Because if this guy doesn’t need 60 percent of the vote to get approved…
…then neither should Washington school levies.
If you want to get involved…
Sign up to phonebank here. If you want to do some rush-hour sign waving, contact the campaign here.
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
this crap is almost pure homophobia – why not leave all the bashing to the Republicans?
if society, that is all of you straight people, were a lot less homophobic then Mr. Curtis and many thousands of folks like him, WOULD NOT, be in the closet
And there are far worse examples of right wingers than him, Zarelli for example in the same district
and he looks good in panties I hear, better than Goldy or Will by a long shot
The long-range solution to school funding is tax reform and full funding by the legislature, which is elected by simple majorities. Unfortunately, we’ve been unable to get tax reform in this state for a variety of reasons, not least of which are the dual American mentalities of “getting something for nothing” and “let the other guy pay for it.” Meanwhile, we make do with a regressive Rube Goldberg patchwork tax system that often taxes those least able to pay.
Property tax caps were enacted to protect homeowners of modest means from being forced out of their homes by taxes. While the poorest of the elderly are protected by tax exemptions, many retirees and young families are caught in that netherworld where income doesn’t stretch far enough yet they’re considered too “rich” to qualify for tax relief.
The supermajority requirement applies to elections to WAIVE legal limits on the levies school districts can impose on property owners and approve EXTRAORDINARY taxes over and above the level that citizens of our state have decided via initiative they’re willing to pay. This fact often gets lost or overlooked in the debate over 4204.
Nevertheless, a good case can be made that the levy lids are out of sync with what voters want because nearly all “excess levies” for schools are approved at the polls — even when a 60% supermajority is required.
The best solution here probably is to revisit the whole levy structure with the aim of eliminating unnecessary elections. When 95% of levies are routinely approved, usually at special elections held solely for that purpose, the cost of conducting these elections represents waste. Reducing the passage requirement to 50% won’t eliminate this expense, and won’t pass significantly more levies, since most pass now. For most school districts and voters, the change from 60% to 50% will be (if it passes) a non-event.
One thing about 4204 bothers me, though, and that’s the fact it also eliminates the minimum turnout requirement. I don’t like that. No organization I’ve ever heard of lets its board of directors take action without a defined quorum of voting members present. In special levy elections, held at odd times of year — often in the dead of winter when voter turnout tends to be lowest — there ought to be a requirement that a minimum quorum of voters turn out, so 500 people can’t increase taxes for 50,000 households. Indeed, in many school levy elections, campaigning focuses on getting people to vote, not getting people to vote “yes.” While this may make the task harder for school supporters, it ought to be a hoop that taxing districts must jump through before WAIVING legal tax limits to authorize EXTRAORDINARY levels of taxation.
I felt eliminating the turnout requirement was an overreach, and that’s the only reason I voted against 4204. If this measure is defeated tomorrow, and comes back onto a future ballot in revised form, I will be happy to vote for the simple majority provision if the turnout requirement is retained in the law.
We should, however, put an initiative on the ballot that would require Republican same-gender dicksuckers to be elected by at least 60% of the vote, with a 40% minimum turnout requirement. This won’t have a significant effect on election results in hayseed counties where voters would elected a braying mule to the legislature if it called itself a “Republican.” We can’t do anything about the brain damage that long exposure to cow manure causes. But at least it would slow down the rate at which creeping ruralification is overtaking our suburbs.
I see nothing wrong with same gender dick suckers in either of the parties, R. or Dem.
you sound silly Rodger and unless you are a fag – save it
straight people make horrible experts on GLBT topics, duh
so hypocrites like Curtis and West and Craig don’t deserve criticism when caught?
Bunny – great points on eliminating the turnout requirements – that is rather a big deal in low-profile off-year school elections, and has not gotten the attention it deserves.
Apparently, Guest feels that it is hypocritical to out anti-gay-gay Republicans.
I’m not against gays. I’m not against dick sucking, either. Need a good time? Call 1-900-SUCK-ROG. This is a toll call. All proceeds go directly to the Help Roger Rabbit Live Like A Republican Fund.
