This PowerPoint Says Eyman's Latest Time Bomb Makes MacGyvers of Us All
"Given our experience in Colorado, passing [I-1033] in a recession would be a disaster." So says Carol Hedges of the Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute, in a conference call held by her org's counterpart, the Washington State Budget & Policy Center this afternoon. (Think tanks, unite!)
If you're not familiar, I-1033 (aka the "Washington Lower Property Taxes Initiative") is Tim Eyman's latest time bomb--which makes the voters MacGyvers, if the measure makes the ballot. (It'll be close.) For a good explanation of the measure, check out the lucid PowerPoint that the WSBPC released today. Basically, what I-1033 is doing is peeing in the punch bowl, or what preachers like to call "smiting."
It would cap local and state government budgets at their current, super-low, recession levels, and allow them to grow only with inflation and population increases. (Any money collected above that amount would go to property owners.) Needless to say, this would keep the budget below what's necessary to maintain current services and meet the needs of an aging population. Even worse, if there's another recession, the measure would lower the cap again. It's the worst of both worlds, or something like that. Colorado tried it with its "Taxpayer Bill of Rights," then backtracked when it saw what a mess the measure created.
According to the WSBPC's analysis, had I-1033 been put in place in 1995, our budget this year would be $6 billion lower than it is. ($6 billion, the PowerPoint notes, equals "the entire combined budget for higher education, natural resources, public health, early learning, corrections, and the Basic Health Plan.") For just a taste of what it might bring, note that--thanks to this year's budget cuts--today's the first day without coverage for 1,000 sick, elderly adults who get services like dialysis and physical therapy through the adult day health services program. Though maybe if we see an uptick next year, we'll have enough money to buy them cake.
5 comment(s)
Tim Eyman, I-1033 co-sponsor says:
From: Tim Eyman, I-1033
So many inaccuracies, so little time. Best to direct people to our main website which explains what I-1033 does and doesn't do:
http://www.VotersWantMoreChoices.com
P.S. It's important to note that this exact same 'think tank' said that our initiative in 2007 I-960 was just like Colorado's TABOR and would cause all sorts of death and destruction. What impact did it have? Very little, according to Gregoire and budget leaders.
HEADLINE: Lawmakers say Eyman's I-960 had little effect on actions
http://www.theolympian.com/politicsblog/story/856882.html
Posted On: Wednesday, Jul. 1 2009 @ 4:58PM
Steve Zemke says:
Who's inclined to believe Eyman? I-960 did have an effect on Legislators because it required a 2/3 vote to raise taxes or revenue of any kind. The result was Washington State cut services to elderly and children and education and much more.
Eyman's measure doesn't provide real property tax relief, like a Homestaed Exemption or circuit breaker legislation would do for middle and low priced homes.
It's just another "I hate Government" measure by Eyman. The measure would benefit more wealthy proerty tax payers because any return is proportional to the amount of proerty you own. So shopping malls and businesses would get the majority of the return and funding for education which the state property tax pays for, would decrease even more.
How is cutting money for education going to help anyone? Even businesses lose because they wind up having poorly educated employees.
Posted On: Thursday, Jul. 2 2009 @ 12:15PM
geo logic says:
Tim, will you please, for the love of God, go away?
Posted On: Thursday, Jul. 2 2009 @ 1:24PM
Steve Zemke says:
To see the problem that I-1033 will cause this state, watch this YouTube video on Colorado's experience. They tried an identical approach to I-1033 and recently suspended it because public services declined significantly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbF3_CiOtoM
We don't need to repeat Colorado's disastrous experiment here in Washington State. Things are already bad enough with the national recession. We don't need to make them worse.
Posted On: Monday, Aug. 31 2009 @ 10:24PM
Paula Schwartz says:
Please contact city managers or mayors of small towns and cities (such as Shoreline, Kenmore, Edmonds, Mountlake Terrace, etc.) as to how the trickle-down effect of Eyman’s new initiatve—I-1033—would negatively impact not only these small jurisdictions around the state, but state businesses, retail and real estate markets, as well. I-1033 limits growth rates of state, county, city and town general fund revenues to not exceed inflation (which is currently zero) and population growth. For example: • 2009 revenue shall be the base revenue upon which future revenue is calculated • 2010 revenue received in excess of 2009 revenue must be placed in a fund to be refunded to property owners • 2011 revenue received in excess of 2010 revenue (including the amount of deposits made in the prior year (2010)), must be placed in a fund to be refunded to property owners. In other words, our communities will always be working off 2009 revenue + inflation and population growth • 2012 and beyond, the same—2009 revenue (unless revenue in a subsequent year is less than 2009 revenue, then that year’s revenue amount becomes the new base) I am a former business owner. No business would agree to operate on nearly the same funds year after year. Many government agencies have already laid off a substantial number of employees and are operating on lean staffing numbers. They are spending down “rainy day” funds to provide the services the public needs and wants (maintained roadways, public safety, education, recreation facilities, etc.), and if these agencies are not already in the accounting “red” zone, they will be in the foreseeable future. Additional employees, hundreds and perhaps thousands of agency employees around the State, will be laid off. Those people will not be spending money at their local businesses. The negative trickle-down effect will place more pressure on existing businesses, causing them to lay off employees and possibly close their doors. We don’t need this initiative at this time. The State of Colorado passed such an initiative (the Tabor initiative), and businesses were so hurt that after a few years of negative impacts, the business associations requested the law be overturned. Let’s not repeat Colorado’s mistake. Vote "NO" on I-1033
Posted On: Tuesday, Oct. 13 2009 @ 7:17PM