Washington Votes Forum

Pathetic.

Once again the libs have no other ideas but tax and tax and tax and tax.  And keep taxing you once you're dead!

How about cutting spending?

Real cuts, instead of increasing spending by double digits biennially, and then meager "single digit or spending freeze" cuts.

Good grief...anyone bringing up the income tax horror (again!) needs to be out of office none too soon.

 We have lived here for 23 years, pretty soon we won't be able to afford to live here. WA will become as bad as CA taxes. I have a better idea why don't the politicians take a pay cut and try and live on what the average citizen lives on. We have tightened our belts, you need to also. More money will not fix the over spending and the waste! Anyone who votes for this will not get our vote come election time!

 Why the HELL does the legislature keep sponsoring this bill?  Why the HELL haven't the sponsors been voted out of office yet.  IF I wanted a state income tax, I would move to a state that has one.

I have an idea, instead of raising taxes, cut the state's budget, quit helping illegals, make English the official Washington language so the state need only print official signs in English and not wast who knows how much dollars printing them in who knows how many languages...  And finally, vote the bat-rastards out.

DK

 DK - Just look at the three Senators sponsoring this bill and that answers your question. These are three of the most ultra-leftwing liberals in the Senate.

Besides, they are just mimicking their tax and spend counterparts in the other Washington as well as completely ignoring the will of the people.

They probably figure now is the time to ram through everything they have been dreaming of for decades since that is what Washington, D.C. is doing.

Oh, and the 10 year fiscal projection for this gives the state revenues of  $23,239,894,066 from 2012-2019. That says everything.

We know that if a state income tax is implemented, it will only grow and grow and grow.

Washington State pays one of the highest sales tax in the nation. So, the fact that this bill will lower the state portion of the sales tax from 6.5% to 3.5% should be hailed. It would also eliminate (for one year at least) the state portion of the property tax. This would definately have a great result for folks who are having a hard time paying their property tax.  

I also don't have a problem with a graduated income tax because it is based on ones income and I wouldn't have a problem with CEO's with their big bonuses paying theiir fair share of the tax burden. It is about time to end the free ride of these rich cats.

SOS:

Washington State pays one of the highest sales tax in the nation. So, the fact that this bill will lower the state portion of the sales tax from 6.5% to 3.5% should be hailed. It would also eliminate (for one year at least) the state portion of the property tax. This would definately have a great result for folks who are having a hard time paying their property tax.  

You're either a politician or a fool that believes politicians. 

Yup it did wonders for California and Oregon property taxes, in case you haven't heard, they went up.

WE DO NOT WANT AN INCOME TAX  PERIOD!  and those that wish for it can move to the states that have it.  In the meantime those who keep proposing it should be voted out of office, if not impeached for malfeasance of office and not following the will of the people and the constitution.

Instead of infusing the state with more money on the backs of the taxpayers, why not have the politicians show us that they believe in fiscal responsibility and all the other campaign promises they made.  Have the politicians cut their own salary, and then let them do an independent audit and cut the fat, including state-run programs. 

IF you believe that state is fiscally responsible, how can you explain this?

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq0Til_X2jg&feature=channel

They say they're for education but THEY have a bill to not give teachers raises until 2015.

They say they want illegal guns off the street, but they try and pass a law that will law-abiding citizens criminal.  In fact they don't know that it is already illegal to own the weapons they want to outlaw.

They say they want more businesses in the state of Washington so that more jobs maybe created, but they run boeing out of state.

We say enough!  Deeds not words.  Vote the bat-rastards out!

Thanks for the given link.I have found the detailed information here.
P90X
P90X

I am glad you have faith in the system to do what is "right" with your money.  I do not.  Time and time again the legislation has voted to bloat the government and spend unwisely continuing to throw money at broken programs rather than chucking them or doing the difficult revamping them, trimming them back, and learning to do more with less like the rest of us have.  All I can say to this latest round of added tax burden is 'take some responsibility for spending and do not put the burden on either the taxpayer that cannot afford it or the business that is already suffering'.  The income tax bill 6250 opens the door for control of income tax rates to be increased over time.  With sales tax you control how much you pay by how much you spend. Oh, and Those CEO's you note with big bonuses paying "fair share"...uh what do you you think the sales tax burden on a Cobalt or Porche or fine furniture is?  They buy more, they pay more, simple.

