I'm still trying to compose a profile of the I-695 supporter. As with any other group, no one caricature will do. There must be the same shades of grey in another person as exist in me. But in observing the dialog here, patterns emerge. I can learn something here. Those who choose not to listen may repeat mistakes we need not experience.

I first wonder if a 695 supporter would make a good neighbor. Is this a person who would vote against any taxes at any level? Would this person vote for roads, schools, libraries? Would such a person also cooperate with a neighborhood going onto a septic system? It all depends, I guess. But at this website, I see a lot of dialog that proposes no taxation whatever, and in listening to Mr. Eyman's latest proposals, no means to replace the lost revenues of 695. We should simply make do with less government. Any proposals to replace that revenue would stand out like a litmus test.

I also hear a lot from what were called 'angry white men' after the '94 midterm elections that put Newt Gingrich on top. Some are women. There seems to be an anger that the government has coopted a way of life by taxing auto registration. I must admit when I came here in 1982, I knew the auto registration fees were higher than in other states, but I also knew the tradeoff was no state sales tax, no tax on food, or no outrageous property taxes. But that's relative, eh? No, the big selling point was that we should have it as cheap as Oregon. It has grown in the telling to a general tax abatement movement of many differing flavors, but the common element seems to be a genuine hatred for bloated government, inefficient government, and often just a hatred for government of any form.

I've heard a few anecdotes about the 'truly greedy' that Ronald Reagan told us about back in the 80's. Is there welfare fraud and abuse in Washington? You have plenty of evidence here at greenspun.com. I've seen it too.

So here we are. The bus drivers filed suit. Many other groups, class action parties, and individuals are in line right behind them to find the injunction power to save their interests. Of course, no sane government official wants to touch the third rail of Washington politics right now. Nevertheless, dozens of entities around the state are posturing and waiting for the dust to settle. Counties from King to Pend Orille are drawing up revenue forecasts. Some cities have already had their bond ratings downgraded with direct reference to 695 in mind.

I see real people divided down an issue like a battlefield during one of Washington's real crossroads in time. During one of the greatest economic times of prosperity, every county, every city is feeling eviscerated by the sudden loss of revenue, some over twenty percent, but still have the civic responsiblity to uphold the social contract of police, fire, road services, public health, policy planning, payroll, and every consequence of modern existence.

One must acknowledge the groundswell of statewide sentiment. And now that the consequences are rolling in, some parties are becoming even more entrenched in their previous postions. Less government yet, says one faction. Completely remove any taxation power, says another. In the meantime, cities and counties are sending out warning slips to employees and contractors. The well is going drier, at least for a while until the lawsuits are decided. Our taxes will go up from every corner of Cape Flattery to the Columbia. And they probably won't go completely back to the status quo if 695 is invalidated in whole or in part. So, if 695 was about wealth distribution in our society, the tax increases proposed-chiefly increases in user fees, property taxes, and even higher sales taxes-all seem to point toward the bottom of the tax base, moving up. Go after large groups of people a little bit. It doesn't hurt so bad when you pay every day. Of course, many people miss the fact that this has greater effects on those who pay larger percentages of their money on basic needs like shelter, food, transportation, and education. So, we have wealth redistribution, but this time, the right to drive comes out on top. The more expensive the car, the more you win. Seems like every dealership in the state would support this.

But, I guess they didn't. Some of us see the bond ratings being downgraded and think, will the rest of the country think we're a bunch of cheapskates? Don't Washingtonians want to pay to keep criminals off the streets, potholes filled, kids going to good schools, low-income housing, and world class health care? Or do they think this stuff just comes with the modern age? No, lots of good people have found this website-republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives, and they're not altogether confident that the I-695 movement has thought through the consequences. As time goes by I'm guessing that there will be a little education by all parties.

It must be a good sign for Washington's education system that so many people have little fear of anarchy. It hasn't been seen around here in a long time. Even if I don't completely understand all of what will happen at something like the WTO conference, I think that Washington is in for a little dose of anarchy post 695. If revenues are terribly eviscerated, it might act like a government vaccination for future revenue protection.

Either way all of us look a little like our neighbors in the compounds of Idaho: Taken to extremes, fear and hatred of government devolves into isolationism. Timothy McVeigh is an unfortunate possible outcome. No government means city-states, feudalism instead of trade, and, like Yeats said, the ceremony of innocence is drowned in anarchy. Of course, the other extreme is just as bad. I personally have no interest in becoming a politican-I did my time as a medic for three years, I worked for UW hospitals at Harborview, and I'm through with working for the state. I value being self-employed with time for family, continuing education, and a spiritual way of life. But I'm not ready to go live in the woods with a bunch of canned food just yet.

