America since the people said, "Emergency, everybody to fill the streets."
These shackles they aren't such a burden, are they?
God help us.
Posted by: Jericho on May 5, 2005 12:33 AM