From opponents of I-695, I consistently hear three reasons why the results of its passage will be disastrous:

1. The state will be unable to fund essential services, including predictions that the state ferry system will cease to operate within a few years. Yeah, right. 2. I-695 benefits only the wealthy. Given the widespread support of this initiative, Id say that there are a lot of non-wealthy citizens of Washington who think its beneficial to them as well. 3. I-695 will reduce our quality of life, whatever that is purported to be, with the audacity to assume that their definition of quality of life applies to all of us. An important measure of quality in my life is the amount of my hard-earned money Im able to keep in my own pocket.

When I-695 passes, our elected representatives should look no farther than in a mirror to find the reason why. They are addicted to the narcotic effects that come from the power to tax and spend someone elses money, namely ours. This addiction is so strong that theyre willing to resort to deception (reduce the rate of taxation, but change the method of valuation to result in an increase in revenues) to keep the flow of narcotic increasing. Its obvious that theyre unable to restrain themselves, so the voters will have to do it for them.

-- Craig Peterson (ccpeterson@home.com), October 13, 1999

Answers

I just read an article (can't remember where - there have been so many) that said that portions of I-695 could be changed within the next 2 years with a 2/3 majority vote by the House & Senate. After 2 years, all that would be required would be a simple majority vote.

If passed, I do not expect our representatives to take I-695 sitting down. Within the first year, I expect that the voting requirement for any fee or tax increase imposed by I-695 will be gone. With that restriction gone, I fear that our representatives will have a ready excuse to levy various new and increase existing taxes and fees upon us.

Do not be too surprised to hear "The increased sales tax or the new state income tax was needed because of the budget short fall caused by I-695."

If they need it, the government will find a way to get it. We may be paying higher property taxes, sales tax, B&O tax, ferry and transit fees, parking fees, etc., but our car tabs will only be $30 (until they decide to raise it).

I-695 may force our representatives to reassess our state's tax structure. They may develop a new tax structure that is fair to all! ...I doubt it!

-- Gene (Eugene.Ma@boeing.com), October 13, 1999.

"If passed, I do not expect our representatives to take I-695 sitting down. Within the first year, I expect that the voting requirement for any fee or tax increase imposed by I-695 will be gone. With that restriction gone, I fear that our representatives will have a ready excuse to levy various new and increase existing taxes and fees upon us. " Hell, Gene, they could do that NOW, they don't need no stinking excuses. If I-695 DOESN'T pass it'll really send them a message, "Thank you, may I have another, sir?" I vote we pass it. If they do something in retribution, we escalate with an initiative that doubles all taxes for anyone that has ever held a state elective office."

-- zowie (zowie@hotmail.com), October 13, 1999.

Gene writes:

"Within the first year, I expect that the voting requirement for any fee or tax increase imposed by I-695 will be gone. With that restriction gone, I fear that our representatives will have a ready excuse to levy various new and increase existing taxes and fees upon us."

I expect at least part of 695 to be found unconstitutional. It's one subject is that it deals with taxation, but it then puts a restriction on fees. A fee is not a tax.

BB

-- BB (bbquax@hotmail.com), October 13, 1999.

Craig Peterson: You missed several of the reasons 695 is a bad idea.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), October 13, 1999.