So, we haven't lost the underclass who are sometimes criminal, often illiterate, hungry, homeless, and angry. If you ignore them long enough, you create a permanent underclass of untouchables who either rise up in protest, or limp through life like indentured servants or slaves. There's no prison or hospital large enough. We've simply lost some of the revenue available to solve the problems that come with them. Of course, cuts in revenue would ultimately leave less money for defense as well. So, in the major criteria for determining the wealth of a society, have we gained? Freedom is great here compared to so many other places in the world. But what exactly does that freedom cost? And who pays for it?

I'm asking those people who voted for 695 to implement real solutions for our problems-they belong to all of us. If we can do it on a decreased revenue stream, so much the better. Roll up your sleeves and do your part to make the world a better place to live. Give back something for the gift of life and consciousness. Destruction without reformation is regression, not progress.

neal

-- neal (healingarts@evergo.net), November 22, 1999

Answers

Neal,

First of all, you need to read all of the other postings in this forum. All of your questions have been answered over and over, but you still don't seem to get the point. Nobody is crying "Anarchy!" or "abolish the government!", we just want to keep more of the money that we earn. I don't know if you have ever taken the time to add it up, but after you get the "usual" deductions taken out of your pay, you end up paying an additional 10-20% in taxes. Do you think paying up to 50% of your paycheck to the government is fair? We spill our blood for 40+ hours a week (I work a minimum of 50) just to give half of to them, and the reason that this innitiative passed is because we don't think that we are getting near enough in return. We work, they tax us, they spend our money as if it grew on trees. Government is not meant to be a baby sitter. If they cut the "fat" that they are wasting money on, plenty will be available to fund the essential services that we NEED. JT

P.S. In your original post, you claim that there is no sales tax. Are you nuts or do you have an Oregon drivers license so you don't have to pay it. Sales tax in King County is 8.6%!

-- JT (t-jtuttl@amazon.com), November 22, 1999.

Neal-

In one post, you manage to trash the MAJORITY who are against you, trash our neighbor state, and generally WAAH-WAAH about the mean spirit of capitalism.

Give it a rest. Liberals have long since forfeited any claim they may have once had for the moral high ground. They proved with the First Delinquent that any behavior is excusable, if you supports the liberal orthodoxy.

The underclass has been CREATED from the poor (but potentially socially mobile) precisely by the failed policies that liberals espouse. Subsidizing the breakup of families is not the means to prosperity, it is the means to the creation of a permanent underclass, with little choice but to vote for more government.

You guys are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem. While we have fewer poor than ever before, the plight of the poorest has been made infinitely worse, because their future has been stolen from them. I used to believe that this was a well intentioned mistake on the part of the liberals. Clinton and the recent follies of Jesse Jackson has convinced me that this is a necessary requisite for their pushing their agenda.

-- Mark Stilson (mark842@hotmail.com), November 22, 1999.

no state income tax, not sales tax, jt...you get the picture. Yes I do read up. And like so many before you, you choose to ignore the other side of the equation. I could never advocate 50 percent taxation. I'm self employed, and from the looks of things here, most of the big money hires tax attorneys to lower tax libility to the lowest possible value. But what do you want to spend your tax money on today-an infrastructure, or more walls and prisons? ~N~

-- neal (healingarts@evergo.net), November 22, 1999.

neal--"I'm still trying to compose a profile of the I-695 supporter. As with any other group, no one caricature will do. There must be the same shades of grey in another person as exist in me. But in observing the dialog here, patterns emerge. I can learn something here. Those who choose not to listen may repeat mistakes we need not experience."

This is true of the people opposed to I-695 as well.

"I first wonder if a 695 supporter would make a good neighbor. Is this a person who would vote against any taxes at any level? Would this person vote for roads, schools, libraries? Would such a person also cooperate with a neighborhood going onto a septic system? It all depends, I guess. But at this website, I see a lot of dialog that proposes no taxation whatever, and in listening to Mr. Eyman's latest proposals, no means to replace the lost revenues of 695. We should simply make do with less government. Any proposals to replace that revenue would stand out like a litmus test."

Do I-695 supporters make good neighbors? Just like I-695 opponents, some would and some wouldn't. It would be a mistake to think I-695 supporters *or* opponents are monolithic in their reasons for their views on I-695.