Just say no!

 Enough already. I have lived in Oregon, no sales tax, but beware the property taxes were much higher than the property taxes in Washington! Either one or the other, NOT both, and frankly I personally prefer the taxing as it stands, and no additions at this time.

 And dems in the state should be made aware that many more people are watching what is done, and will vote accordingly the next time these people are up for re-election. I sense a change is in the wind.

 And about the Obama light rail "gift" reported recently by our Governor should be refused and he should be told to apply the monies to our contries financial problems, maybe more states should tell him the same thing. Just say NO WAY!!!! 

 Dragon,

you said:

M_DragonKnight:

They say they're for education but THEY have a bill to not give teachers raises until 2015.

How exactly do you plan to give teachers raises without increasing taxes? where is this money going to come from? If your answer is to cut spending, you're merely mouthing empty platitudes. 70% of the state budget is untouchable by law, programs such as core education requirements. Thus in order to "cut" our way out of this mess, we would have to literally cut the 2.6B deficeit from the remaining 7.7B that is not off limits. Do you really think there is a third of state spending that can be easily cut? If so, please go throught the state budget line by line and show us where this would come from, and if you really are so amazing, please run for office.

Now that we have established that it is not realistic to cut our way out, that means we must increase income, which means taxes. Now, Wash has one of the most regressive tax systems. sales taxes disproportionally affect those at the bottom of the income spectrum: those who earn 20k or less spend 17% of their income on sales taxes, while those who earn 537k or more spend only 2.9% of their income on sales taxes. Thus our tax system is regressive. furthermore, a sales tax effectively puts a 10% handicap on washington businesses, making it hard for them to compete against out of state, out of country, and internet competitors.

So you, sir, either earn above 537k a year and rightfully detest a more graduated system, or you are a fool who believes those who do earn that much.

My challenge to you then, sir, is to get real. if you can post a spreadsheet breakdown of what you intend to cut from the eligible 7.7 billion that will actually total 2.6 billion, then we can have a serious discussion of whether those services you intend to cut ought to be cut. and if you convince me of that, ill vote for you.

Otherwise, stop being penny wise and dollar foolish.

 My point was, the dems say one thing but do another, and unlike the teachers, the legislature voted to keep their raises.  DEEDS NOT WORDS. 

pagerussell:

 Dragon,

you said:

M_DragonKnight:

They say they're for education but THEY have a bill to not give teachers raises until 2015.

 Do you really think there is a third of state spending that can be easily cut?

My challenge to you then, sir, is to get real. if you can post a spreadsheet breakdown of what you intend to cut from the eligible 7.7 billion that will actually total 2.6 billion, then we can have a serious discussion of whether those services you intend to cut ought to be cut. and if you convince me of that, ill vote for you.

Otherwise, stop being penny wise and dollar foolish.

 

 why yes, yes I do...  And when the state introduces business unfriendly bills like SB 6851 http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2011015909_major_polluter_tax_bills_intro.html?syndication=rss

and we see waste like this:  http://www.kirotv.com/news/22479465/detail.html

or questionable items like SB 6853 :  http://washingtonpolicyblog.typepad.com/washington_policy_center_/2010/02/ghost-\\bill-on-taxes-introduced-.html

My first act would be to get an independent audt, and then to start stripping useless state-ran programs of their funding (ORCAA comes to mind).   As you can tell, I would cut most of the ineffectual environmental programs that the state has passed in the last couple of years.

Next, make the state more business friendly but offering better tax-incentives, then the other states we're losing jobs too. 

I would also probably make assault weapons legal for the public to own but by providing a large registration fee and annual license for them. 

I would also make English the official state language, so that the state wouldn't need to print several posters all saying the same thing in a different language.

And, I would also treat illegals as illegals. 

