Search EFFWA Site:

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 ·  

POLICY HIGHLIGHTER

Volume 14, Number 32
December 17, 2004

Locke's tax increase budget: winners and losers

Out-going Governor Gary Locke is proposing a $598 million tax increase to fund his $26.2 billion 2005-07 budget request. Locke's budget represents a $2.9 billion spending increase over the current budget, including a requested $161 million 2005 supplemental budget. This is a 12.5 percent increase in spending. Forecasted revenue for the next budget is expected to increase by 1.5 billion (6.7 percent), while the implicit price deflator inflation index is expected to be up 3.7 percent. This means Locke hopes to increase state spending by more than three times the rate of inflation and $1.4 billion higher than forecasted revenue (prior to his nearly $600 million tax increase taking effect).

In January, the Evergreen Freedom Foundation will release recommended budget savings based on a review of core functions of government. In the meantime, it is interesting to see which agencies win and lose under Locke's tax-and-spend $2.9 billion spending increase budget request. Below is a select review of how certain agencies fare under Locke's proposal, which assumes passage of a 2005 supplemental budget.

Losers: real reductions in current expenditures
(general fund state)

Agency/Office Funding change over 2003-05 Percentage change
State Auditor <$16 thousand> <1.1 %>


Winners: increases over current expenditures
(general fund state)

Agency/Office Funding change over 2003-05 Percentage change
Social and Health Services $1.2 billion 18.4 %
Superintendent of Public Instruction $736.5 million 7.2 %
Corrections $160 million 12.8 %
Community Colleges $149.8 million 14.5 %
Higher Education Coordinating Board $82.3 million 25.3 %
University of Washington $59.2 million 9.3 %
Washington State University $54.1 million 14.4 %
Washington State Patrol $33.8 million 86 %
Labor and Industries $27.3 million 225.1 %
Western Washington University $17.3 million 15.7 %
Central Washington University $17.1 million 20.8 %
Eastern Washington University $16.2 million 19.5 %
Ecology $11.5 million 15.9 %
Health $11.3 million 9.5 %
Parks and Recreation $11 million 18.2 %
Fish and Wildlife $10.3 million 12.4 %
Evergreen State College $6.9 million 14.8 %
Veterans Affairs $5.8 million 26.5 %
Financial Management $4.7 million 18.1 %
Attorney General $2.5 million 29.4 %
Governor $2.4 million 30.9 %
Agriculture $1.5 million 8 %
Licensing $1.2 million 11.8 %
Indian Affairs $228 thousand 48 %
Liquor Control Board $215 thousand 7.3 %
Asian Affairs $207 thousand 52.7 %
African-American Affairs $202 thousand 50.2 %
Hispanic Affairs $198 thousand 47.9%
Interagency Outdoor Recreation Committee $190 thousand 7.2 %
Arts Commission $150 thousand 3.3 %
Lt. Governor $141 thousand 12.7 %
Salary Commission $36 thousand 11.7 %

The question for legislators at this time: Will an electorate that just rejected a billion dollar a year tax increase for education programs support a $600 million tax increase to fund the type of spending increases Locke proposes?

Prepared by: Jason Mercier | Budget Research Analyst | 360.956.3482


Evergreen Freedom Foundation
P.O. Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507
Phone: (360) 956-3482, Fax: (360) 352-1874
Email: effwa@effwa.org


Election Reform


Grassroots Washington

Performance Audit Pledge
View pledge results

Health Plan 4 Life

Ten-Minute Citizen

WashingtonVotes.org

ChoosingLiberty.org

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)
(360) 786-7886

Despite the arrogance of some state officials, Washington's constitution is clear: "All political power is inherent in the people..."

Court of Appeals Ruling AG's WEA Appeal What is the WEA Hiding? Determining Government's Core Functions Priorities of Government Stewardship Series School Directors' Handbook Professional Choices For WA Educators Congressional Testimony (6/20/02) Agency Rule Change Request Social Security Calculator Tax Dividend Calculator Public Records Requests