"I also hear a lot from what were called 'angry white men' after the '94 midterm elections that put Newt Gingrich on top. Some are women. There seems to be an anger that the government has coopted a way of life by taxing auto registration. I must admit when I came here in 1982, I knew the auto registration fees were higher than in other states, but I also knew the tradeoff was no state sales tax, no tax on food, or no outrageous property taxes. But that's relative, eh? No, the big selling point was that we should have it as cheap as Oregon. It has grown in the telling to a general tax abatement movement of many differing flavors, but the common element seems to be a genuine hatred for bloated government, inefficient government, and often just a hatred for government of any form."

I can't speak for anyone else, but I have no particular hatred of government. That being said, I recognize the tendency for organizations to grow to use whatever resources are available to them. Non-monopolistic private organizations (profit *and* non-profit) have obvious impediments to growth that keep them from growing too large and influential. Given the rather cozy relationship between government employee unions, government contractors, and political campaigns, what exists to impede the growth of a governmental organization? AFAICT, the only thing that would is something like part II of I-695. Interestingly enough, one of the I-695 opponents (on another forum) made this point for me when he complained about how the voting issue would (para.) "force government agencies to compete with each other for voter attention and the corresponding funding." Imagine his surprise when I told him I considered this to be a positive (not a negative) outcome of I-695.

"I've heard a few anecdotes about the 'truly greedy' that Ronald Reagan told us about back in the 80's. Is there welfare fraud and abuse in Washington? You have plenty of evidence here at greenspun.com. I've seen it too."

I kept looking for a point. . .

"So here we are. The bus drivers filed suit. Many other groups, class action parties, and individuals are in line right behind them to find the injunction power to save their interests. Of course, no sane government official wants to touch the third rail of Washington politics right now. Nevertheless, dozens of entities around the state are posturing and waiting for the dust to settle. Counties from King to Pend Orille are drawing up revenue forecasts. Some cities have already had their bond ratings downgraded with direct reference to 695 in mind."

As you read my response, perhaps you'll understand why I find it ironic that I-695's supporters are tagged as greedy. I believe mental health professionals would call this projection.

"I see real people divided down an issue like a battlefield during one of Washington's real crossroads in time. During one of the greatest economic times of prosperity, every county, every city is feeling eviscerated by the sudden loss of revenue, some over twenty percent, but still have the civic responsiblity to uphold the social contract of police, fire, road services, public health, policy planning, payroll, and every consequence of modern existence."

Imagine your surprise as they actually continue to perform all the above services. They may not have the same coverage they had previously, but all these services will continue to exist.

It seems to me that there was never a discussion (WRT I-695) of what "appropriate" service levels were. IOW, what are the consequences of the cuts in I-695? As an example, the no 695 camp initially said that 1000 LEOs would be laid off due to I-695. What is the consequence of having 1000 fewer police officers in Washington (a quick look at crime statistics and trends makes me think there isn't much consequence. . .of course, this excludes the 1000 cops who are actually laid off).

Lastly, you should consider it a blessing that I-695 passed when it did. There's a school of thought that teaches dramatic change is least painful during the best of times. The reason for this is quite simple--it's less painful to adjust to change during good times than it is during hard times. Put more concretely, it's better that a bus driver loses his/her job now as opposed to losing it in the middle of a recession.

"One must acknowledge the groundswell of statewide sentiment. And now that the consequences are rolling in, some parties are becoming even more entrenched in their previous postions. Less government yet, says one faction. Completely remove any taxation power, says another. In the meantime, cities and counties are sending out warning slips to employees and contractors. The well is going drier, at least for a while until the lawsuits are decided. Our taxes will go up from every corner of Cape Flattery to the Columbia. And they probably won't go completely back to the status quo if 695 is invalidated in whole or in part. So, if 695 was about wealth distribution in our society, the tax increases proposed-chiefly increases in user fees, property taxes, and even higher sales taxes-all seem to point toward the bottom of the tax base, moving up. Go after large groups of people a little bit. It doesn't hurt so bad when you pay every day. Of course, many people miss the fact that this has greater effects on those who pay larger percentages of their money on basic needs like shelter, food, transportation, and education. So, we have wealth redistribution, but this time, the right to drive comes out on top. The more expensive the car, the more you win. Seems like every dealership in the state would support this."

Yeah so. From my observations, there appear to be a significant portion of I-695 supporters who could've cared less about the license fee section of the initiative.

