Hear David Boze every weekday at 6am on 770 KTTH
 David Boze
Get David's Books
The Little Red Book of Obamunism: Quotations from The One
It's the must-have election resource of 2012! It's a pocket-sized collection that reveals not just what the president says, but what he means!
Buy it now on Amazon.com
Look inside: Read a sample

Kumar Joe, The Singing Crow
Kumar Joe, the Singing Crow is the tale of a little crow who was born with a heart for music, but not a voice for it.
Buy it now on Amazon.com
Look inside: Read a sample



Unconstitutional! The 2/3rd require to raise taxes was thrown out by the courts BUT...

March 4, 2013 @ 10:53 am (Updated: 3:52 pm - 3/4/13 )

 

eyman

 

The Washington State Supreme Court tossed the supermajority requirement voters imposed on their elected representatives before they could raise taxes. Apparently, it was too great an interference for the people, in whom the power of the state still presides, to put a guiding limit on the constitutional powers exercised by their representatives. It's interesting that the Court finds this to be an overstep, but not their own declaration in the McCleary case in which the court declared the legislature has not made education a "paramount" duty. Now the court presumes to tell the legislature how much money needs to be spent on schools, but the people cannot advise the legislature that they want limits as to how much of their money they collect.

Politically, the decision is likely to help Republicans, who are already working on making the supermajority requirement permanent through other means. Even if that fails, the issue remains a hammer with which they can beat Democrats who don't line up on the tax issues.

One also hopes that it will lead to trouble for 6 of the justices the next time they face voters at the ballot box.

More David Boze

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (19)


  • Add A Comment

  • xplanes wrote...
    It doesn't matter
    March 4, 2013 11:07 am
    When the SCOW threw out over 500 murder convictions that resulted from an assault everyone I talked to were beyond outraged. Next election all the justices up for re-election won I believe. Maybe one didn't but the state of Washington yawned. Time after time we pass these restriction only to see our legislators weasel their way out of them and they too are re-elected time and time again. The voters in this state are too lazy to get past voting R or D and don't follow the issues. I predict (with great accuracy) more of the same....
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • sportsguru wrote...
    I don't know
    March 4, 2013 2:45 pm
    The Dem might have lost me, I never forgave Ronald Reagan for releasing all the mental ill out on the public and right now I am so upset with this ruling. You don't want to know what I feel like doing, let's just leave it at that.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Come on, sports. You know that release of mental patients was withn the full cooperation of the democrats.
    March 4, 2013 3:10 pm
    But as to the no longer supreme court, just HOW do you make case law by citing the Federalist papers ???????
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Sporty
    March 6, 2013 9:37 pm
    What exactly was Ronnie's role in the release of all the crazies? Do some Googling, Sunny-Jim. It was a big issue that involved a lot of factions. It didn't begin with GOVERNOR Reagan and didn't end with him - he was just the most popular guy to sign some of the dotted lines, and thus, the easiest scapegoat.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cigarfan wrote...
    Easy Veto
    March 4, 2013 3:45 pm
    This reminds me of GOP tactics trying to ban same sex marriage, women's reproductive healthcare and immigration reform. Pander to the extreme right wing and have the legislation killed by the house or executive. Political points at the cost of actually doing something.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Havannah Pacifier
    March 6, 2013 11:32 pm
    Ciggy, Queen of the Segue! You manage to drag your pet issues into blogs where no one else would or could. I prostrate myself at you and your Mexican lesbian lover's aborted fetus' mangled feet.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cash wrote...
    i just don't understand
    March 4, 2013 4:03 pm
    Why the democrats can't reign in spending? Why is it so important to spend so much all the freaking time? Yes 101 the right is just as guilty at poor spending habits but not nearly as bad as your hero liberals...
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Drool wrote...
    Well Dave,
    March 4, 2013 6:00 pm
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/escort-says-menendez-prostitution-claims-were-made-up/2013/03/04/31299fe2-8514-11e2-999e-5f8e0410cb9d_story.html
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • blowchowski wrote...
    Unconstitutional!
    March 4, 2013 8:50 pm
    THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, Unconstitutional! Only in libitardistan!!!!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • William Lawn wrote...
    So, a majority of Americans vote to confiscate guns
    March 5, 2013 8:36 am
    You OK with that?

    We in Washington have a Constitution.

    If the people want to amend it, they have the ability to do so.

    Trouble is, Tim can't make a buck on that.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Willy Fescue
    March 6, 2013 10:19 pm
    Unfortunately, the amendment process requires a supermajority of the legislature to approve sending an amendment to the electorate (again). This would be akin to asking 2/3 of the junkies in a rehab clinic to grant more methadone rationing power to said clinic's patrons. Party lines be damned, them politicians love our money.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    blow
    March 5, 2013 9:16 am
    What if we took a vote to once again allow slavery and it passed?Should we honor that vote of the people?How bout we vote on doing away with the 2nd amendment and it passed would you be OK having that RIGHT taken away?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • xplanes wrote...
    So....
    March 5, 2013 10:25 am
    Raising taxes is a right? Hmm. I'd hate to deny our representatives their right to force us to pay more than we want to. That would just be wrong. After all, we send them to Olympia to force us to do things we don't what to, right?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • William Lawn wrote...
    No, raising taxes isn't a right
    March 5, 2013 10:34 am
    The way the legislature conducts business is Constitutionally mandated.

    My dog could write better initiatives than this moron.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    xplanes The point is
    March 5, 2013 2:48 pm
    It should NEVER have gotten on the ballot
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • xplanes wrote...
    really?
    March 5, 2013 3:11 pm
    So, next time do the people run an initiative by the government for approval or just you? Think very carefully about what you said. It kinda sounds a bit Fascist. Any popular idea can get on the ballot. Any popular initiative can become law. Any law can be ruled unconstitutional and any justice can be voted off the court. What part of democracy bothers you so much?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Pair o'dimes wrote...
    That's how it is supposed to work
    March 5, 2013 6:44 pm
    The kind of majority required to amend the U.S.constitution means that the document is not changed easily. No matter how the political winds blow, the U.S. constitution is amended with a super-majority in both houses, and then must be ratified by 3/4 of all the state legislatures. No easy task. On the other hand, the state constitution has been amended 102 times since it was adopted in 1894, so that should prove to be easier. The point is that the founding fathers trusted the people enough to allow changes to the constitution to take place, and if enough people want to end the second amendment, or the 13th, then they may do so. Nonetheless, there isn't any chance of the 13th amendment being revoked, and there are still more than enough citizens that support the 2nd amendment to keep it in effect. Any bets on what the next amendment will be?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Dimes
    March 6, 2013 10:30 pm
    They'll just keep hammering at the 4th and 10th with impunity, but won't call a convention to change it. I'm hoping for the 16th.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Cigarillo wrote...
    @Mess
    March 6, 2013 10:20 pm
    I'd vote for slavery in a heartbeat if it meant that someone else would have to mow that jungle of a lawn out back.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }