New Political Committee Set Up to Push Eyman Initiative

Philosophy of the blogosphere: “Never let lack of facts stop you from expressing an opinion”.

We're thrilled to receive help from the business community getting I-1053 before the voters this November and passed this November. Some business leaders are giving directly to our PAC “Save The 2/3's Vote For Tax Increases Initiative” and some are donating to the Assoc of WA Business' PAC but we're all trying to achieve the same goal: letting the voters vote on I-1053. Voters have 3 times approved the 2/3's vote requirement for the Legislature to raise taxes and this will be the 4th time. Based on Elway's latest poll showing us leading 65% to 25%, it's clear the voters are on our side. When even the liberal editorial board at the Seattle Times is in favor of the 2/3's requirement, it's clear that I-1053 is as mainstream a policy as one could imagine.

Again, we're thrilled that business leaders are helping voters have a chance to vote on I-1053.

This “news” story is littered with inaccuracies but hey, we're accustomed to that on blogs like this one.

As for our signature drive for I-1053, we're making good progress, we're not there yet, we're just going to keep our heads down and keep working hard all the way until the end. We're very hopeful that, working together, we can give voters the chance to vote on it this November.

The fact that this system can be milked for-profit is appalling. If I had $500,000 to spend I'd file an initiative to make for-profit signature gathering illegal.

Yet you fail to cite which facts are inaccurate.

Tim Eyman is for minority rule, changing a democracy into a tyranny where a smaller group gets to impose its will on the majority. this change is unconstitutional and unpatriotic, as our Founders gave the government the right to have taxation with representation and did not require 2/3 ! The founders of our State copied this form of government when they created the State of Washington, too.

the measure is profoundly undemocratic. It also means your vote is not equal to others' votes. Suddenly, with this change, those who want to block a majority have the power to do so even if they can't muster a majority of the votes! So, their votes count more and ours count less.

this radical move to put into power a minorty has no place in our system. Tim, the Dounding Fathers knew what they were doing. They were for America governing itself through representative democracy based on majority rule. That's right, the majority gets to RULE. When you take that away you have minority rule, another form of the tyranny we were fighting back in 1776 — being ruled by someone else, not having majority rule. When our Founders put together our constitution they considered the 2/3 vote rule and limited it to certain things. They had an even higher requirement for creating the USA, they had 2/3 for senate confirmations and treaties and they said normal legislation and budgets pass by a majority. The State is set up largely the same way.

Tim and his ilk, the major corporate interests, naturally want minority rule. They can't get a majority on things they want! They want to block majority rule by we, the people. They're trying to empower a minority to block majority rule — to block government by of and for the people.

Instead, they want government by, of and for the minority of the people who side with special interests and who are against what the majority want.

Sure Tim. Whatever you say.

A majority of voters have approved this policy 3 times. That is majority rule.

I-1053 requires a 2/3's vote for the Legislature to raise taxes. If they can't get 2/3's, then with a simple majority in the house and senate, they can refer the tax increase to a public vote where a simple majority of voters is all that's needed for it to pass.

this has been the policy in WA state since 1993 and it's been effective at making tax increases a last resort. All I-1053 does is reinstates the policy before the next legislative session, rather than after it.

To learn more about it, go to: http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com

“it's clear that I-1053 is as mainstream a policy as one could imagine.”

I'm not sure what No Minority Rule is talking about. Under this proposal it would take a bigger block to approve tax increases, so tougher and would take a LARGER chunk to approve it. Not less. It's not the minority that's the problem, but the majority.

But this very thing is why California is in such trouble right now. They need to get things done, and they can't because 2/3 of the state needs to approve; and in no way can they ever get 2/3 of the people of California to act in the state's best interest.

We don't want to go there.

Seattle Times, liberal editorial board? WTF?

post above wrote: 2/3 of the people of California to act

response: once again, it's not 2/3's of voters to raise taxes, it's 2/3's of politicians. if they can't get 2/3's of the Legislature to jack up taxes, a simple majority in the house and senate can put it on the ballot and a simple majority of voters to pass it.

2/3's of politicians or majority of voters. that's been the policy since 1993, except those years when politicians suspend it like they did with I-960.

in 2008 and 2009, I-960's 2/3's was in effect and it worked exactly as voters intended. all that I-1053 does is reinstates the 2/3's before the session rather than after the next session.

we're working hard to give voters their 4th opportunity to vote on it.

“response: once again, it's not 2/3's of voters to raise taxes, it's 2/3's of politicians.”

I'd rather go for 2/3 of voters.
2/3 of politicians means not a damn thing can or will be done until crisis, and maybe not even then.

Your populist schtick wore off years ago, after the cheap car tabs.

I like my cheap car tabs; and I like that the legislature would have to agree by 2/3 or send a tax increase to the voters.

While my bank says my property value (fair market) has goen down, my county says it has gone up — and my taxes have gone way up.

I signed 1053, and all the others before it.

The thing that gripes me about the politicians is that they are the only ones (in the legislature) who can put these taxpayer protections in the state constitution and they haven't done it.

I'm tired of having to pass this over and over and over by initiative.

Our Iniatiative process has been a good process over the years. It has
let citizens in our state put issues before the voters. It has let them get
educated on issues that are legislature cant deal with (and they should)
I would not put Costco in bed with Tim Eyman.. Costco has a good point
if the state is in business to sell liquor they arnt making as much money
as they could…. I dont always agree with Tim Eyman but he is at least
putting his own money where his mouth is and letting the people decide.
Because our Legislature cant.

We called you and sent you an email for this story Tim. Please call back and tell me what facts are wrong.

Eyeman's just a bottom feeder – a leech on productive people. Worse than a politician.

But he appeals to stupid people, and he's a useful tool for the rich and powerful.

Poor pathetic slob……

“the voters” don't know what they want. Rather, they want no taxes and all services. They have the attention span and emotional maturity of a seventh grader and the collective intellect of a third grader. That's why we're in the mess we're in, and parasites like Eyeman just feed into the collective ignorance an immaturity by abusing the initiative process.

Bunch of cheapskates.

So what services are YOU willing to give up or see reduced, that you use today?

I don't share the contempt for voters/citizens that many of you do. If they're so stupid and ignorant as you say, then why should they be allowed to elect and vote for candidates for office?

Have you ever met state senators and state representatives? many aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer — and even if they're as brilliant and wise as many of you seem to believe, look at what they're doing: they're introducing and discussing 3000 bills per legislative session, voting on thousands of motions and amendments, and about 500 bills become law each session. All in the span of 3-4 months. How can we expect them to get it right every single time? Isn't it reasonable that the people be given a few chances to direct the ship of state via initiative which is guaranteed by our state Constitution?

At least with initiatives, there's only a couple that make it on the ballot and we all have 4-5 months to discuss and debate them. Of the initiatives voters have voted on, they've accepted half, rejected half — sounds to me that voters are discerning which they support and which they oppose.

If bills in Olympia went through the same gauntlet of examination and critique that initiatives do, 90% of the crap they pass in the Legislature would never survive.

None. I'd like to see a state income tax on everyone, along with a stable sales tax, a hefty inheritance tax, and increased services. Other states do it, why do we have to be so childish?

They're ignorant because they just listen to the crap they hear on talk radio and the nightly non-news, plus the never-ending TV and radio ads by whoever has the most money.

And yeah – you get outside of the Seattle area, and you have a lot of morons. Cross over Lake Washington, and you have a lot of greedy bastards who know full well that this stuff is bad for society, but don't care.

Washington State Constitution Article II, Section 22: “SECTION 22 PASSAGE OF BILLS. No bill shall become a law unless on its final passage the vote be taken by yeas and nays, the names of the members voting for and against the same be entered on the journal of each house, and a majority of the members elected to each house be recorded thereon as voting in its favor.”

2/3 majority for tax bills to pass is clearly unconstitutional.

Tim, using the reply button makes it a lot easier to read your comments.

I bet you that the county assessment is still below your bank's assessment. The best way to find market value for your tax assessment is to ask yourself, would you sell your house for the amount of the county assessment?

Funny, I agree with both of you on this one. WE ARE ALL MORONS!

So it looks like we have a strong case to make the names and votes of those that vote on initiatives public.

Why is the AG allowing this to be pending as an initiative then?