We must have some new guests on this blog. They’re not familiar with rabbit satire, which is a specialized form of literary art, and highly entertaining! In case we’ve got some newbies here, I’ll repost the HA ad hoc posting rules:
1. This is a liberal blog.
2. Anyone can post here.
3. There is no censorship.
4. We don’t discriminate against anyone except Republicans, libertarians, fascists, and commies.
5. As liberals, our mission is to verbally kick the living shit out of Republicans, wingnuts, and other traitors to the Constitution, America, and our troops.
6. No mercy for wingnuts!
7. Our terms are unconditional surrender, to be followed by trials.
8. klake is a nazi.
Any questions?
Roger–From what I understand, the elimination of the validation requirement was added by the Legislature almost as an after-thought, not because the validation requirement was an important issue. It was the supermajority requirement that is the sticking point.
When you research this stuff, you’ll see that a levy hasn’t failed because not enough voters have turned out in a good long while–feel free to look at the secretary of state’s online records. Ever since we instituted vote-by-mail, it really hasn’t been a problem. It’s really a non-issue.
Now, if you want to have a quorum for ALL elections, that might make sense, but again I really think it’s a moot point. Surprisingly enough, a good percentage of people vote.
Long story short:
4204 won’t make it on the ballot again if it fails. So, if you voted against it because of a non-issue like the inclusion of the validation requirement, you’ve really done a disservice to kids across the state. You should go find two people who weren’t going to vote and make them vote for it–one to cancel out your vote, and another for good measure :)
to Roger Rabbit:
I second everything Ben has said above. I would like to add to that voters in all counties except 3 now vote-by-mail in the State of Washington, which means that citizens are notified of an upcoming election and ther ballot is even DELIVERED TO THEIR DOORSTEP. So, even if an election is in “the dead of winter” they still get a ballot and a voter’s pamphlet. It’s completely true that vote-by-mail has increased voter participation significantly, making this a non-issue. Furthermore, by 2008, all counties will adopt this system.
This is really just another outdated rule, and its elimination is nothing to be feared. The focus should be on the supermajority requirement that has cost taxpayers millions of dollars and has taken time and energy away from schools and our kids.
The fact that school levies get special elections, almost guaranteeing a minority turn out, is special consideration enough. Levies already have a favorable playing field.
I whold heartedly agree with much of what Roger stated above.
“Property tax caps were enacted to protect homeowners of modest means from being forced out of their homes by taxes. While the poorest of the elderly are protected by tax exemptions, many retirees and young families are caught in that netherworld where income doesn’t stretch far enough yet they’re considered too “rich” to qualify for tax relief.
The supermajority requirement applies to elections to WAIVE legal limits on the levies school districts can impose on property owners and approve EXTRAORDINARY taxes over and above the level that citizens of our state have decided via initiative they’re willing to pay. This fact often gets lost or overlooked in the debate over 4204.”
10, 11 Well, if the rule isn’t a problem, then keeping it doesn’t hurt anything, does it? Consider that rule a taxpayer protection rule. Let’s not lose sight of what we’re voting on here: Exemptions to limits on taxes. These are not normal appropriations and expenditures, these levies are lid-busters. While they may go for normal expenditures, they don’t come from normal taxes. (Not that anything having to do with taxation is “normal” in this state, but that’s another issue for another day.) Yes, it does make a difference where the taxes come from, and who pays them. Washington voters have made it clear they want protection against escalating property taxes, and making “excess levies” harder to pass than regular taxes and appropriations is the way this state has done business for as long as I’ve been here.
I’m willing to give up the supermajority. Why aren’t you willing to retain the minimum turnout requirement? Where’s the compromise? If I go halfway, why won’t you? Why should I do everything YOUR way? I want the minimum turnout requirement. If you want my vote for simple majority, deal with it.
I should note that Jonathan Fant is a Simple Majority supporter. He helped us get literature out at the Clark County Fair last August. I really hope he runs in what I’m assuming will be a special election now to replace Curtis? He was very pro-active in helping spread the word about 4204.
To tell the truth, I don’t know where that provision came from. I’ll take you word for it that the legislature put it in there. But the legislature doesn’t do ANYTHING as an afterthought. Nothing gets into a bill, or stays in a bill, that someone doesn’t lobby for. There’s a reason it’s there. Legislative language is never a random act of nature.
