July 27, 2011

Associated Press -- Dems challenge WA initiative curbing tax increases : "Rep. Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, one of the dozen House Democrats backing the lawsuit said he doesn't expect any broad tax increases if the measure is successful. But he argued that the Legislature needs the ability to at least repeal tax exemptions, such as one for banks."

Eyman responds: "Democrats have proven time and time again that they'll impose tax increases on the working class without the two-thirds requirement. In 2010, with mega-majority control of the House and Senate, the Democrats suspended Initiative 960 which gave them a carte blanche opportunity to raise any tax they thought worthy or repeal any tax exemption they thought unworthy. What didn't they do? They did not impose a state income tax on the wealthy or repeal tax exemptions on big banks or big oil. Who did they target during that "minus the 2/3" legislative session? The working class. They imposed taxes on soda pop, candy, beer, and cigarettes, all of which are disproportionately hurtful to the working class and the poor.

"So now, with the overwhelming defeat of I-1098's state income tax, why should anyone believe Seattle Democrats like Jamie Pedersen when they claim they won't impose broad-based general tax increases on the working class and the poor again without the two-thirds? No one should. Pro-tax-increase Democrats claim they're only interested in taxing the rich, but whenever they have the opportunity, they always pick on the working class and the poor. The fact is that Democrat politicians' lust for tax money outweighs their supposed commitment to social justice. They know that powerful corporations and labor unions can fight back against efforts to tax them, but the working class and the poor cannot. So their decision to sue the citizens over I-1053 should be viewed for what it is: an arrogant effort to clear the decks for massive tax increases on everyone, especially the working class and the poor."

Posted by Tim Eyman at July 27, 2011 10:06 AM | Email This
1. off topic

Posted by: Politically Incorrect on July 27, 2011 10:42 AM
2. Democrats don't care what the people want. Never have, except those infrequent occasions when it matches their agenda.

The rank hypocrisy of it is that neo-communists like Jim Moeller have so roundly condemned Rob McKenna for doing the same thing for the same reasons.

But then, to be a fringe-left nutter is, of course, to be a hypocrite.

Posted by: Hinton on July 27, 2011 11:07 AM
3. off topic

Posted by: Politically Incorrect on July 27, 2011 12:15 PM
4. off topic

Posted by: Daniel on July 27, 2011 12:41 PM
5. Democrats made a very "broad" tax increase on all service businesses (a whopping 20% in the already-too-high Business & Occupation tax) just before 1053 was passed by the voters with huge margins. They are itching to hurt more people, apparently. Never mind that higher B&O taxes = less money to hire more people!

Posted by: Michele on July 27, 2011 04:13 PM
6. Marijuana dispensaries have so far resisted any effort at taxing them -- so that argument rings hollow.

Posted by: jvon on July 27, 2011 04:33 PM
7. off topic

Posted by: Politivally Incorrect on July 28, 2011 09:52 AM
8. off topic.

please address the Democrats lawsuit.

Posted by: Go to Hell! on July 28, 2011 12:08 PM
9. Moonbats, former mental patients and those who should be institutionalized love the Democratics. Also, criminals, perverts and pedophiles cheer for the Dems to be elected.

Posted by: radical moderate on July 28, 2011 09:58 PM
10. So why isn't jvon @6 off topic, too, Timmah?

Posted by: Politically Incorrect on July 29, 2011 04:19 PM
11. @10...I don't think Tim Eyman is the one who in monitoring this site. He probably has allowed one of the Forum Posters to do his monitoring. My guess is Jim Miller. He has shown his over zealous School Marm nature before. The purpose of any Forum is to examine a particular topic. However, to be so over stiff for compliance of remaining totally on topic reduces the spontaneity of the post as well as the interest by lessoning the expansion thereof.

Posted by: Daniel on July 29, 2011 05:19 PM
12. Daniel @11,

Thanks for the info. If it's Jim Miller that's being the dick, then he must have a stick up his but about something. Thanks again.


Posted by: Politically Incorrect on July 30, 2011 02:56 PM
13. A supermajority requirement to raise taxes violates that WA constitution. Article II Section 22. Look it up.

Posted by: Daddy Love on August 1, 2011 04:30 PM
Post a comment

Email Address:



Remember info?