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 ·
|
PRESS RELEASE September 16, 2004 2005-07 revenue forecast $193 million
more than I-601 spending limit OLYMPIA—Forecasted revenue available for the 2005-07 budget is expected to be nearly $1.7 billion more than the current budget biennium (2003-05). This 7.2 percent increase in revenue for the 2005-07 budget amounts to a forecasted surplus of $193 million if the state abides by the I-601 spending limit. However, desired spending by state policy makers is expected to result in a projected budget "deficit" of nearly $1.1 billion. To reach this level of deficit spending, lawmakers will have to eliminate the taxpayers' state spending limit protection enacted by voters in 1993. "Depending on lawmakers' ability to live within forecasted revenue and current state law, today's revenue forecast is great news," said Jason Mercier, budget analyst for the Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF). "If legislators don't gut the I-601 spending limits, and if they exercise fiscal discipline by utilizing performance-based budgeting, Washington will have nearly $200 million to use towards rebuilding much needed state reserves." All dollars in millions
*Based
on OFM's July six-year budget forecast.
*Based
on OFM's July six-year budget forecast. Total likely to increase as result
of final collective bargaining contracts with state employees.
|
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..." |
