A LOOK AT RECENT RIGHT WING INITIATIVES ON THE BALLOT
Initiative 695
1999
1999Transportation Funding Slammed: $1.7 billion projected loss for 2001-2003 biennium
(DOR estimate, statewide, counting all losses, including funds counties & cities were to recieve)
Ballot Summary: Shall voter approval be required for any tax increase, license tab fees be $30 per year for motor vehicles, and existing vehicle taxes be repealed?
Perspective: Motor vehicle excise taxes (MVET) were used for funding many DOT transportation programs before this initiative was approved. Thanks to the thoughtless actions of then-Governor Locke and the Legislature, the effects of I-695 are still being felt.
At the Ballot Box: Succeeded
YES: 992,715 56.16%
NO:775,054 43.84%
775,054 43.84%Court & Legislative Action: Numerous cities, counties, and other organizations sued the state on the grounds that the initiative was unconstitutional - it had more than one subject in the ballot title (see above).
The initiative was found unconstitutional by King County Superior Court for violating a law that states only one subject can be the focus of an initiative. Tim Eyman tore up one of his Yes on I-695 campaign signs when the ruling was announced.
Afterwards, the Legislature eliminated the motor vehicle excise tax anyway, but it did not pass the provision of I-695 calling for voter approval of tax increases.
Effects of I-695
Because Initiative 695 was declared unconstitutional, it did not actually void any tax. However, the Legislature did. The state motor vehicle excise tax (MVET), while it existed, funded several different public services. However, most of the tax went to fund transportation. During the 1999-2001 biennium, the MVET was supposed to generate $1.5 billion in revenues. Because of the Legislature's action following the I-695 court decision, this funding was cut short. The state motor vehicle excise tax, before it was repealed, helped to fund much of the following:
- Local transit districts.
- County public health account.
- Distressed county assistance account.
- Ferry capital construction account.
- Ferry operations account.
- Motor vehicle fund.
- Transportation fund.
- City & county sales tax equalization
- Municipal & county criminal justice
The Graph: In 1999-2001 biennium, the MVET was to be distributed in three main ways: 47% to state transportation, 29% to local transits, and 24% to local governments. This funding was lost after the enactment of $33 car tabs. The money you saved came at the expense of public services.
In terms of local distribution for counties and cities across the state, about $496,904,767 (in 2004) was projected to be lost because of Initiative 695 by the state Department of Revenue. The state Department of Revenue predicted that overall, counting both transportation and local distribution, up to $1,700,000,000 in funding for public services and transportation was lost for the 2001-2003 biennium, statewide. Clearly, Initiative 695 was an extremely radical, dangerous measure.
In King County and the cities within King County, the measure eradicated a whopping $186,042,885, (for 2003-2004) according to Department of Revenue estimates. Metro Transit was the biggest loser, with $124,015,975 lost (2003-04).
In Spokane County and the cities within Spokane County, I-695 blasted away a devastating $29,731,406 (for 2003-2004), according to DOR estimates. Again, transit was the biggest loser. Spokane Transit lost $18,663,288 in potential funds for 2003-2004, money that was sorely needed. Spokane voters apparently didn't mind cutbacks in their bus service- they approved the initiative, 59% (yes) to 41% (no).
Links: These are just a few statistics from the millions of dollars lost to I-695. Want to look up your local jurisdiction, or learn more about I-695 and I-776? Visit the following links:
Initiative 7222000
2000Ballot Summary: Shall certain 1999 tax and fee increases be nullified, vehicles exempted from property taxes, and property tax increases (except new construction) limited to 2% annually?
Perspective: This initiative unsucessfully attempted to cut down on property taxes. No portion of it was ever enacted by the state, and as a result, Tim Eyman had no successful ballot measures in 2000 - thanks to both voters (on 745) and the courts (722).
At the Ballot Box: Succeeded
YES:1,295,391 55.89%
1,295,391 55.89%NO: 1,022,349 41.11%
1,022,349 41.11%Court & Legislative Action: Cities and counties, represented by Tom Ahearne, and a group named Permanently Offended, led by attorney Knoll Lowney, sued Tim Eyman and his PAC, Permanent Offense, on the grounds that the initiative was unconstitutional under the same premises as I-695: it had more than one subject in the ballot title (see above).
The initiative was found unconstitutional by Thurston County Superior Court for violating the above mentioned law that states only one subject can be the focus of an initiative. This ruling was upheld by the State Supreme Court. The Legislature took no action.
Effects: There were no effects because the initiative was found unconstitutional.
Initiative 7452000
2000Ballot Summary: Shall 90% of transportation funds, including transit taxes, be spent for roads; transportation agency performance audits required; and road construction and maintenance be sales tax-exempt?
Perspective: This was an extremely flawed measure that could have devastated transportation choices and hurt mass transit if it hadn't failed on the ballot..
At the Ballot Box: Failed
YES:955,329 40.65%
955,329 40.65%NO: 1,394,387 59.34%
1,394,387 59.34%Court & Legislative Action: No court action was required because the initiative failed.
Effects: There were no effects because the initiative didn't pass.
© 2007 Permanent Defense
Paid for by Permanent Defense PAC
A Northwest Progressive Institute organization
Post Office Box 264, Redmond, WA 98073-0264
A HISTORY OF DECEPTION AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
Years ago, Tim Eyman seized on a feeling of apathy towards taxation in the state and convinced a majority of Washingtonians to vote for I-695. Tim turned his success into a highly profitable business and has continued to file initiatives every year. This section illustrates how the results of right-wing tax cutting initiatives deeply affect every level of government and harm communities across Washington State.
