The Washington State Supreme Court has once again thumbed its collective nose at the voters of our state. This time, the “Liberal 7” unanimously ruled that Initiative 1366 is unconstitutional – and considering the lock-step political viewpoint of all seven justices who preside on the court, the ruling is not surprising.
It was just too much for the lefties who occupy the court to allow the people to try and make it harder for legislators to raise taxes. Recall that the voter-approved I-1366 proposed a one percent cut in the sales tax unless the state Legislature allowed a public vote on an amendment that would require a two-thirds supermajority for future tax increases.
The ruling stated (via the Washington Policy Center):
“We affirm the trial court and hold that I -1366 violates the single-subject rule of article II, section 19, and that it is void in its entirety . . . We also hold that 1-1366 contains two operative, unrelated provisions and does not constitute valid contingent legislation. Thus, we hold that 1-1366 violates the single-subject rule and that it is void in its entirety.”
It should be noted that a survey conducted in December found an overwhelming 65% of respondents believe legislators should give voters a chance to weigh in and vote on a constitutional amendment.
The passage of I-1366 is by no means the first time voters have approved requiring a 2/3 legislative vote to raise taxes. The public has had their say a whopping six times on the subject, and here’s the record:
- 1993: Initiative 601 – passed with 51% yes vote, to require a 2/3rds vote in the legislature to raise taxes;
- 1998: Referendum 49 – passed with 57% yes vote (affirmed 2/3rd requirement);
- 2007: Initiative 960 – passed with 51% yes vote (re-enacted 2/3rd requirement);
- 2010: Initiative 1053 – passed with 64% yes vote (re-enacted 2/3rd requirement);
- 2012: Initiative 1185 – passed statewide with 64% yes vote, approved in 44 of the state’s 49 legislative districts, to re-enact the 2/3 requirement.
Notably, 17 other states provide taxpayers supermajority protection against tax increases. These states include Oregon (3/5), California (2/3), and Colorado (voter approval for all taxes). Perhaps the most hypocritical aspect of the Left’s opposition is the fact that several of the loudest voices against the initiative – such as the bosses of Washington’s public employee unions – also protect their members from bad policies with supermajority restrictions in their own constitutions.
Additionally, as the Washington Policy Center’s Jason Mercier points out, Washington’s constitution contains nearly two-dozen supermajority requirements. The Washington Policy Center:
“Among the 20 plus supermajority requirements are a 3/5 vote for spending money from the Budget Stabilization Account and 3/5 vote for issuing bonds. The one component currently missing from the state constitution’s fiscal supermajority requirements is additional protection for state taxpayers on tax increases. Ultimately, the legislature should allow the voters to harmonize the existing budget supermajority vote requirements with a tax restriction to complement the current higher threshold required for local tax-levy increases, incurring debt and spending one-time savings.”
The only way the will of the voters will be respected is if the state Legislature passes a constitutional amendment creating a supermajority requirement or voter approval for tax increases. Unfortunately, if Democrats continue to control either House of the legislature, or governor’s office, that won’t happen.
At every opportunity, House Democrats blocked the possibility of bringing a bill that would establish a voter-approved supermajority vote to raise taxes. But, if the 2016 elections have anything to do with it, the obstacle Democrats represent in the House could be removed.
Interestingly enough, there are 20 Democrat House members who represent districts that supported I-1366 in 2015. Four of those districts have split representation in the House, one Republican and one Democrat, making those Democrats extra-tempting campaign targets for the GOP.
Democrat incumbents running for re-election in these districts include first-termer Christine Kilduff (28th District, in Pierce County) and Democrat House Majority Leader Pat Sullivan (47th District, King County). The other two target districts – the 31st, straddling King and Pierce County and the 44th in Snohomish County, will feature open-seat contests since the incumbent Democrats likely read the writing on the wall, and have moved on.
There is no doubt that if Democrats maintain their hold on the state House that they will continue to do everything in their power to prevent the voters’ will on a supermajority requirement from ever coming to fruition. After all, as their party’s “guiding principle,” Democrats won’t ever allow anything to stand between them and raising your taxes… or imposing a future state income tax.
