powered by Bonneville Seattle - News Talk 97.3 KIRO FM and 770 KTTH: The Truth

Updated Nov 3, 2009 - 1:11 pm

I-1033 would slap cap on gov't growth

Comments   |   Print this   |   E-mail this   |  
By CURT WOODWARD
Associated Press Writer

Anti-tax activist Tim Eyman awaited the voters' verdict Tuesday on his Initiative 1033, which would limit government revenue, cut property taxes and require voters to approve any tax hikes.

A wide coalition of opponents, including elected officials, labor unions and big business, is hoping it will fail. They say the government is already struggling with recession-fueled drop-offs in tax revenue.

Initiative 1033 borrows from earlier smaller-government measures enacted here and in other states.

Its central feature is a cap on revenue. If enacted, I-1033 would allow the main checking accounts of city, county and state governments to grow only fast enough to match price inflation and population growth.

Any revenue collected above the cap would automatically flow into a separate account, which would replace property tax revenue in the following year.

Governments could collect revenue above the limit only by getting voter approval for new taxes.

Some sources of income would be exempt from the cap, including the state's constitutionally protected Rainy Day Fund and some federal money to the state.

An estimate from the state Office of Financial Management says I-1033 could divert nearly $6 billion away from the state general fund over six years. Cities would lose about $2 billion during that stretch, and counties would lose close to $700 million.

Eyman says I-1033 establishes needed restrictions to keep government spending growth at reasonable levels as the state pulls out of recession. Without such safeguards, he argues, politicians are too apt to match spikes in revenue with unsustainable increases in spending.

Opponents, however, argue that this is exactly the wrong time to put government on a strict diet. Services are being cut at all levels because of big drops in revenue tied to the slow economy, and the opposition says Eyman's measure would lock in a "permanent recession."

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


Comments (8)
  • Add A Comment

  • len98531 wrote...
    To all you whiners
    maybe more people would take a government or union official more seriously if they would announce a pay and benifits cut for themselves, if they Really believed it was 'for the childeren...'
  • slandc wrote...
    restrictions
    So the fact that government employees were furloughed wasn't enough for you? That's not a real cut? Now you want to cut them and then only allow for raises that match price inflation? Are you willing to only get inflation tied raises at your employer? What you'll end up seeing is that people will not stay at their positions long enough to really become proficient...and services will suffer even more than they do. I'm all for budget constraints but this one is draconian and coming at the wrong time.
  • Rick (4) wrote...
    Our elected officials leave no choice, but...
    to cap revenue collected. They failed to cut wasteful spending, so now we will help them out with this cap. IMO there are too many government employees in this state, that do absolutly nothing to earn a paycheck. Plus, get rid of that mandatory art program completely.
  • len98531 wrote...
    how about...
    if i ran my personal budget like the elected officials do theirs , id be homeless...if i conducted business where i work the way the government does, id be unemployed, and most likely in jail.... yet the elected officials seem to be rewarded for the way they overspend , and i include the governor, as she does have a veto pen somewhere
  • Irish Rover wrote...
    And this is bad because .....
    What part of government fiscal responsibility don't you like ? Until our society adopts a policy and mindset of "if you can't afford it, don't buy it", we will continue to be awash in needless debt. The old addage of "Use it up, wear it out, do with what you got, or do without!" needs to be applied to all levels of our society if we are to survive the financial crisis our elected leaders have dumped on our nation's children for generations to come.
  • jacinto wrote...
    As long as....
    WA continues to blow hundreds of millions of taxpayer $ to run liqour stores that could be eliminated entirely with a simple shift to grocery store sales, it is pretty clear that GREGOIRE HAS NO INTEREST IN FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY! WE MUST VOTE YES ON I-1033!!!
  • kidjon wrote...
    california here we come
    Washington will be in the same financial straits as California is in now. The idiotic voters of this State are too blame.
  • Judy L wrote...
    slandc: Where do YOU work?
    I'd love to have inflation-related raises. At least I'd get one. My last raise was so long ago I can't remember; I've been on my job for over 23 years and the economy has had an extreme effect on our business. At this point, I'm grateful I still HAVE a job. What is wrong with us as taxpayers trying to exercise budgetary restraint over the people we elect to spend our tax money?!? I can only spend what I receive; the government should exercise the same restraint!


More headlines...





Home   |   Contact Us   |   Terms of Use   |   Privacy Statement   |   Copyright Infringement   |   Employment   |   EEO Public File Report   |   Contest Rules   |   Set Us as Your Home Page   |   RSS
Copyright © 2009 Bonneville International. All rights reserved.