I may be a party hack and liberal shill — I admit it — but I’m not a rubberstamp.
Roger,
4204 is a constitutional amendment. By law, constitutional amendments must be voted out of the Legislature (with 2/3, no less), and then go in front of the people and must win a popular vote. So the legislature wrote the language for it.
It’s just that I’ve heard Sen. Holmquist throwing out this “stealth election” argument everywhere she goes–that if 100 people show up, 50 could decide it!–but I think it’s entirely spurious. Yeah, if 3 people come out to vote, 2 people could decide the election! Which is a supermajority anyway!
But that doesn’t happen. When there were 2000 school districts in the 50s and nobody knew when the hell an election was and boundaries weren’t clearly defined, yeah, maybe. But with 196 school districts and mail-in ballots? Come on!
Everybody has said we don’t get another chance on this. Gregoire, Chop, Brown etc. etc. It was too hard to get the 2/3 vote. This is just too important for kids to throw away this opportunity.
My school district failed a levy in ’03 (my senior year of high school) with 59.2% of the vote. We had to waste something like $150,000 to run it again, and hundreds of volunteer hours and thousands more dollars to rerun the election and win it the second time. All that we’re doing is forcing parents to spend more time campaigning and learning how to campaign, and less time volunteering at schools and being with their kids.
I think you’re missing the forest for the trees. You can say that the legislature had some nefarious intent with taking out that clause–but go look at the election results! Levies don’t fail because of lack of turnout. They fail because of unrealistic requirements.
@17 “Everybody has said we don’t get another chance on this.”
I keep hearing this from people who want me to vote for flawed ballot measures. They sound like furniture salesmen.
@17 (continued) “Levies don’t fail because of lack of turnout. They fail because of unrealistic requirements.”
I’ve lived in this town for 40 years and I remember levies failing for lack of turnout. As for trees and forests, you’re focused on little bushes. People need to get behind tax reform, period. We need to make “excess levies” obsolete, period. That’s where the forest is, my friend.
I backed Gregoire in ’04, and will back her again in ’08, but I would hope that progressives will not let her campaign for re-election without addressing this state’s acute need for tax reform. Politicians don’t want to touch it. Support for tax reform has to come from the Democratic Party grass roots, or it won’t come from anywhere.
Farley Mowat and White Rose –
The reason the R.s dumped Mr.Curtis so fast was rank true blue homophobia, make no mistake.
Any time you are on the same side with the religious far right wing, take a look at your suppositions.
I have no sympathy for Curtis or Craig, but their political failures is one thing, rank homophobia to attack them and gay male sexuality in general is another.
The closet is not a new thing and will not die out soon. Neither is it shameful for any male anywhere, anytime to seek male-male erotica. Go to a big city, rent a room, get it on. Tens of thousands of that old true and tired way to hook up every night.
And I sure don’t want all the straight men to become expert voices on the topic to the exclusion of gay men.
Yes, I am a flaming gay man.
By the way, Jim West from Spokane is dead. Villifying the dead is a bit silly.
to the rabbit:
Actually, the purpose of these elections IS NOT for approval of taxes over the levy lid (as you wrongly stated @13). The levy lid was put in place specifically to guard against increases above a certain percentage. So anything on the ballot is still under the levy lid (the reason why some districts have higher lids is due to the fact that they were grandfathered in when the levy lid was adopted, but have also been capped at a certain percentage). Changing that, specifically, is a different issue that would require a different vote than what we’re talking about here.
Additionally, most of these levy measures are on the ballot for re-approval, meaning that voters are being asked to approve the level of funding that they had previously approved. If these levies fail, it doesn’t mean that extra funding was blocked, it means that funding was actually cut, forcing school districts to make very tough choices about whether or not to buy new textbooks, increasing class sizes (WA ranks 47th in the nation in class size by they way), or eliminating art and music programs.
No income tax in Washington: if you want a state income tax, send the Dept. of Revenue some money and ease your conscience. They’ll be happy to cash your check. I’ll stick with the taxes we have before a state income tax. Never, never, ever!!
Curtis told him that “his wife knew he liked men when they got married, but she was not into that, so he only did that when he was out of town,” the detective wrote in his report.