As you note, this is the
first year the State of Washington has not mailed paper Voter Guides as
a cost cutting measure. If you don't want to read it all, I have
selected my votes for all state measures to the bottom with an
explanation.
It's all online now here: Washington Sec. of State - 2010 Election Guide
Washington's State Measures
Initiative 1053 - Tim Eyman Initiative to change the tax and fee increases imposed by state government.
Summary: This measure would restate existing statutory requirements that legislative actions raising taxes must be approved by two-thirds legislative majorities or receive voter approval, and that new or increased fees require majority legislative approval.
The Effect of the Proposed Measure, if Approved
This measure would reverse the action of the 2010 legislature by replacing the current statute regarding tax increases and the state expenditure limit with a new section reading the same as the pre-2010 version of the law and restating that any action or combination of actions by the legislature that raises taxes may be taken only if approved by at least two-thirds legislative approval in both the house of representatives and the senate. Consequently, for the period beginning with the effective date of this measure, those requirements would be not be suspended.
Initiative 1082 - Initiative concerning changes to industrial insurance.
Summary - This measure would authorize employers to purchase private industrial insurance beginning July 1, 2012; direct the legislature to enact conforming legislation by March 1, 2012; and eliminate the worker-paid share of medical-benefit premiums.
The Effect Of The Proposed Measure If Approved
This measure would establish a third option for employers beyond either participating in the state industrial insurance fund or qualifying as self-insurers. Beginning on July 1, 2012, employers could instead purchase industrial insurance from qualified private industrial insurance insurers. Companies could qualify to issue industrial insurance policies through licensing and regulation by the state insurance commissioner. Private industrial insurers would have the same rights and responsibilities under the industrial insurance laws as the Department of Labor & Industries, and claim decisions by private industrial insurers could be appealed in the same manner as claim decisions by the Department.
The measure would create an industrial insurance administrative fund and would direct that appropriations be made to the fund to pay the expenses of the state insurance commissioner and the board of industrial insurance appeals in performing their responsibilities. The measure would establish a joint legislative task force with members representing the legislature, employers, industrial insurers, and employees. The task force would be directed to develop proposed legislation to conform current statutes to the provisions of this measure. The measure states that the legislature would be required to adopt supplemental legislation implementing this measure by March 1, 2012.
The measure would repeal language authorizing employers to assess their employees for one-half of the amount the employer is required to pay for the medical benefit portion of the premium, and to deduct these amounts from the employees’ pay. The entire premium for the medical benefit would be paid by the employer.
Initiative 1098 - Initiative concerning establishing a state income tax and reducing other state taxes.
Summary - This measure would tax “adjusted gross income” above $200,000 (individuals) and $400,000 (joint-filers), reduce state property tax levies, reduce certain business and occupation taxes, and direct any increased revenues to education and health.
The Effect of the Proposed Measure if Approved
If approved, this measure would impose an excise tax on the receipt of taxable income beginning in 2012. For a married individual filing a joint return with his or her spouse and for every surviving spouse, the tax would be as follows:
Taxable Income Tax
$0-$400,000 $0
$400,001-$1,000,000 5% of the amount above $400,000(joint file), $200,000 (individual)
$1,000,001 and above $30,000 plus 9% of the amount above $1,000,000 (joint), $500,000 (individual)
This measure would also increase the credit against the B&O tax to $4,800 a year. If the tax exceeds the amount of the credit, the credit would continue to be reduced. If the tax owed is more than twice the amount of the credit, the credit would continue to be eliminated.
This measure would also reduce the state property tax levy. The state levy would be calculated in the way it currently is, and that figure would be reduced by twenty percent. The reduced levy would be divided by the value of all of the taxable property in the state to determine the rate of the tax. The amount of state property tax a property owner pays would continue to be determined by multiplying the tax rate by the value of his or her taxable property. The twenty percent levy reduction would not apply to property taxes imposed by other jurisdictions.
