Contact: Carl Gipson,
Deputy Communications Director
(360) 956-3482
Transportation Pajama Party Details of the three transportation plans to date
Governor Locke and several state lawmakers worked feverishly
into the night last Tuesday in an attempt to hammer out details in a transportation
improvement package. Locke passed out pajamas at the meeting, but had little
information to pass out at his morning press conference. Both sides claimed
to be getting close to a compromise, with disagreements hinging on about
$100 million.
The new transportation plan will likely be a mix of three current proposals
from House Democrats, Senate Republicans and the governor. Each relies on
a ten-year plan to raise funds through a gas tax increase and other fees
and surcharges.
Any compromise should heed the message sent by Referendum 51's fiery demise.
R-51 lacked appropriate accountability measures, did not prioritize projects,
and did not provide the means to complete many of its projects.
So, will legislators come up with a meaningful and accountable transportation
package, or will they gamble on the hope that voters have short-term memory
and pass a "Referendum 51-lite?"
Questions to be answered by a new proposal:
1. Is measurable congestion relief the priority when selecting projects?
2. Will independent performance audits be applied to selected projects
so taxpayers know they are receiving the best possible value for the money
spent?
Currently, none of the three proposals detailed below can answer "yes"
to both questions.
Other considerations:
Plans submitted by the governor and the House Democrats contain an emergency
clause, meaning the tax and fee increases can go into effect immediately
and no referendum effort could be mounted to overturn the lawmakers' decision.
None of the proposals currently allow for independent, comprehensive performance
audits.
The gross weight surcharge will mostly be felt by businessesthe
very entity that can least afford another economic hit.
A Nutshell Overview
House Democrats' transportation plan @ $2.6 billion
gas tax increase = three cents
gross weight fee increase for trucks = 15%
increase in sales tax on new and used cars = 0.06%
This package is the most generous to non-road related projects:
$2 billion for highways/auto ferries
$360 million for public transit
$257 million for passenger/freight rail
Governor Locke's transportation plan @ $3.2 billion
gas tax increase = four cents
gross weight fee increase for trucks over 10,000 lbs. = 15%
gross weight fee increase for motorhomes = 15%
title transaction tax = 0.05%
This package is more modestly split between roads and public transit:
$2.355 billion to highways/local roads
$297 million to state ferry system
$275 million to passenger/freight rail capital projects
$242 public for public transportation programs and grants
Senate Republicans' transportation plan @ $4.1 billion
gas tax increase = five cents
gross weight fee increase for trucks = 15% (motor homes are also included)
sales tax increase on motor vehicles, excluding off-road vehicles =
0.3%
This package is the most generous to road-related projects:
$2.266 billion for King, Pierce and Snohomish Counties
$1.175 billion for roadways outside those three counties
$298 million for the state ferry system
$218 million for passenger/freight rail capital projects
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]?"