I am sure that covers you third.  If not, send me the spreadsheet and I will make the cuts.

As far as sales tax goes, the more you buy the more you pay.  We have one of the fairest sales tax in the US., we don't tax food, and a few other essential items.  The problem with an income tax, is tax deductions.  Deductions usually only give a percentage back of what you would actually spend on taxes, if the item you bought was taxed, for example if you spent $100 on food, there is no tax on it, but if you had an income tax, and tax on food (which will be next probably), if you spend $100 on food, there is about $9.00 in tax.  So if you budget only $100 for food, you're buying less to begin with that is, food minus tax, so in reality you're only able to buy $91 in food. And, if you're looking  to get the sales tax ($9.00) back as an income tax refund, you will only recieve about a third of the sales tax, in other words about $3.00, as witnessed when deducting for property taxes or mortgage interest.

I've been there, done that, bought and gave away the tee-shirt, and, I don't want it again.  IF I did, I could move to another state.

DK

 Since we taxpaying citizens don't have complete access to the workings of our state government, nor would the average citizen understand them even if full access were available, one great organization that does go through the state's budgets and the federal agencies budgets is Citizens Against Government Waste. They publish "piglet" booklets that are eye-opening. Google their name and see what they have accomplished. They published a cost-cutting booklet for Washington State in 2008.

One thing you are right about is the sales tax places a heavier burden on lower income people. But, and this is a very big but, the reality is if the state passed an income tax it would change every year (that is the reality of government) and you can bet it would be more onerous as time went by. Special interest groups would dictate the tax system and receive special considerations. Thus another avenue for vote-getting opening up.

The majority have voiced their opinion over and over again they do not want a state income tax so why do our legislator's keep trying to thwart the will of the people? 

The legislature cannot be trusted to abide by the laws. This session they thwarted the will of the people who voted to restrict the raising of taxes through I-960.

Surely there are some ways in which the government can reduce spending without jeopardizing health and safety. They have the perfect opportunity to evaluate every agency, program, and grant to see if they are necessary, effective and efficient with our revenues falling. But they can't be bothered. This is what the people should be demanding now.

 Dragon,

saying one liners like DEEDS NOT WORDS is ridiculous, as is pointing out human errors. we are not discussing whether those in office currently are capable. we are discussing structure, as in, what should the structure of our tax code be?

Next, my spreadsheet challenge to you was really a way of implying that there really are not that many programs that you can cut and make a serious dent in 2.6 billion. Even if you cut ORCAA completely, that agency only receives 124k from the state (as per their 2009 budget-Google it). Do your math; at that rate we will have to find 20,697 programs the size of orca to cut. I will save you the time and tell you there aren't that many.

Moreover, be sensible. your fee on assault weapons would have to be huge to make any difference, and the larger it is the less people who will elect to pay it (think:even if a million people paid 100 bucks, thats 100 million. Not bad, now repeat 25 times; furthermore, a fee is a tax-ergo you just raised taxes). likewise, printing costs are cheap. you might save a bit by only printing in English, but it wont touch 2.6 billion. That's not to say we should not do so, saving is saving, but I remind you that my original post said we cannot expect to cut our way out of 2.6 billion. yes we can and should make sensible cuts so we are not spending money wastefully. but we also must change our tax structure.

And what tax incentive can you think of that is better than a 9% break that would be the result of eliminating a sales tax? your still vague on all of your points. (NOTE: while i would love to omit this, it wont actually be a 9% break because not all of the sales tax can be cut, some is unrelated, like the tax on cigarettes)

your point about illegals is off topic. stay on topic, please, or if it is somehow on topic, please explain how so.

you are right that we have one of the fairest sales taxes in the us. but that does not change the fact that, as lainie points out, sales taxes place a heavier burden on lower income people. your last paragraph lost me. you assume somehow a tax on food and income tax when we are explicitly discussing eliminating sales tax and replacing with an income tax, which would sever the link between price and tax. instead, the link is between wage and tax.

