Contrary to the belief of some state officials, the voter
approved I-601 spending limit is still in effect. This has ramifications
on the budget proposal Governor Christine Gregoire will release on Monday,
March 21, at 10 a.m. Based on the $25,721 million forecasted revenue for
the 2005-07 budget (includes $836 million 2003-05 ending-fund balance) and
the $25,107 million voter approved I-601 spending limit law, Gregoire's
budget proposal will fall into one of the four following scenarios:
1) Gregoire's budget will be balanced within forecasted revenue and the
state's I-601 spending limit. This will mean that NO tax increase
of any kind will be needed (this is the only scenario that follows the
priorities of government budget processfocusing on program results);
2) Gregoire's budget will include requests for new taxes and expenditures
that exceed the state's I-601 spending limit. Under current law this will
require a vote of the people at the November election to approve expenditures
and taxes in excess of the I-601 spending limit;
3) Gregoire's budget will include requests for new taxes and expenditures
that exceed the state's I-601 spending limit. Rather than refer these
actions to a vote of the people as law requires, state officials will
eliminate the I-601 voter approved spending limit. Current law requires
a vote of the people for approval of expenditures and taxes in excess
of the I-601 spending limit; or
4) Lawmakers will pass a 2005 supplemental budget that spends the majority
of the projected 2003-05 $836 million ending-fund balance. This action
will greatly expand the I-601 spending limit and taxes will be raised
to bridge the gap between the $24,885 million forecasted revenue and the
new I-601 limit.
RCW
43.135.035 Tax legislationConditions and restrictionsBallot titleDeclarations
of emergencyTaxes on intangible propertyExpenditure limit
to reflect program cost shifting or fund transfer.
(1) After July 1, 1995, any action or combination of actions by the legislature
that raises state revenue or requires revenue-neutral tax shifts may be
taken only if approved by a two-thirds vote of each house, and then only
if state expenditures in any fiscal year, including the new revenue, will
not exceed the state expenditure limits established under this chapter.
(2)(a) If the legislative action under subsection (1) of this section
will result in expenditures in excess of the state expenditure limit,
then the action of the legislature shall not take effect until approved
by a vote of the people at a November general election. The office of
financial management shall adjust the state expenditure limit by the amount
of additional revenue approved by the voters under this section. This
adjustment shall not exceed the amount of revenue generated by the legislative
action during the first full fiscal year in which it is in effect. The
state expenditure limit shall be adjusted downward upon expiration or
repeal of the legislative action.
(b) The ballot title for any vote of the people required under this
section shall be substantially as follows:
"Shall taxes be imposed on . . . . . . . in order to allow a spending
increase above last year's authorized spending adjusted for inflation
and population increases?"
Contact: Jason Mercier
| Budget Research Analyst | 360.956.3482
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]?"