Tag: tax policy

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall tax policy

My Favorite Control Group

Tim Eyman

Tim Eyman strikes again. 

In deep blue Washington State, the ballot measure activist celebrated another Election Day victory last week with Initiative 976, limiting vehicle taxes. Not to mention Referendum 88, whereby voters kept a ban on government use of racial preferences, enacted via an initiative Eyman had co-authored two decades ago.

And still, there were a dozen more issues on last Tuesday’s statewide ballot thanks to Mr. Eyman’s 2007 initiative, I-960, which mandates “advisory votes on taxes enacted without voter approval.” (Also thanks to state legislators, I guess, for racking up 12 new tax increases this year without bothering to ask voters!)

Yet, perhaps it matters not at all. Nearly two million votes cast on each of these measures? Three supported by a majority? Nine rejected? Two esteemed Evergreen State newspaper columnists pooh-pooh them as “meaningless.”

“The Legislature has never taken the voters’ advice when they say a tax should be repealed,” writes Spokane Spokesman Review columnist Jim Camden. 

That’s a failing of the Legislature, Jim,* not these advisory measures . . . which you seem to acknowledge when you write that these votes at least “provide a good control group for any experiment on the voters’ knee jerk reaction to higher taxes.”

If legislators cared to know. 

While dumping on the dozen measures as “an empty remnant of an earlier initiative,” The Columbian’s Greg Jayne notices that “their presence on the ballot this year reminded voters, over and over again, of the Legislature’s spendthrift ways.”

Helping create an anti-tax mood that spurred support for I-976.

Not bad for being meaningless.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* I use his first name because I know Mr. Camden from decades ago when he was a reporter covering House Speaker Tom Foley, who after suing to overturn the 1992 citizen initiative for term limits became the only Speaker defeated for reelection since the Civil War. 

PDF for printing

Tim Eyman

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall tax policy

Blue Colorado Big Spenders

Colorado, elections, taxes, Bruce,

“The Trump years may have cemented Colorado’s blue-state status — time will tell,” writes Alex Burness in the Denver Post, “but voters in the Centennial State continue to hold a hard line on anything that has even a whiff [of] new tax.”

Burness is talking about Proposition CC, a measure placed on Tuesday’s ballot by the state’s Democratic-controlled legislature, which would have allowed state government to keep and spend $37 million annually coming into government coffers over the state’s constitutional spending cap, rather than refunding those dollars to taxpayers as required by the Taxpayer Bill of Rights passed back in the 1990s.

The elite supporters of Proposition CC devoted more than $4 million to promoting the measure, outspending opponents better than two-to-one and arguing that government desperately needed the money for education and transportation. Opponents cried foul over the official ballot summary voters read, which began with the words “Without a tax increase . . .”

 “But the measure lost,” Burness informs, “and it wasn’t close.”

“The measure’s failure amounts to a significant victory for supporters of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights,” Colorado Public Radio reports. “That constitutional amendment requires voter approval for all tax increases, sets a revenue limit for every government in the state and requires any surpluses be returned to taxpayers.”

“Who’s in charge?” TABOR author Douglas Bruce asked years ago. “We, the people, who earn the money, or the politicians who want to spend it?”

The answer from supposedly blue-leaning Colorado voters was unequivocal.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Colorado, elections, taxes, Bruce,

Photo credit: Pictures of Money

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts


Categories
national politics & policies too much government

NowhereCare

Elizabeth Warren, healthcare, taxes,

Even people who get their information only from major network news know that, in their mad rush to promise free health care, Democratic presidential hopefuls would raise taxes for nearly everybody including the “hard-working middle class.”

How do they know?

Because at least one of the eager promisers won’t give a straight answer.

Her name is Senator Elizabeth Warren. 

Like Bernie Sanders (but not Amy Klobuchar and Joe Biden) she is offering “Medicare for All,” which Fox’s Tucker Carlson calls straight-up socialism.*

George Stephanopoulos, Chris Matthews, and “other strident Democratic partisans” have been pressing her on the tax hike issue, and at the recent, fourth national primary debate, Warren continued to evade. Even Sleepy Joe knows that universal single-payer health care spending would require more taxes than can be squeezed out of the very rich and the big corporations (which Warren, Sanders, and other Democrats incessantly push). But Warren just will not say the words: yes, your taxes will go up. She continually feints to her follow-up argument, that since overall health care costs would [according to plan] go down, we would all come out ahead.

Tucker Carlson, citing an Urban Institute study, gives the answer the democratic socialists won’t: their promise would require spending 3.4 trillion tax dollars per year — $10 grand per person per year, including every child, retiree, and prison inmate.** Warren expects us to repress our common sense and believe that cramming all health care spending through the federal government will increase efficiency.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar has the right word for Medicare for All: utopian. 

Noting that Obamacare failed to live up to its promises, Azar predicts the ultimate result, “Medicare for None.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

* And not altogether implausibly, since medicine is a fifth of the American economy and (presumably) since socialism is an economy run by government.

