House minority floor leader Doug Ericksen (R-42, Ferndale) says that if Seattle can’t make up its mind on how to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct, Eastern Washington would be happy to take our money:
“As someone who actually understands that the Eastside means the east side of the state, not the east side of the lake, I get a little bit irritated with the amount of money we spend waiting for Seattle to make a decision on transportation projects,” Ericksen said. “We’d be happy to take that $3 billion and spread it to the rest of Washington.”
Notice how he doesn’t say “We’d be happy to take that $3 billion and use it to balance the state budget.” No, he’d just be happy to take money from an economically vital Seattle project and spread it around the red counties, whether it’s needed there or not.
Huh. I guess that’s what Republicans mean when they describe themselves as fiscal conservatives.
“spreading the wealth”.
but if you consider that the 3 Billion would create so many new jobs…they would become the vital part of the state. Isn’t that how it works ? :-)
The 3B would help fill in un and underfunded programs in the rest of the state. His meaning and your meaning are the same.
He’s from Western Washington and talking up Eastern WA. He’s bridging that East/West divide you post about a few days ago. Plus, his comment is spot on. Hopefully with McGinn in the mayors office you folks can actually make decision and act on them.
re 2: What good’s it going to do to give 3 billion dollars to a bunch of beet farmers?
They’d just buy a bunch of those expensive watering systems.
Except that Ferndale is in Whatcom County, which generally votes blue. Goldy, you should get out more.
Of course, Goldy does know Transportation funds can’t be co-mingled with general fund dollars, so the money can’t actually be used to plug budget shortfalls.
For the last time, levy equalization just encourages shitheads like Doug Erickson to say stupid things because they know soft hearted-headed Dems will redistribute wealth to their districts no matter what fucked up thing they say.
Fuck the Republicans.
I say give it to them on the condition they build a light rail from Seattle to Spokane.
Whatcom County is in E. WA? News to me!
@3, in Seattle style they elected the human sandbag.
@9, but it might be good news to Canada.
@10
Maybe not.
The question was to decisions and transportation, and McSandbag’s AWV short-term plan is to drag it out, muddy it up, and offer a cleaner solution later, much later.
Doug Erickson is not alone in that if McSandbag slows this down and they sniff that he is killing it, they will work to send that gas tax money to places that will use it right now.
Clearing Nickels appointtees off the paid favorites list is not unusual, given the hole in the wallet.
He has to fill a 40 million dollar hole for next year.
He can not both ask for a tax levy for west side lite rail while having a giant fiscal hole next Fall.
They call it interest, compound.
When Seattle screws around on a project (can you spell McGinnLovestheTunnel?)all of the state loses the costs of setting aside that effin money.
One small problem Goldy.
Yes it would be nice to take the Viaduct money and balance the state budget with it. There’s a pesky thing called the State Constitution however which says gas tax money can only be spent on roads.
If there is a shortage of money in the state then the government should tax corporate legal services. At ten cents on the dollar that would cover a lot of ground.
eastern wash, like al qaeda, is an idea, not a place or group.
@15…dont confuse goldy and the other leftists with strange concepts such as a state constitution….
re 18: It wasn’t Tories like you who gave us constitutional government.
All we’ve got to thank you guys for is the divine right of kings, bankers, and big, abusive corporations.
This is a fascinating idea!
Does anyone know what taxes law practices now pay? Imagine if taxing lawyers drove them out of state! What a way to attract business! Imagine: WA– we have law but no law-yas.
See Mark S.’s post @ 15 to clear up your confusion.
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Finance/fueltaxes.htm
@20
The notion of extending the sales tax to various services is one that comes up every few years. Perhaps it will actually get some traction this time around.
As long as the sales tax is expected to be one of the main revenue sources for government in this state it will keep coming up until passed as a larger and larger portion of the state economy is made up of services. Everything from cutting your hair to giving out legal advice.
SJ @ 20: My understanding is that lawyers are subject to the B&O tax, same as other service providers. I’m not sure if they have to collect the sales tax. I remember there were some arguments in the late 1980’s to early 1990’s that adding a sales tax to legal services would make it even more un-affordable to the poor and middle classes.