Before spending the revenue generated by the tax imposed by this measure, the state treasurer would be required to calculate the loss to the general fund resulting from the increase in the B&O tax credit and the reduction of the state property tax levy, and deposit the revenue generated by the new tax into the state general fund to replace the lost revenue.
After the state treasurer has made the deposit to the general fund to replace the lost revenue, the additional revenue generated by the tax imposed by this measure would be deposited in a dedicated account in the state treasury. Seventy percent of the revenue deposited in this dedicated account would be deposited in the education legacy trust account. Thirty percent of the funds deposited in the dedicated account would be used to supplement the state’s basic health plan, provide for state and local public health services, provide long-term care services for seniors and people with disabilities, and for other health services.
Initiative 1100 & 1105 - concerns liquor (beer, wine and spirits).
Summary: This measure would close state liquor stores; authorize sale, distribution, and importation of spirits by private parties; and repeal certain requirements that govern the business operations of beer and wine distributers and producers.
The Effects Of The Proposed Measure If Approved
If approved, Initiative 1100 would direct the Liquor Control Board to close all state liquor stores, to terminate contracts with the private contract liquor stores, and to shut down the state’s spirits distribution operation. It would allow licensed private parties to sell spirits as retailers or distributors, and it would terminate the state’s authority to sell spirits. This would eliminate the net proceeds from the Board’s markup on sales of spirits at state liquor stores and contract liquor stores, which are distributed to the state, cities, and counties. Initiative 1100 would retain existing taxes on the sales of spirits, with minor modifications.
Initiative Measure 1100 would change the Liquor Control Board’s powers. It would eliminate the Board’s authority to manage liquor stores, distribute spirits, set spirit prices, and require the Board to close state stores by December 31, 2011. The measure would limit the Board’s rulemaking powers to regulation of licensing matters, taxation, and the prevention of abusive consumption and underage drinking. The Board’s authority to regulate the kind, character, and location of advertising of liquor would be subject to new limitations.
The Effects Of The Proposed Measure If Approved
If approved, Initiative 1105 would direct the Liquor Control Board to close all state liquor stores and to shut down the state’s spirits distribution operation. It would allow licensed private parties to sell spirits as retailers or distributors, and it would terminate the state’s authority to sell spirits. This would eliminate the net proceeds from the Board’s markup on sales of spirits at state liquor stores and contract liquor stores, which are distributed to the state, cities, and counties. The measure would generate new proceeds by requiring private spirits retailers and distributors to pay the state a percentage of their gross sales for five years. The measure would eliminate existing taxes on the retail sale of spirits, and would direct the Board to recommend to the legislature a new tax on the sale of spirits to spirits distributors.
Initiative 1105 would change the Liquor Control Board’s powers. It would eliminate the Board’s authority to manage liquor stores, distribute spirits, and set spirits prices. It would require the Board to close state liquor stores by April 1, 2012, and to make a good-faith effort to sell its liquor store inventory and assets by that time. It would authorize the Board to issue licenses allowing private parties to sell or distribute spirits, and to regulate the sale of spirits under those licenses.
Initiative 1107 - concerns reversing certain 2010 amendments to state tax laws.
Summary: This measure would end sales tax on candy; end temporary sales tax on some bottled water; end temporary excise taxes on carbonated beverages; and reduce tax rates for certain food processors.
Referendum Bill 52 - The legislature has passed Engrossed House Bill No. 2561, concerning authorizing and funding bonds for energy efficiency projects in schools.
Summary: This bill would authorize bonds to finance construction and repair projects increasing energy efficiency in public schools and higher education buildings, and continue the sales tax on bottled water otherwise expiring in 2013.
The Effect of the Proposed Measure if Approved
This measure asks the voters to approve the state’s issuance of general obligation bonds to pay for certain construction and repair projects to improve energy efficiency in public schools and in higher education buildings. The measure would authorize the state to borrow $505 million by issuing bonds to be repaid from future revenue.
The money raised by selling the bonds would be deposited into the state treasury, and would be used to make financial grants to public school districts, public universities, colleges and community colleges, and other public agencies. The grants would be used to pay for capital improvements for energy, utility, and operational cost savings.
Senate Joint Resolution 8225 - The legislature has proposed a constitutional amendment concerning the limitation on state debt.
Summary: This amendment would require the state to reduce the interest accounted for in calculating the constitutional debt limit, by the amount of federal payments scheduled to be received to offset that interest.
Engrossed Substitute House Joint Resolution 4220 - The legislature has proposed a constitutional amendment on denying bail for persons charged with certain criminal offenses.
Summary: This amendment would authorize courts to deny bail for offenses punishable by the possibility of life in prison, on clear and convincing evidence of a propensity for violence that would likely endanger persons.
_____________________________________________________________
Initiative 1053
Vote:
[x] - Yes
[ ] - No
Why
I vote yes because it would restrict tax increases to a two-thirds majority vote instead of a simple majority. It's the correct thing to do in a state legislature that is already majority Democrat party. This measure has been in effect since the mid-1990's, so I believe in the track record.
Initiative 1082
Vote:
[x] - Yes
[ ] - No
Why
Voting yes because L&I doesn't need to be the only issuer of insurance for employers outside to the only option to self-insure. Providing the option of offering private industrial insurance that complies to the existing laws that regulate Dept. of Labor & Industries. It still allows L&I to be an insurer.
Initiative 1098
Vote:
[ ] - Yes
[x] - No
Why
Washington does not need an income tax, it need responsible budgeting to see it through tough times like these. Governor Gregorie failed to utilize the state's budget surplus during the boom years to supply the pitiful "Rainy Day" Fund. Also, the ads with Gates Sr is misleading. The reduction of the state's property and B&O tax isn't that great. The majority of the property tax percentage is for local government funding. For example, the state's portion of the sales tax is 6.5% and that hasn't change for the last 30 years. Sales tax for northern Snohomish County is 8.6%, so the state takes 6.5% while the county and cities governments divide the 2.1% left. This initiative is simply what it is... introduction of income tax. Vote no and the Seattle Times editorial plainly explains it better. Seattle Time Editorial - Initiative 1098 is not a tax cut
Initiative 1100 & 1105
Vote:
I-1100
[x] - Yes
[ ] - No
I-1105
[ ] - Yes
[x] - No
Why
These are two totally different initiatives to deal with the end of the state's retail monopoly of "spirits" selling, distribution, and pricing. The fine print difference of the two initiatives is how the state generates revenue from private retailers. I-1100 keeps the current state tax rate of spirits while I-1105 would eliminate it and let the Liquor Control Board have the state legislature decide a new tax. In addition, I-1105 private retailers and distributors would pay the state a percentage of their gross sales over five years. I vote yes in I-1100 because it's the more simple route in terms of taxation by the state.
Initiative 1107
Vote:
[x] - Yes
[ ] - No
Why
Plainly simple, this tax is lame.
Referendum Bill 52
Vote:
[ ] - Yes
[x] - No
Why
Such projects should be part of current/future bond projects for public schools and higher education buildings. Plain and simple, dunno why the state needs to sell bonds to finance these projects. The state has no money to really finance this... it's still cutting it's budget further.
Senate Joint Resolution 8225
Vote:
[x] - Approved
[ ] - Rejected
Why
Basically deals with specific federal bonds available currently used for state transportation and local government bonds called "Build America Bonds". Other bond projects such as schools, universities, parks, etc. would become eligible for them. With this amendment, the state’s constitutional debt limit would be calculated by using the “net” interest paid (after federal reimbursement) rather than the current “full” interest amount paid. The debt limit stays the same, not all state debt is eligible against the debt limit in the state constitution.
House Joint Resolution 4220
Vote:
[x] - Approved
[ ] - Rejected
Why
This amendment is in direct response from the Lakewood cop shooting with Maurice Clemmons. It gives judges more leeway to deny bail while offering fair trial and the right to have bail. The original draft was more strict and wider oversight for judges to deny bail similar to the way the federal justice system denies bail. HJR 4220 is a fine compromise to the issue, strict but not overly so.
