The BIG lie is the lie from which all the other lies flow. The BIG Lie must be believed for all the other lies to have any validity.

To believe that calamities and shutdown of services will occur if 695 passes you first must be stupid enough to believe The BIG Lie,which is the foundation and basis for the multitude of the lies we are told.

The BIG Lie is never spoken but always implied.

The BIG Lie is: That the Governor and Legislature,who enact amend,change and abolish all state laws and regulations including the budget,and have done so since Wa. joined the union,are, in this ONE CASE, utterly powerless to change the budget.

They want you to believe (without saying so) that THIS budget is written in stone and CANNOT be reprioritized and reallocated to fund essential services FIRST,and their waste last.

You have to be either a gummint drone or a victim of the education establishment to give even the slightest credence to such Libberish.

The TRUTH is,of course,that if ANY of the necessary,essential services of government are interupted or in any way adversely affected,it is because the Governor and the Legislature,through malice or stupidity,allow it to happen.

I would suggest that e-mailing each member of the Legislature AND the Governor and let them know we are aware that they have all the power necessary to take the actions required to continue essential services.

We have to tell them that the lawmakers in Colorado and Ca. faced with similiar situations,reacted as statesmen and not spoiled children who have had a toy taken from them. They made the citizen initiatives work and so can Wa.

We must hold their feet to the fire,and let them know we are watching and that any adverse effects will be laid right on their doorstep where it belongs.

Let them suffer the consequences at the ballot box.

"When the Legislature is in session,no ones life,liberty or property is safe"

Ricardo

-- Ricardo (ricardoxxx@home.com), October 22, 1999

Answers

R:

I don't think anyone said it can't be done, but rather that it takes time and will be a painful process with many casualties. Essentailly, we will waste a lot of time and money to repair the damage that would be done by 695. Worse, we will spend a lot on lawyers, and no one knows if it will ever be implemented as the proponents expect. It's just not worth it. Poorly written. Bad law. Vote NO.

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

db:

They say "A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step."

The Olympians are telling us "Hey, you don't need to take that journey, we'll fix it.... maybe... just please don't take control of the road away from us." But if we do start down that path, the Olympians must do the will of the people to make the journey as smooth as possible without taking out needed services along the journey. They must keep water available during the journey, but can get rid of the fancy lines and road signs that aren't needed every 10 feet. If an addition to the road is needed and is just, the people will vote for it. If it's something we don't need in our journey, we can vote it down and still continue on our journey without it.

After I-695 is approved, there may be a jolt to the system at first, but once we get moving and realize the path, the destination may be closer than you think.

-- Sandy D (sandy_d1@yahoo.com), October 22, 1999.

Db

If they do it right the only casualties will be the moronic programs put in the budget to buy the votes of every looney special interest group that comes down the pike.

Judging from the quality of the posts of the pro-taxpayer crowd in this forum,I think that a half dozen of us could sit down with the budget and clean up this mess in a week.

I would also guess that we could come up with a lot more than a piddling 2 percent cut.

"scratch a liberal--get E-coli under your fingernails."

Ricardo

-- Ricardo (ricardoxxx.@home.com), October 22, 1999.

R:

I have noted before that the special interest groups are you and me, and everyone else in the state. We all have special interests, unless we are dead. Environmentalists, builders, car owners, transit users, dog owners, horse riders, bike riders, car poolers, families with children, the disabled, single parents; everyone is a part of several special interest groups, many of which ask for government help or cooperation at some level. So when you cut programs for the special interest groups; you cut programs that are important to you, or your family, or your neighbors, or your friends. Evaluating those interests, and prioritizing those choices, is what takes time. 695 provides no time, if it is implimented on 1/1/2000.

If they do it right, you hope that the programs cut are those YOU are not interested in. No matter how they do it; casualties, jobs, pain, and problems for some if not all. And waste. Lots of wasted time and money to fix the damage. It is just not worth it. Vote NO.

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

d..... There's an interchange that the state wants to put in near where i work. It will cost over $1,000,000. to do this, besides the property acquisition that needs to take place. Yes, it will probably save me about 30 seconds each day i got to work. But... i am willing to sacrifice MY benefit of this, in order to save a million dollars. This is a SMALL example of what i think is very much wasted state resources. How about you? Can you think of instances of wasted state resources. Most people can.

I have heard the arguement from a no-voter saying this... "There is definitely a lot of waste in the state, but if you cut the budget, the legislators of this state will cut the essential services, and not the waste." My question is this... Are we being held hostage?? Who, in their right mind would do such a terrible thing??? What would you do?? The right thing (cut the waste) or the wrong thing (cut the essential services)? This is similar to another arguement i have heard... it goes... "if we dont give them free money (welfare), they will revert to crime." Once again, are we being held hostage?