Dragon, your entire post sounds more like you are angry with the specific politicians elected currently, and I have nothing to say about that (I don't really like most of them either). But, as I said above, this is about structure.

now, Lainie, enlighten me. I am young, only 24, but I have followed politics avidly for over a decade. you claim that voters have expressed their opinion about a state income tax over and over, but my research shows that there have been exactly 3 attempts in Washington history, 1932, 1966, and 1992. none recent, and nothing that shows serious voter disapproval.

As for I-960, I can understand your anger, but consider this angle. I can guarantee you that no politician actually wants to raise taxes, because there is no easier way to get re-elected then to be able to say you didn't raise taxes. But facing a 2.6 billion shortfall with, as we have seen, no realistic way of getting close to that number via cuts, what do you expect them to do? you simply cannot have your cake and eat it too.

That being said, yes, we should, can and ought to look for waste in government. and not just when we face shortfalls, but in the boom times too. But also, we should be realistic when considering taxation.

Now, if you, dragon, or anyone else who stumbles on this post takes the position that it is not right for the successful top earners to pay more, that the burden of government ought to be equal, well that is at least a defensible position. But the position that dragon and you are holding, that we can realistically cut our way to budget balance, is simply not defensible.

regards,

Page

 Page, you get me the spreadsheet and I'll give you the budget cuts you ask for.  Until then, you come-off as someone who is in favor of taxing the state of washington so much that people will move out.  The current legislature has chased Boeing out due to non-concessions, as well as (if I remember it correctly from last year) that the National Chamber of Commerce has named Wasthington State as anti-business.  Not to mention that the legislatures has already discussed a one-percent sales tax increase (http://www.libertylive.org/blog_main/post.php?post_id=1913)  which would make Washington State the highest taxed state in the United States.  Do you feel blessed or more oppresed?  And, instead of trying to cut the budget, like the legislature should be trying to do what do we get? Our State Senate passing a bill asking NASA for a space shuttle (http://www.komonews.com/news/local/84178707.html)  And, if we do get the shuttle how much money do you think it's going to cost for transport and upkeep, not to mention the manditory new building?  Or, how about that bill calling for a transparency in drinks (http://blog.thenewstribune.com/politics/2010/02/11/house-calls-for-transparency-in-drinking/)   Remember, Deeds not words.  And while ORCAA as you suggested only cost $135,000 or so in tax-payers money, what you do not see, is, it is a start.  Cut enough of those wasteful state agencies and pretty soon you're making a real dent in the deficeit. One thing I didn't mention is, since the federal governement has decided that there is no inflation and those with SSI will not be getting their COLA, we can assume that the state will be able to spend less money in the upcoming year so, we can begin to cut taxes from last-year's bloated budget.  As a simpler answer for you, if you want to look at those who want a tax increase, just look at the sponsors of all the bills that call for a tax increase and an income tax.  If you cut the spending there wouldn't be a need for an income tax or any additonal taxes.

I will give you your point that making assault weapons that go fully automatic legal to own will probably not make a dent in the budget, I wanted to stir-up the anti-gun people out there, and it looks like it worked on you. 

So Page, I ask you, is the bloated government spending the anti-business atmosphere and the increase in taxes is the legislature trying to run the non-elite people out of state?  It certainly appears that way to an outsider.  Again, Deeds not words.  In an earlier post I mentioned that I believe the plan of the legislature is to evacuate the state and make it a federal park, whereby the environmentalists can point to the state saying "good job."  Deeds not words.

You say, that I sound angry.  Well, yes,  Yes I am.  I am tired of the politicians who do not care about their constentuancy, and are only trying to make a legacy for themselves, I am angry that the government continues to spend, while we the people are floundering in debt and are looking for jobs that aren't there becuase of an anti-business crusade the legislature has, I am tired of the legislatures feeling self-imporant to the effect that they keep their pay-raises, while cutting the pay-raise of those who need it and are doing the real work. We elected the legisilature to lead rather than worry about getting re-elected in next election.  The best way to lead is by example,  in other words, I am as MAD as HELL and I am not going to stay silent any longer, VOTE THE BAT-RASTARDS OUT!

