EFF's Election Report ·
Gonzales Letter ·
Welfare Reform ·
Boeing Contract ·
Budget & Taxes ·
Business Climate ·
K-12 Fact Sheet ·
EFF Health Study ·
Paycheck Protection ·
Transportation ·
Unemployment Ins. ·
Receive Updates ·
Bookmark EFF ·
Contribute ·
EFF in the News ·
How Can I Help? ·
Join EFF ·
Media Center ·
COMMENTARY
 March 15, 2002 They'll be back! We’d like to give you our take on exactly what happened with the budget when the legislature left town, but we can’t. We don’t have any more details than most of the lawmakers did when they voted “yes,” and that’s not much. The balance sheets aren’t available until Monday and we decline to accept the words of the budget writers as gospel truth. But here’s the math illustrating what we do know: (In millions) $20,961.9 (2002 February Revenue Forecast) $22,790.0 (2003-05 Revenue Forecast) So, to paraphrase the words of a burly Austrian, “They’ll be back!” Contact: Jason Mercier, Deputy Communications Director, (360) 956-3482
|
1 Part Honesty; 2 Parts Arrogance At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question: "Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?" - Rep. Jim McIntire (D - 46) Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..." |
