Seattlest Voters' Guide: Your Ballot is Due Soon Edition
Hello, dear readers--
Your ballot is due in less than a week. And if you haven't already filled it out, let me tell you that you're in for a sort of bumpy ride. There are a couple non-candidate matters (propositions, initiatives), all of which could greatly impact our region. It's a lot to ask.
It's also a lot to write about in a way that makes sense.
So, we're re-mining what we've already told you, and telling you some new stuff, too. During the primaries, we did a lot of footwork to help you get a handle on a few of the people you're voting for. Here's a re-visitation of some of the issues we've looked at, so when you're filling out your ballots, you might feel a little less in the dark.
Prop 1: A levy to increase funding for education, based on property value.
We Said:
Proposition 1's cost to property-owning Seattleites works out to roughly $0.27 per $1000 of assessed property value, or more plainly: about $124 annually for the median Seattle household.Voters hate raising taxes, but they love giving money to schools. A rate hike may be hard for homeowners to swallow, given the state, county and local burdens they already face, but the need is undeniable. Both the proposed new programs and older ones funded through the levy are most beneficial to the vulnerable students who are under-served by the traditional curriculum, and the Seattle families who already struggle at the margins. Without the passage of Proposition 1, our community will have fewer tools to support and strengthen such families. Still, a $231 million levy for education and social programs sticks out bright, burning red in a time of tax-cut fanaticism, budget cuts, and austerity.
Initiative 1183: Would get the State of Washington out of the liquor business. It has been largely funded by Costco, and could bring in more revenue...and hurt small businesses.
We Said:
The lack of provisions for craft breweries, wineries and distilleries in I-1183 is truly anti-Seattle, in my opinion. Seattle loves craft. Yes, we have "antiquated" laws that most people find silly and stupid, but some of those laws have allowed for craft industries to make huge strides. If this initiative was brought forth by the craft (small) liquor businesses here in Washington, there would be some obvious difference and protections for not jacking up their costs and prices to the point where they will likely become obsolete and be buried even further from the public eye. If Costco squashes those who have only in the last 3 years became legally capable of creating craft liquor, then some of the things we hold dearest about our city will likely get steamrolled over and go the way of the five-liter bottles of mass-produced Skyy Vodka.
and also:
Make no mistake, taxes lie in the wrong place here: on the people and on private distributors. Consumers won't notice much a difference in price with taxes really, though, and while this tax structure is not ideal, at least this experiment won't break us. Of course Costco wrote themselves out of the taxes--they wrote the initiative. But this has taught us that it's possible to write a privatization initiative that, instead of losing income, gains it. If this one doesn't pass, at least we know it's possible to deregulate without a huge hit to the state's budget. Perhaps a future initiative could tax Costco instead of us.
Initiative 1125: : Anti-transit measure that contains language about tolling as well as lightrail. Benefits few, impacts many. Tim Eyman's, which should tell you enough.
We Said:
At best, this is a wrench thrown into the Sound Transit 2 package, gumming up the process of the Eastside getting efficient transit. At worst, it's a vanity project that benefits a select few at the expense of the City of Bellevue, and an attack on everything Sound Transit does.
SJ-8205: Changes residency requirements for those registering to vote in the state of Washington
We're Saying: This is only really important to those who are moving to the State of Washington and wish to become registered to vote. But since we think everyone should vote, cleaning up the requirements is really only a good thing. Additionally, one of the provisions in our State's laws is unconstitutional: the United States Supreme Court has already ruled that voter residency requirements greater than 30 days are not allowed.
SJ-8206: Allocates additional money to the rainy-day fund.
We're Saying: That the Progressive Voter's Guide explains it better than we ever could:
The state maintains a budget stabilization account, called "The Rainy Day Fund", into which the legislature must contribute 1% of revenues from the general fund. This account can be tapped in case of catastrophe, or when state job growth in the state is less than 1%.This amendment would require additional contributions to the budget stabilization account in times of "extraordinary revenue growth". Three-fourths of that growth would go to the fund.
Some progressive legislators and organizations are concerned that the amendment would make it harder to tap revenue growth to repair budget cuts made during hard times. The current rainy day fund remains underutilized despite the budget cutbacks caused by the great recession.
The state senate passed this amendment unanimously. The state house passed this amendment 76 to 10.