** Tucker’s list.

PDF for printing

Elizabeth Warren, healthcare, taxes,

Illustration from a photo by Gage Skidmore

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall tax policy

The Legislature That Couldn’t Tax Straight

Tim Eyman, Senate Bill 5224, taxes, vote, democracy,

“If you lost count of how many new and higher taxes state lawmakers passed this year,” begins Jerry Cornfield’s recent column in the Everett Herald, “it was 12.”

Cornfield doesn’t appear too distressed about the tax hikes, however, worrying instead that Evergreen State voters will be “awash in tax advisory measures this fall.”

That’s because for every tax increase the Washington State Legislature enacts without putting it to a vote of the people of Washington, an advisory vote is mandated by Initiative 960, passed by voters back in 2007.

So 12 tax increases = 12 tax advisory votes. 

“We wouldn’t be talking about advisory votes and providing Eyman a platform for politicial [sic] ministering,” Mr. Cornfield complains, “had Democratic lawmakers gotten rid of them by passing Senate Bill 5224.”

Seems odd somehow that a newspaper columnist would be berating politicians for not passing a law to silence voters regarding tax hikes. Democrats could have done so without a single Republican vote. SB-5224 did pass the Senate, but it was blocked in the House by the Democratic Speaker — “democratic,” thankfully, in more ways than one.

Eyman is Tim Eyman, the state’s anti-tax initiative leader. His group, Voters Want More Choices, spearheaded Initiative 960, which from 2008 to 2018 required 19 tax advisory votes. Voters have expressed opposition to 12 of the 19 tax increases passed by the legislature — 63 percent — and support for seven. 

“It’s a tax increase report card,” explains Eyman, “and the Legislature this year gets an F.” 

A grade that was certainly earned.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Tim Eyman, Senate Bill 5224, taxes, vote, democracy,

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts


Categories
subsidy tax policy

The Truth of Tax Privileges

Tony Gehrig, Dave Piepkorn, Caldevron, taxes,

In Fargo, North Dakota, a company called Aldevron applied to the city council for a tax exemption. If given, it would spare the company from handing $4.6 million dollars to the city government over the next ten years.

Now, Aldevron isn’t just a company with a name seemingly out of a sci-fi movie. It is science-fictional in its mission, providing “high-quality plasmid DNA, proteins, enzymes, antibodies, and other biologicals to help our partners achieve ground-breaking science,” and so on.

Sounds very interesting. But is it $4.6 million interesting?

That is subjective. A more objective question was asked of the company’s representative by Commissioner Tony Gehrig: “If you didn’t get the incentive would you still expand?”

The answer was revealing: yes.

That is when another commissioner, Dave Piepkorn, got a bit peeved.

He “accused Gehrig of ‘bitching’ about the subsidies,” explains Rob Port of the Say Anything blog. Then Piepkorn went on to “bitch” . . . about Gehrig. “It really bothers me when he puts words in people’s mouths.”

So Commissioner Piepkorn asked Aldevron’s rep if the company would go somewhere else sans the special privilege.

The company man, looking a tad uncomfortable, as Port notes, said no. Businesses have to take a long view of their relationships with local government, and tax breaks are just one element in overall “friendliness.”

After all, businesses have to go somewhere.

Rob Port concludes that “the subsidies occur because they’re expected, not because they’re needed.” 

Fargo’s voters might consider an initiative to take away politicians’ ability to make creative use of their taxing authority.

Perhaps while voting out Piepkorn.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Tony Gehrig, Dave Piepkorn, Caldevron, taxes,

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts


Categories
Popular tax policy term limits

Terms for Taxes

tax man, taxes, Tim Eyman, term limits,

Years ago, I dubbed Tim Eyman “America’s #1 freedom fighter,” and how does he repay me? Washington State’s anti-tax crusading initiative guru has gone and stolen my bread-and-butter issue, term limits . . . and married it up with another one of his tax initiatives. 

He’s calling Initiative 1648: Term Limits on Taxes. 

“This measure would require state tax increases to expire after one year unless approved by a majority vote of the people,” informs the official ballot title, “and immediately terminate any tax increases imposed in 2019 without such approval.”

Did someone say “tax increases”? 

“They went absolutely bonkers this legislative session,” Eyman told radio host Lars Larson recently. “There were 11 tax increases; they totaled over $27 billion over the next ten years. And there’s just no checks and balances.”

Speaking with Dori Monson of KIRO Radio, he noted that “all of them were passed without a vote of the people. This initiative says whenever they raise taxes without a vote of the people, we’re going to put it on a strict time limit.”

But with a July 5th deadline, supporters have less than two weeks left to gather the 320,000 voter signatures required on the petition.

It is terrible that Evergreen State voters can’t term-limit their state legislators directly. But in 1998, the state supreme court struck down a term limits initiative passed by voters, ruling that a constitutional amendment was required — something only legislators can propose. 

Now, thanks to Mr. Eyman, at least voters can slap term limits on their legislators’ tax increases. 

Still, he stole the idea from me.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

tax man, taxes, Tim Eyman, term limits,

—

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts