Voting on everything

greenspun.com : LUSENET : I-695 Thirty Dollar License Tab Initiative : One Thread

I think that the best part of this thing is that we will get to vote on everything that we will be paying for. I am tired of paying taxes that don't help me or my family. And I am sick of politicians telling me where my money should go.

Plus, it will be cheeper for us to vote on these things once a year than the politicians sitting around deciding where the taxes come from. And as far as voting on every little thing I want to do that. And even if I don't know abuot the tax I am voting on I can always vote no to save my fellow taxpayers money. That is what really matters to me and my famil

-- Sonia (sonia_900@yahoo.com), September 21, 1999

Answers

Sonia wrote: "And even if I don't know abuot the tax I am voting on I can always vote no to save my fellow taxpayers money."

And this is at least part of the reason having every issue voted on is a problem. No one will be able to become familiar with the issues and policy choices involved in every funding proposal. Elected officials of one level of government are often unfamiliar with the funding issues of another level. We will be expecting every voter to become familiar enought to make an informed choice, and not just vote no if they don't understand it.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.frei.net), September 21, 1999.


"Plus, it will be cheeper for us to vote on these things once a year than the politicians sitting around deciding where the taxes come from."

First off, it won't be once a year. Already there is often some sort of levy to be voted on in February, sometimes an election in May, one in September, and the standard one in November. Actually, I'm not sure, but you might be able to call an election every month (not that this would happen).

Figure a low amount of $2,000 for every measure to be placed on the ballot (assuming there are other issues to share the ballot, otherwise the costs go up significantly.) And if there is any controversy to it, then people will be spending money there on both sides of the issue.

Finally, the politicians will still be sitting around collecting their paychecks. Remember, we're not replacing a layer of bureaucracy, we're just add

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), September 21, 1999.


Sonia's thought that there would only be an election once a year to consider tax/fee issues of all state, county, city, school district, water district, sewer district, cemetery district, fire district, park and recreation district is probably inaccurate.

Patrick has a point. Per RCW 29.13.010, elections can be held in February, March, April, May, September and November. Being able to adequately study the issues around each proposal and understand why it is necessary to do such things as raise the fee to obtain a health district banquet along with thousands of other fees, charges (how much should hamburgers cost at the high school cafeteria?) could be overwhelming. An uninformed public vote on the matter will not benefit the public at large, but we'll become more arbitrary than a banana republic.

-- David (unified@whidbey.net), September 22, 1999.


David-

I concur with you. Clearly the politicians are a natural aristocracy and we ought to forever cede to them the discretion to decide all matters of public law and finance. Yeah, right!

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), September 22, 1999.


Nice one, David.

Now, allow me to sum up:

"People in this state are too stupid to have a say in tax amd/or fee increases."

Yup. You have the "anti" rap down pat. See what it gets you.

Westin

Only the finest in rechromed ASCII

-- Westin (86se4sp@my-deja.com), September 22, 1999.



did you people skip civics class? It sure seems like it. I'm amused by the irony -- several of the regular contributors imply that those against I-695 are in some way against the American Way of Life, and call them communists, etc. Might I remind you that we live in a modern democracy, based on the idea of representative government? That means that we elect people to run our government, making decisions for us which should reflect the opinions and desires of their constituents, but be tempered with the needs of the greater society (in this case, the state and ALL of its residents) as a whole. If we don't like the way we're represented, we have every right to change representatives -- in fact, if an elected representative does an about-face on his campaign promises, changes parties, or the like, we don't have to wait for a regularly scheduled election -- we can recall him!

Now there are some problems to this type of government -- after all, the Continental Congress passed the Declaration of Independence by a very slim majority -- meaning that the large number of people in favor of remaining British were forced into a war they certainly didn't vote for. Slavery ended much later in America than it did in Europe, because legislators compromised on the issue -- an economic decision that resulted in many of the economic problems causing the Civil War (most scholars agree that slavery was not the issue per se, rather that the South was so dependent upon the system that it could not compete with the industrialized North without maintaining slavery). Both these decisions were the results of representative government -- not perfect, but our own.

On this site, there has been no mention of individual legislators. Why? I suggest that those supporters of I-695 are waving the flag of demagoguery (which will eventually bring down the strongest democracy, and whose results are farther-reaching than most demagogues ever imagine). Rather than convincing people to work within the system and change it for the better, or encouraging voters to learn more about their government and their representatives and what they stand for, the supporters of I-695 are trying to convince voters that popular opinion should be the basis for legislation. By doing so, they absolve the voters of taking responsibility for government. They are in effect saying that, if we don't like what our elected representatives do, we can simply change the rules. Ironically, these are the same people who frequently decry such actions and other forms of political protest as Un-American.

I suggest that the proponents of I-695 use their considerable financial power to form effective change, rather than bow to the temptations of demagoguery. At the same time, I would encourage them to remember that majority rule is not the same as rule by those with the loudest voices. Sometimes, we can't have what we want, because the impact on others is too great. That may well be the case here. The benefits we all reap from society must be paid for. Quality of life for future generations should remain firm in our minds -- I-695 may make it cheaper for them to have cars, but at what cost? If you have any doubts, look at California, which is still reeling from the impact of Prop. 13, a lowering of property taxes enacted 20-odd years ago. Are we so short-sighted? I'm sorry to say that some of us may be so.

-- J. Kemp (jhofmannkemp@netscape.net), September 22, 1999.


J. Kemp:

I agree. Just watch Westin and Craig Carson and others go ballistic about your defense of the current representative system. Some of the proponents seem to have missed Civics, entirely.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), September 22, 1999.


Way to say it Sonia.

Representative government? Gaugh! It's failing. Safeco Field was voted down twice but our "represtative government" saved us from ourselves and TOLD us what we needed.

I know what I need and so do you.

When you boil it down, the baseball stadium fiasco happened, we got the message that we should not trust even the representative we voted for since they are paid for by lobbiests who also tell us what we need.

I'm voting YES on I-695 to take that taxing power away and put it in my hands. If that means going to the polls every week, "...Then make it so..."

-- William Sheehan (wsheehan@billsheehan.com), September 22, 1999.


William writes:

"Safeco Field was voted down twice"

No it wasn't.

BB

-- BB (bbquax@hotmail.com), September 22, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