.
Feedback

Response to Toft’s “Bipartisanship and Washington's Budget”

Imposing a Supermajority requirement to create tax revenue in our State’s Constitution is not bipartisan approach to solving our State’s budget problems.

 

BRAD TOFT, the Republican candidate for the State’s Fifth Legislative District Senate seat, wrote a recent Patch blog post concerning Washington residents’ desire for a bipartisan approach to budgetary tax reform.  The “bipartisan” approach Mr. Toft proposes, however, is to vest our State’s ability to generate tax revenue in a minority of state representatives.  Mr. Toft’s approach is not “bipartisan.” 

More specifically, in his blog post, Mr. Toft argues that Tim Eyman’s Initiative 1053 – which mandates that any new tax revenue must be approved by 2/3 of the State Legislature – should be memorialized by a State Constitutional Amendment.  Mr. Toft’s position is likely in reaction to King County Superior Court Judge Bruce Heller’s May 30, 2012 ruling that Eyman’s two-thirds vote requirement under I-1053 was unconstitutional.

Mr. Toft incorrectly contends that requiring a Supermajority to legislatively generate income makes for sound fiscal policy and is bipartisan. Without offering any factual support, Mr. Toft argues that the Supermajority promotes healthy long-term financial planning. 

I disagree that granting a few legislators control of our tax policy is anything but obstructionist and emphatically disagree that it begets lasting economic stability.  Our state Legislature needs to be enabled – not disempowered – to make fiscal decisions, including making decision to generate tax revenue for things like education.  Allowing a simple majority (51%) of our Legislature to make tax decisions is the bipartisan approach we need and is also the available option best suited to create fair and democratic representation in Washington.

But on this tax issue, Mr. Toft urges an undemocratic Supermajority requirement – which largely benefits the Republican Party – that handcuffs our Legislature to the whims of a small few.  In that regard, whether the Democrats have maintained a majority in Olympia is entirely irrelevant when it comes to tax reform because tax decisions have been in the hands of Olympia’s minority, i.e., the Republicans. 

For that reason, Mr. Toft is equally wrong when he says that our fiscal problems are not caused by gridlock.  To the contrary: it is the Republican Party’s abject refusal to compromise on tax issues that stops the forward progress our State needs in its tracks. 

It is an unpleasent truth for many of us, myself included, but it is real nonetheless: our State needs to generate tax revenue.  And “In this world,” where according to Mr. Franklin, “nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes,” Mr. Toft appears unwilling to adopt a responsible, nuanced approach to tax reform, and instead seems happy to Stand on Principle and thus doom our State’s budget to its death.

_______________________________________________________

Trent Latta is an attorney and Patch Local Voices contributor who may be contacted at TrentLatta@gmail.com

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Sammamish-Issaquah Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Sorting through clothing at the warehouse
Jeanne Gustafson (Editor) May 17, 2013 at 01:54 pm
Thank you so much for sharing this great event on Patch! What a cool thing to do--as an IssaquahRead More resident, I really appreciate your involvement with EBC.
Photo by Jean Johnson
Susan Gerend May 18, 2013 at 07:58 am
We too, love having our Farmers' Market return! Opening day was a bit weather-challenged. ThankRead More you merchants for enduring the wet and cold for our new extended hours! What a wonderful sight will return to the plaza when the sunshine calls back all the families with happy, giggling children. Market day is a date of dinner out (side) & shopping (vegetables, fruits and now HedgeHog Toffee) with my husband. Doesn't get much better than that! SEE YOUR THERE! Susan Gerend
Margaret Santjer (Editor) May 16, 2013 at 12:17 pm
Thanks for posting that, Jean! I love this time of year when the markets open. Were there a lot ofRead More people for the opening day?
David V May 15, 2013 at 02:49 pm
Thx Kendall, bear news just isn't what it used to be. thinking it has something to do with the komoRead More anchor moving out of our trossachs neighborhood:)
Kendall Watson (Editor) May 15, 2013 at 01:19 pm
Hey, thanks for the bear photos on Friday! Sorry about the slight delay in posting!
Ben H April 14, 2013 at 03:42 am
Agreed Mark, Much as this solution seems crazy, some things are worth paying for (law and order, aRead More decent safety net, good schools and yes roads). I do blame the tax hawks though. Washington already has a relatively regressive tax structure. The "choke the government" solution seems carried way too far.
Question Mark April 12, 2013 at 02:13 pm
I thank the author for his well thought out arguments regarding these important transportationRead More issues in Washington state. While I believe some of the ideas presented are debatable, for example I believe that a vital and well used transit system ought to be part of our congestion relief plan in metropolitan areas, the lack of realistic funding options for this system cannot be ignored. However, our legislature (both parties included) seems to place a higher priority on "no new taxes" than creating a sustainable future for the state in many areas, including the transportation system. More than that, though, we live in a state whose citizens have varied interests and priorities. Most of all, we need our government to set priorities so that citizen interests and needs can be reasonably served. It seems we are pretending that we can base tax policies and tax rates exclusively on individual self-interest, as is often the consequence "no new taxes" scheme (e.g. if I don't get a direct benefit for myself, I won't support paying for it). This seems to me to be as much a part of this problem as current transportation system priorities.
Richard Bray April 9, 2013 at 07:26 pm
It gets worse folks. I was part of a selected focus group a few weeks ago of people who live alongRead More I-405 conducted by a well-known marketing research firm and paid for by WSDOT. They are considering options that would charge commuters to use a new lane on I-405 & charge for the existing carpool lane too (even if you have two people in the car!)