I’ve been meaning to comment on Tim Eyman’s brilliant post-election analysis. In referring to the overwhelming defeat of both I-892 (Slots for Tots) and I-884 (Education Trust Fund), Tim made the following remarkable observation.
“I think voters really liked half of both the proposals. If we could lower property taxes and increase funding for education, clearly we’d have a major winner.”
But then, doesn’t that just epitomize the rhetorical philosophy that has characterized all of Timmy’s initiatives… offer voters something for nothing.
In fact, there is a way to dramatically improve performance at our public schools while simultaneously cutting taxes, which I outlined last year in a modest proposal: “Cut Taxes to Improve Schools.” Though I suppose the fact that it involves eating the stupider children, might turn off a few voters.
The point is, both I-892 and I-884 failed for the same reason… when voters understand that there is no such thing as a free lunch, they tend not to vote for a free lunch.