Now Page, you don't like one-liners like DEEDS not WORDS, in your short life-span you have decided that such sayings are "ridiculous," some call it a creed (a personal code) to live by. You maynot like the one-liners like Deeds not Words, and consider them trite and niave, but, it's one liners that that make sense "A penny saved is a penny earned," or a battlecry, like "Freedom," NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION," "Vote the bat-rastards out," "Deeds not words," while you get the point.  As long as I am on the point, here are a couple more one-liners that I know you're not going to like: "Liberalism is a dangerous mental disorder."  "VOTE THE BAT-RASTARDS OUT."   Indeed words are a two-edged sword, you can sway people one way or another, but, in the end what really matters are the Deeds done, not the Words spoken, hence, DEEDS NOT WORDS.  You can call it ridiculous, but there are a lot of people who live by that creed, are you calling them ridiculous too?

So again I extend the offer to take you up on your challenge to me Page, give me the spreadsheet with the budget and I'll make the cuts.

DK

This state goverment is the only state government that I've ever seen that tells you to get out and votes, then disregards what the voters say.

The voters of this state have asked you to do something about government spending, and you have.  You've increased it.

The voters of this state have asked you to do something about taxes, and you have.  You've increased them

The voters of this state have asked you to do something about illegal aliens, and you have.  You've made this state an even more benificial place for them to illegially immigrate to.  You can't go into JCPenny's unless you speak something other than English.

If you worked for any other agency than the state government you would have been handed your pink slip ages ago.  But, then all you'd have to do is go down to the welfare and unemployment office and make out like a bandit.

And now you've waited to slip the latest smoke and mirror proposal to increase taxes in on us after normal work hours, you waited until the wee hours of the night to pass your bills.  You behave like crimminals, stealing hard earned money from taxpayers in the dark.  You are the ultimate gang in the state of Washington.  You are the ones that we need to fear.  You smile at us and steal from us while you shake our hands and ask for our votes.  You control law enforcement, you control the national guard, you control almost every thing in our day to day lives.  Now you steal from us behind locked doors, in the dark.  Led by a Govenor that does not abide by what the voters mandate and by Senators that are more concerned with keeping illegals happy than the hard working, law-abiding citizens they swore to represent.  Have you no shame?

Your employers, those you swore to REPRESENT, are telling you to stop the madness.  What part of that do you not understand?  Would you like for someone to explain the big words to you?

Listen up politicians...your employers are telling you NO NEW TAXES.  PERIOD.

Remember, we are your employers and you will lose your jobs if you do not do as we tell you to.  You might not lose them today, but remember, sooner or later you will seek re-election.  That is when you will be handed your pink-slip. 

Hey Washington State Government,

Here's a simple idea on how to help reduce the deficit...  Consider this...

Illegal immigrant:

                Somebody who has entered a country illegally

Illegally:

                See illegal

Illegal:

                1.  against law:

                                Contravening a specific law, especially a criminal law

                                Criminal:

                                                Someone who has committed a crime, so...

Illegal immigrants are people that have broken the law and therefore are crimminals, not someone to feel sorry for or a group of people that we should be pouring more money into that water runs into drains on a rainy Washington day.

Maybe, just maybe, if we stop funding the lively hood of illegal immigrants (they have commited a crime by entering the country illegally, therefore, they are crimminals) and their parasitic offspring (oh, but according to Gregoire, Clinton, and Pelosi we're doing it all "For the Children"), then that might help with the budget and taxes.  Yes, I know, our country was founded on immigration.  LEGAL IMMIGRATION, people, LEGAL IMMIGRATION.  Yes, they have the same rights guaranteed, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  No, I'm not saying STAY OUT.  Come one and come all...legally.  And why will someone immediately scream I'm violating their rights or discrimminating against them?  Why do these same people rail against gun ownership?  Doesn't the same document that guarantees life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness also guarantee our rights to bear arms?  So what, I'm discrimminating against crimminals.  Why shouldn't we?  They are crimminals, leeches sucking the life's blood out of our society.