What it comes down to is this... we (the people) have shown disapproval for the MVET and government waste. We (it seems a majority of washington's people) have lost faith in the legislators, because they have not fixed the problems. So, an initiative was drafted and is now on the ballot. (I do realize that this initiative has major flaws.... so just bear with me, k?) If the initiative passes, it will once again make the legislators have to make a decision of whether to do the right thing, or the wrong thing. I would think, that those who have NOT lost faith in their legislators (i.e., no-voters) would believe that their legislators WILL, IN FACT, do the RIGHT thing. Would you not agree????

If i truely believed that if we voted no, the legislators would then go and fix the MVET and stop such blatant waste, i would. To me, if the initiative fails, the legislators will look at this as though they can continue as they have in the past. If the initiative passes, whether it is inacted or not, i believe it will send a very strong message to the legislators. If they dont heed it, next year, the momentum will increase. THIS, IN ITSELF, IS WHY I AM VOTING FOR IT.

P.S. my brother works for the state. He is voting yes. In fact, everyone in his office is. Now isn't that ironic???

Please do not take any of my questions or comments as a personal attack, because that is not my intention. These are just some of my reasonings.

-- Allan (ae_me@yahoo.com), October 22, 1999.

Allan:

You comments are very clear. You recognize the initiative is flawed, but you will vote for it anyway to send a message to the legislature that you believe has not listened in the past about reducing the MVET.

Personally, I didn't see much public outcry for a reduction of the MVET until the initiative campaign began. The debate in the legislature about a reduction of the MVET is the only time it got much attention, and that did not excite much public comment. An initiative was not attractive enough to get signatures, once. If the legislature didn't listen, it may have been because no one spoke loud enough until now.

Win or lose, I think the legislature heard the public this time. They are your neighbors, after all. We have a part-time legislature that lives most of the year in the real world, under the same laws and taxes they approve for everyone else. If you don't trust your representatives, replace them. A representative structure is still the best mechanism for making these decisions.

The flaws of the initiative will waste public time and money, cause unintended consequences, and damage the operation of state agencies and local governments that have nothing to do with MVET revenue. Don't put us through that just to send a message that has already been received.

Poorly written. Bad law. Vote NO.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), October 23, 1999.

Ricardo, Excellent message. This BIG LIE has been polished by the professional PR firms and distributed with $2M worth of advertising. Yet, to accept it, you must accept that the legislators are 1)incompetent or 2)vindictive and the public is too stupid to look behind the hype. I suggest you send your post in a letter to every editor in the state. Wayne

-- Wayne (wsmith@precisionimages.com), October 23, 1999.

dbvz,

You spend a lot of time saying that I-695 is poorly writen and a bad idea. Ok, fair enough. I'd like to see you put your word in your mouth this time. I don't see you writing a better initiative! I don't see you getting 511,000 signitures! In fact all I see you doing is providing no real name to what you say and critisizing what others say and that you can't provide any real alternative.

That's why I say you're a mouse.

-- William Sheehan (wsheehan@billsheehan.com), October 25, 1999.

Wayne

I have sent probably sent a half dozen letters to the editor re: this and other subjects about the i-695 campaign.

I don't think they will see the light of day.

This is understandable if you consider that the editors of most of the states newspapers are part of the anti-taxpayer crowd,and they aren't going to get to discussing the tactics and lies or the paid P.R. flacks that promote the BIG LIE.

" The undeniable truth is...depends how you define "is"."

Ricardo

-- Ricardo (ricardoxxx@home.com), October 25, 1999.

William S.

I didn't write an initiative, because I believe the current institutions of government work just fine for proposing and adopting changes in the law. The Legislature does a better job of research, review, public input, hearings, debate, and adoption. You get my opinions, not my name. Some on this forum get downright hostile.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), October 26, 1999.

"The Legislature does a better job of research, review, public input, hearings, debate, and adoption." I see little to suggest this d. They are CAPABLE of doing good research, review, hearings, debate, etc. So are the voters. But the problem is the lobbyists, d. Look at the number and the amount they are paid, both at the state and at the federal level. Like PR firms, businesses invest in these people because they produce. And they get deductions as a business expense because it does support the business of the one that hires them, not the interests of the population as a whole. That's why we NEED to get more common voter involvement. Initiative is one way. Getting the public to vote on requests for taxation is another.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), October 26, 1999.

Craig:

We disagree again. The legislature considers thousands of bills each session, and will pass a relative few because the problems are found and rejected. With I-695, the problems were not found until it was on the ballot, and the voters seem willing to be bought with cheap car tabs and ignore them.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), October 27, 1999.