It's all online now here: Washington Sec. of State - 2010 Election Guide
Washington's State Measures
Initiative 1053 - Tim Eyman Initiative to change the tax and fee increases imposed by state government.
Summary: This measure would restate existing statutory requirements that legislative actions raising taxes must be approved by two-thirds legislative majorities or receive voter approval, and that new or increased fees require majority legislative approval.
The Effect of the Proposed Measure, if Approved
This measure would reverse the action of the 2010 legislature by replacing the current statute regarding tax increases and the state expenditure limit with a new section reading the same as the pre-2010 version of the law and restating that any action or combination of actions by the legislature that raises taxes may be taken only if approved by at least two-thirds legislative approval in both the house of representatives and the senate. Consequently, for the period beginning with the effective date of this measure, those requirements would be not be suspended.
Initiative 1082 - Initiative concerning changes to industrial insurance.
Summary - This measure would authorize employers to purchase private industrial insurance beginning July 1, 2012; direct the legislature to enact conforming legislation by March 1, 2012; and eliminate the worker-paid share of medical-benefit premiums.
The Effect Of The Proposed Measure If Approved
This measure would establish a third option for employers beyond either participating in the state industrial insurance fund or qualifying as self-insurers. Beginning on July 1, 2012, employers could instead purchase industrial insurance from qualified private industrial insurance insurers. Companies could qualify to issue industrial insurance policies through licensing and regulation by the state insurance commissioner. Private industrial insurers would have the same rights and responsibilities under the industrial insurance laws as the Department of Labor & Industries, and claim decisions by private industrial insurers could be appealed in the same manner as claim decisions by the Department.
The measure would create an industrial insurance administrative fund and would direct that appropriations be made to the fund to pay the expenses of the state insurance commissioner and the board of industrial insurance appeals in performing their responsibilities. The measure would establish a joint legislative task force with members representing the legislature, employers, industrial insurers, and employees. The task force would be directed to develop proposed legislation to conform current statutes to the provisions of this measure. The measure states that the legislature would be required to adopt supplemental legislation implementing this measure by March 1, 2012.
The measure would repeal language authorizing employers to assess their employees for one-half of the amount the employer is required to pay for the medical benefit portion of the premium, and to deduct these amounts from the employees’ pay. The entire premium for the medical benefit would be paid by the employer.
Initiative 1098 - Initiative concerning establishing a state income tax and reducing other state taxes.
Summary - This measure would tax “adjusted gross income” above $200,000 (individuals) and $400,000 (joint-filers), reduce state property tax levies, reduce certain business and occupation taxes, and direct any increased revenues to education and health.
The Effect of the Proposed Measure if Approved
If approved, this measure would impose an excise tax on the receipt of taxable income beginning in 2012. For a married individual filing a joint return with his or her spouse and for every surviving spouse, the tax would be as follows:
Taxable Income Tax
$0-$400,000 $0
$400,001-$1,000,000 5% of the amount above $400,000(joint file), $200,000 (individual)
$1,000,001 and above $30,000 plus 9% of the amount above $1,000,000 (joint), $500,000 (individual)
This measure would also increase the credit against the B&O tax to $4,800 a year. If the tax exceeds the amount of the credit, the credit would continue to be reduced. If the tax owed is more than twice the amount of the credit, the credit would continue to be eliminated.
This measure would also reduce the state property tax levy. The state levy would be calculated in the way it currently is, and that figure would be reduced by twenty percent. The reduced levy would be divided by the value of all of the taxable property in the state to determine the rate of the tax. The amount of state property tax a property owner pays would continue to be determined by multiplying the tax rate by the value of his or her taxable property. The twenty percent levy reduction would not apply to property taxes imposed by other jurisdictions.
Before spending the revenue generated by the tax imposed by this measure, the state treasurer would be required to calculate the loss to the general fund resulting from the increase in the B&O tax credit and the reduction of the state property tax levy, and deposit the revenue generated by the new tax into the state general fund to replace the lost revenue.