Quite frankly, I don't think the reduction in license fees is significant over the long run. There's evidence many (most?) legislators understand this as well (WSJ editorial). The whole voting on tax increase thang scares the p*** out of them.

"But, I guess they didn't. Some of us see the bond ratings being downgraded and think, will the rest of the country think we're a bunch of cheapskates? Don't Washingtonians want to pay to keep criminals off the streets, potholes filled, kids going to good schools, low-income housing, and world class health care? Or do they think this stuff just comes with the modern age? No, lots of good people have found this website-republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives, and they're not altogether confident that the I-695 movement has thought through the consequences. As time goes by I'm guessing that there will be a little education by all parties."

I find the implicit assumption--being viewed as a cheapskate is negative--rather mushy. Similarly, I find it amusing that you think it matters how people in other states perceive Washington. I find it likely that Washington will still have net positive immigration for quite some time.

"It must be a good sign for Washington's education system that so many people have little fear of anarchy. It hasn't been seen around here in a long time. Even if I don't completely understand all of what will happen at something like the WTO conference, I think that Washington is in for a little dose of anarchy post 695. If revenues are terribly eviscerated, it might act like a government vaccination for future revenue protection."

We're waiting for your evidence to support your assertion that we'll be in for a "little dose of anarchy post 695."

"Either way all of us look a little like our neighbors in the compounds of Idaho: Taken to extremes, fear and hatred of government devolves into isolationism. Timothy McVeigh is an unfortunate possible outcome. No government means city-states, feudalism instead of trade, and, like Yeats said, the ceremony of innocence is drowned in anarchy. Of course, the other extreme is just as bad. I personally have no interest in becoming a politican-I did my time as a medic for three years, I worked for UW hospitals at Harborview, and I'm through with working for the state. I value being self-employed with time for family, continuing education, and a spiritual way of life. But I'm not ready to go live in the woods with a bunch of canned food just yet."

I don't think this evolves into isolationism. . .it evolves into revolution (how's that for a strange concept). That being said, I think you've a true gift for hyperbole maixed with a tablespoon of overstatement.

-- Brad (knotwell@my-deja.com), November 22, 1999.

"Don't Washingtonians want to pay to keep criminals off the streets," YES

"potholes filled" YES

"kids going to good schools" YES, ALTHOUGH RESULTS ARE BETTER WITH HOME SCHOOLING

"low-income housing" NO

"and world class health care ?" NO, but certainly quality public health services.

WE DON'T HOWEVER, WISH TO PAY FOR $29,000 A STALL UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGES FOR MERCER ISLAND PARK N RIDES, OR $22,000 A STALL PARKING GARAGES FOR RENTON, OR $2.3 BILLION LIGHT RAIL, OR SUBSIDIZED FERRIES BETWEEN WEST SEATTLE AND DOWNTOWN AND KIRKLAND AND SEATTLE.

THESE PROJECTS ALL SUBSIDIZE THE WEALTHY. WE WILL NOT BE HELD HOSTAGE TO SUBSIDIES TO THE WEALTHY AND OTHER SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, IN ORDER TO GET BASIC SERVICES FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. THE STATE GOVERNMENTS CAN EASILY GET BY ON 98% OF WHAT THEY NOW TAKE IN.

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), November 22, 1999.

"Would the 695 supporter make a good neighbor"?

Hmm, I wonder the same of a 695 opponent. I have a picture in my mind...hang on, it's becoming clearer: One one side, I have the 695 supporter. He's a friendly neighbor, that doesn't stick his nose in my business, takes care of himself, returns the stuff he borrows from me, and.. whoa... on the other side is the 695 opponent, it's... it's becoming clearer... hang on, oh my god, it's Mrs. Cravitz, from "bewitched".

-- Paul Oss (jnaut@earthlink.net), November 22, 1999.

Neal,

First let me paint a picture of my neighbor, a 695 opponent.

He is too cheap, even as a vice principal in the Lake Washington school district to pay to have his garbage collected. He packs it to school and dumps it into the dumpster at taxpayer expense.

He has lived in his house for over 15 years and not even landscaped his yard.

He has never served in the military.

He has no kids (thank God for that) who will carry on his views.

He professes all the politically correct philosophy that comes with the socialist society and complains when neighbors, as a whole, want him to join and be one of us. You seem to be like him just in reading what you have said, lazy and wanting to live off of all of us.

-- Jim Labyak (jimlab@msn.com), November 23, 1999.