Of course, if you really want to tax the lawyers and make sure you hit the ones making the most money, you just need to enact a personal and corporate income tax in this state. You would think that the wingnuts would love the idea of taxing personal-injury lawyers for the money they get from corporations and insurance companies, which they claim to be so profits so huge and unjust that it distorts the economy.
But no – they don’t want to tax all lawyers. They want to make it easier for the corporations and insurance companies to pay large fees to lawyers to protect their interests. They just don’t want to see the average person to be able to afford a lawyer.
# 21: Okay, that explains why the state pays a sales tax on highway construction projects. I’ve always wondered why it didn’t exempt such projects from sales taxes.
Umm…would there, by chance, be any Highway and Transportation projects in Eastern WA that need funding?
“……..Balance the state budget.”
Nice spin. Flame a dude for what he DOESN’T say about funding that CAN’T be used.
Face it: You’re just a bunch of haters
Professional initiative huckster Tim Eyman is back in Olympia, filing another initiative to require 2/3 vote to increase taxes.
The picture printed by the Times made me laugh;
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....768591.jpg
It looked awfully similar to another picture I had seen before, but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. Then I made the connection:
http://www.world-wars.org/worl.....enito1.jpg
@27 Maybe we should file an initiative to require a 2/3 vote to cut spending on public services.
@26 (continued) Eyman’s tax-cut initiative isn’t needed. We’ve already cut state taxes by billions of dollars. By not shopping.
That doesn’t require a 2/3 vote or even a majority vote; you can do it yourself without legislative action.
I’ll support the income tax if and ONLY if they get rid of all sales taxes.
I don’t think the governor or legislators get it. Sales tax revenues won’t come back, because wage earners won’t return to former levels of consumption. They can’t because jobs are disappearing, wages are falling, credit has dried up, and an ever-growing share of what’s left of GDP is going to capital instead of consumers. There will be less and less money spent on taxable goods. In addition, as politicians ratchet sales taxes ever higher to make up for shortfalls, there will be more and more tax evasion through on-line purchasing, shopping in Oregon, and other means. The sales tax simply isn’t going to be a viable way to fund public services in the future. They need to start planning for a state income tax now, or they’re going to face a permanent budget crisis that will only get worse over time.
@29 There is no proposal to get rid of all sales taxes. All the proposals that have been floated get rid of only the 6.5% state sales tax. That still leaves local sales taxes in place.
It seems to me, though, that only should you be willing to live with that, you’d profit from it, unless you’re in the top income bracket. Replacing the state sales and B & O taxes with a revenue-neutral income tax would shift some of the tax burden on overtaxed low and average income households to undertaxed high income households, which is exactly what should happen. Tax reform, no matter what shape it takes, isn’t reform if it perpetuates a tax system that taxes the poor 5 1/2 times as much as the rich. The whole idea is to spread the tax load evenly or at least more fairly than the present system.
Most Washingtonians would come out ahead from tax reform that corrects the ridiculous distribution of tax burdens under our present system.
I’m not sure how my household would fare under tax reform. Our income is nowhere near six figures, but we save half our after-tax income and our consumption of taxable goods is very low. My guess is it’d be a wash for us. However, I would support tax reform if it increased my taxes, because the existing system is so obscenely unfair to those least able to pay.
People need to understand the B & O tax is a job killer. It absolutely discourages the formation of small businesses. I had a relative who left Washington when he started his business, because he said he wouldn’t survive the first two or three years under Washington’s tax system.
Income Tax?
A scam that ends up with the citizen paying BOTH income and sales taxes.
Not at first but later….just like they did with seatbelts not being a stoppable offence.
What $3 billion?
According to WSDOT, Total state funding available = $2.4 billion. That includes funding for the south end, where construction will begin in the spring and which is almost half of the entire structure.
You want see where the money goes (besides the $2.8 billion Spokane North Corridor) check out http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/
Y’know, you keep saying this state has little corruption. But what else is this? It is all legal, but still unethical and destructive.
Croak!
@21
Your post does not refute what I said. Gas taxes are to be used for roads. The ferries are part of the state highway system.
Gas taxes cannot be used for the general fund which is facing a shortfall.
@39
You should explain this to House minority floor leader Doug Ericksen (R-42, Ferndale) who is the one wanting to get his hands on the money. Ericksen is after all only the House minority floor leader and not expected to understand such complicated matters as taxes and the state constitution.