Maybe we should start there.  Do something serious about illegal immigration, like QUITE GIVING THEM EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN.  Everything being paid for by our tax dollars.  Funnel that money into social services, law enforcement...wow, law enforcement.  Isn't that an oxymoron?  Let's enforce the laws, but let's tolerate and finance illegal immigrants.  Crimminals, they break the laws.  Robbing, murdering, raping, entering the country illegally (what is the percentage of illegal aliens residing in our prisons? 30%?  See a link somewhere in there?).  But, let's tax law-abiding citizens to death, so we can pay for better treatment for these crimminals, better education for these crimminals, government health care for these crimminals? 

 M DragonKnight:

Washington Policy Center has implemented a website -  Fiscal.wa.gov - which is a website that puts all state spending online in a searchable, easy-to-use format. But it includes much more than just state spending. It is an eye-opener. Every child in this state should be required to access it and have a legislator, or the governor, come into the classroom and explain it.

 Did anyone else hear Dori Monson's interview with rosa?

http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=577&a=15429

Scary stuff in the way a liberal mind works.

 Why implement a state income tax?

Not to have financial justice.

Unless the tax is based on Gross income and not adjusted income like the federal taxes are, I see little or no financial justice here.  The state income tax like the federal income tax will have all kinds of "exceptions" better known as deductions.  Who will the deductions favor?  First, it will be the party that rights the bill ("We have to have a mileage deduction because I drive 15 miles to be here in Olympia so I can write this bill") to ("my property tax is too high, let's write a deduction for property taxes") to, ("I earned money out of the state, so I don't need to pay taxes on this amount"). 

To have true financial justice, one should pay taxes on the money one spends.  The more toys that one has, the more taxes one pays (wait; that sounds like a sales tax to me).  Which plan sounds like true financial justice, the one that pays taxes on their toys or the one that by the time all deduction are said and done, the rich person is making less than those on minimum wage?

Not to lower sale taxes.

There is no proof that this will indeed lower state sale taxes.  The only assurance we as voters have is the word of the politician who has proposed the state income tax.  And we all know that the assurance of a politician is like sand through a sieve.  In fact, with the example set under financial justice, how likely is it that the lawmakers will not only raise the state income tax ("because it is bringing in less than what we thought") to also raising the state sales tax ("because we need more money to offset the discrepancy between the proposed income of the income tax and the real income of the income tax")

Can't anyone else see this?

Not to ease the deficit.

If the legislature really wanted to lower the deficit, it would cut spending, however, the state legislature and our Queen have already proven that they haven't met money they don't like to spend.  This income tax will just enable the law-makers to keep spending like a new lottery winner, which indeed they will be if the bill passes.  The more money the state brings in the more money the legislature will spend.  The real question is how much more will the state spend than it brings in.

So Why implement a state income tax?

To bloat an already bloated government.  Who do you think will be in charge of collecting the taxes?  Who will be in charge to print the forms?  Who wants to be in your pocket?

Finally the queen will have what she wants, a loyal secret police, the local tax authority similar to the IRS.  Remember, that the law didn't take down Al Capone, the IRS did, thus began the fear the American people have of the power of the IRS. I think the question should be, who does our Queen want to take down?  Does this sound paranoid?

Perhaps, but here is an example of what the IRS and the tax police will be capable of:   

IRS visits Sacramento carwash in pursuit of 4 cents  http://www.sacbee.com/2010/03/13/2604016/irs-suits-pay-visit-to-car-wash.html

Does this sound like a wise investment on your tax dollar?  Do you want the local IRS suits to be doing the same? 

Consider this:  How many attorney commercials do you see that propose themselves an expert in tax law?  How many CPAs promise to do your taxes right so you do not get a letter from the IRS?  How many times have you heard of the IRS attaching bank accounts leaving the owner of such accounts essentially penny less?  And the list could go on.

Again, I question, can't anyone else see this?  And now I ask, does anyone else want the Queen to have her own personal state-sponsored terrorist organization called the WA STATE IRS? 

Remember, just because you sound paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

DK