After the state treasurer has made the deposit to the general fund to replace the lost revenue, the additional revenue generated by the tax imposed by this measure would be deposited in a dedicated account in the state treasury. Seventy percent of the revenue deposited in this dedicated account would be deposited in the education legacy trust account. Thirty percent of the funds deposited in the dedicated account would be used to supplement the state’s basic health plan, provide for state and local public health services, provide long-term care services for seniors and people with disabilities, and for other health services.
Initiative 1100 & 1105 - concerns liquor (beer, wine and spirits).
Summary: This measure would close state liquor stores; authorize sale, distribution, and importation of spirits by private parties; and repeal certain requirements that govern the business operations of beer and wine distributers and producers.
The Effects Of The Proposed Measure If Approved
If approved, Initiative 1100 would direct the Liquor Control Board to close all state liquor stores, to terminate contracts with the private contract liquor stores, and to shut down the state’s spirits distribution operation. It would allow licensed private parties to sell spirits as retailers or distributors, and it would terminate the state’s authority to sell spirits. This would eliminate the net proceeds from the Board’s markup on sales of spirits at state liquor stores and contract liquor stores, which are distributed to the state, cities, and counties. Initiative 1100 would retain existing taxes on the sales of spirits, with minor modifications.
Initiative Measure 1100 would change the Liquor Control Board’s powers. It would eliminate the Board’s authority to manage liquor stores, distribute spirits, set spirit prices, and require the Board to close state stores by December 31, 2011. The measure would limit the Board’s rulemaking powers to regulation of licensing matters, taxation, and the prevention of abusive consumption and underage drinking. The Board’s authority to regulate the kind, character, and location of advertising of liquor would be subject to new limitations.
The Effects Of The Proposed Measure If Approved
If approved, Initiative 1105 would direct the Liquor Control Board to close all state liquor stores and to shut down the state’s spirits distribution operation. It would allow licensed private parties to sell spirits as retailers or distributors, and it would terminate the state’s authority to sell spirits. This would eliminate the net proceeds from the Board’s markup on sales of spirits at state liquor stores and contract liquor stores, which are distributed to the state, cities, and counties. The measure would generate new proceeds by requiring private spirits retailers and distributors to pay the state a percentage of their gross sales for five years. The measure would eliminate existing taxes on the retail sale of spirits, and would direct the Board to recommend to the legislature a new tax on the sale of spirits to spirits distributors.
Initiative 1105 would change the Liquor Control Board’s powers. It would eliminate the Board’s authority to manage liquor stores, distribute spirits, and set spirits prices. It would require the Board to close state liquor stores by April 1, 2012, and to make a good-faith effort to sell its liquor store inventory and assets by that time. It would authorize the Board to issue licenses allowing private parties to sell or distribute spirits, and to regulate the sale of spirits under those licenses.
Initiative 1107 - concerns reversing certain 2010 amendments to state tax laws.
Summary: This measure would end sales tax on candy; end temporary sales tax on some bottled water; end temporary excise taxes on carbonated beverages; and reduce tax rates for certain food processors.
Referendum Bill 52 - The legislature has passed Engrossed House Bill No. 2561, concerning authorizing and funding bonds for energy efficiency projects in schools.
Summary: This bill would authorize bonds to finance construction and repair projects increasing energy efficiency in public schools and higher education buildings, and continue the sales tax on bottled water otherwise expiring in 2013.
The Effect of the Proposed Measure if Approved
This measure asks the voters to approve the state’s issuance of general obligation bonds to pay for certain construction and repair projects to improve energy efficiency in public schools and in higher education buildings. The measure would authorize the state to borrow $505 million by issuing bonds to be repaid from future revenue.
The money raised by selling the bonds would be deposited into the state treasury, and would be used to make financial grants to public school districts, public universities, colleges and community colleges, and other public agencies. The grants would be used to pay for capital improvements for energy, utility, and operational cost savings.