No one liberal will comment here. They don’t want to go against their shepherds overulling their votes decision. The sheep knows better not to bite the hand that feeds them.
Washington state’s Constitution says a bill to raise taxes may pass by a simple majority in either House of our state’s legislature. Washington state’s Constitution may not be amended by Initiative. Therefore, any Initiative which would require a two-thirds vote in either House to raise taxes is blatantly unconstitutional. Our courts have told us this, many times. When are we going to listen?
I see you voiced out against the shepherd. You just exposed yourself to slaughter , just like I do. It’s okay, but at least you see something is wrong. Isn’t time to tell your friends to vote out all the Corruption out and instill non political parties in our government ?
You are not as brainwashed as I tough. Now that you see the government is steamrolling rolling their constituents , it is time we steamrolling them out of office. In order to do that is to disconnect from the left and right wing ideology and connect with people that will abide by the laws of the State and Land.
It is time to educate others to expose both political party is not for r the people but for their own interests .
Obviously, you are not for liberty and freedom as described in the US Constitution.
That’s rich, seeing as how I’m the only one here demanding we respect our state’s Constitution.
As for the rest of your witless diatribe, boo hoo hoo. If you can’t disagree without becoming that disagreeable, good luck in convincing your fellow citizens that your ideas are good enough to warrant amending our Constitution.
Simple majority is 3 to 5 Counties out of 39.. that is not 2/3 representation.
You are just bowing down to a bad law that serve 3 counties interest and force the 36 to follow suit. How about that for liberty
All the power of government is centralized in 3 counties. Now do you call that liberty? Obviously, you don’t understand liberty.
I wasn’t aware that “counties” mattered in our Constitution’s amendment process. It refers only to legislators and voters.
On your whining about how the number of voters shouldn’t matter about taxes (!), just the number of counties, do you really believe the 36 counties whose citizens pay less than 40% of our state’s taxes should dictate to the three counties whose citizens pay over 60%? That sure sounds like the minority having totalitarian power over the majority.
Again 51% approved the initiative. Isn’t that a majority? Again, iI understand that initiative can’t change the Constitution, however wouldn’t that be a cry of the majority? 51% represented by 36 counties wanted the change; 49% represented by 3 counties did not want it. The will of the 51% should be respected and change the laws.
Why is 51% enough to change the laws, but should not enough to raise taxes? Isn’t 51% a majority in both cases?
Yes, but we are not talking about raising taxes. The initiative was a cry that a bad law in the Constitution be changed. Now lawmakers should work for the people. Seems like this is not the first time that the majority are voicing out with the same issue. It’s time for lawmakers get to work and fix the bad law to align with the majority.
Yes, but we are not talking about raising taxes.
Um, that’s the entire topic of this post and thread. You were talking quite a bit about raising taxes until I pointed out who actually pays the taxes in our state, at which point you seem to have completely lost interest in the topic.
Again, why is a 51% majority sufficient to require the legislature to pass a Constitutional amendment, but should not be adequate to raise one tax by one fraction of a penny?
I thought by saying yes I agree that if the 51% is enough to raise taxes as well. Come on, we have been talking for about 2 years, i am a reasonable man, sure I disagree with some of your thoughts and I agree with some as well.
I enjoy talking to you, honest. I wish we could really meet and have coffee together, but you are reluctant. Trust me, i am not a bad person. Although, i am from NJ, but love WA. I am planning to move there and would like to be friends with you. I am planning to live in Lacey’s area. I am assuming you live in Seattle. Anyway, my real name is Joseph, if you were wondering.
So what happened? Did i freak you out? Think about it. Here is my email [email protected]. once you email me I will give you my normal email that I use.
Stop being bashful we can still be friends even we disagree with politics.
As long as Democrats control this state, we will continue on our path of totalitarianism.
Gee, and we all wonder why it is NOT good to have a liberal in the White House to appoint a liberal judge to the Supreme Court. Just look what has happened here in our state, they do what they want in spite of a majority vote by the people to the contrary. I suggest we all get together and show them just what the power of the people can do, vote the liberals out of office and change the court system in the process.
People like us need to stand up and educate the sheep. We need to get louder