Senate Joint Resolution 8225 - The legislature has proposed a constitutional amendment concerning the limitation on state debt.
Summary: This amendment would require the state to reduce the interest accounted for in calculating the constitutional debt limit, by the amount of federal payments scheduled to be received to offset that interest.
Engrossed Substitute House Joint Resolution 4220 - The legislature has proposed a constitutional amendment on denying bail for persons charged with certain criminal offenses.
Summary: This amendment would authorize courts to deny bail for offenses punishable by the possibility of life in prison, on clear and convincing evidence of a propensity for violence that would likely endanger persons.
_____________________________________________________________
Initiative 1053
Vote:
[x] - Yes
[ ] - No
Why
I vote yes because it would restrict tax increases to a two-thirds majority vote instead of a simple majority. It's the correct thing to do in a state legislature that is already majority Democrat party. This measure has been in effect since the mid-1990's, so I believe in the track record.
Initiative 1082
Vote:
[x] - Yes
[ ] - No
Why
Voting yes because L&I doesn't need to be the only issuer of insurance for employers outside to the only option to self-insure. Providing the option of offering private industrial insurance that complies to the existing laws that regulate Dept. of Labor & Industries. It still allows L&I to be an insurer.
Initiative 1098
Vote:
[ ] - Yes
[x] - No
Why
Washington does not need an income tax, it need responsible budgeting to see it through tough times like these. Governor Gregorie failed to utilize the state's budget surplus during the boom years to supply the pitiful "Rainy Day" Fund. Also, the ads with Gates Sr is misleading. The reduction of the state's property and B&O tax isn't that great. The majority of the property tax percentage is for local government funding. For example, the state's portion of the sales tax is 6.5% and that hasn't change for the last 30 years. Sales tax for northern Snohomish County is 8.6%, so the state takes 6.5% while the county and cities governments divide the 2.1% left. This initiative is simply what it is... introduction of income tax. Vote no and the Seattle Times editorial plainly explains it better. Seattle Time Editorial - Initiative 1098 is not a tax cut
Initiative 1100 & 1105
Vote:
I-1100
[x] - Yes
[ ] - No
I-1105
[ ] - Yes
[x] - No
Why
These are two totally different initiatives to deal with the end of the state's retail monopoly of "spirits" selling, distribution, and pricing. The fine print difference of the two initiatives is how the state generates revenue from private retailers. I-1100 keeps the current state tax rate of spirits while I-1105 would eliminate it and let the Liquor Control Board have the state legislature decide a new tax. In addition, I-1105 private retailers and distributors would pay the state a percentage of their gross sales over five years. I vote yes in I-1100 because it's the more simple route in terms of taxation by the state.
Initiative 1107
Vote:
[x] - Yes
[ ] - No
Why
Plainly simple, this tax is lame.
Referendum Bill 52
Vote:
[ ] - Yes
[x] - No
Why
Such projects should be part of current/future bond projects for public schools and higher education buildings. Plain and simple, dunno why the state needs to sell bonds to finance these projects. The state has no money to really finance this... it's still cutting it's budget further.
Senate Joint Resolution 8225
Vote:
[x] - Approved
[ ] - Rejected
Why
Basically deals with specific federal bonds available currently used for state transportation and local government bonds called "Build America Bonds". Other bond projects such as schools, universities, parks, etc. would become eligible for them. With this amendment, the state’s constitutional debt limit would be calculated by using the “net” interest paid (after federal reimbursement) rather than the current “full” interest amount paid. The debt limit stays the same, not all state debt is eligible against the debt limit in the state constitution.
House Joint Resolution 4220
Vote:
[x] - Approved
[ ] - Rejected
Why
This amendment is in direct response from the Lakewood cop shooting with Maurice Clemmons. It gives judges more leeway to deny bail while offering fair trial and the right to have bail. The original draft was more strict and wider oversight for judges to deny bail similar to the way the federal justice system denies bail. HJR 4220 is a fine compromise to the issue, strict but not overly so.
No comments:
Post a Comment