Judge strikes down taxes in spending-limit lawsuit

OLYMPIA, Wash. — A Snohomish County judge on Friday struck down a key package of tax increases on liquor and cigarettes, agreeing that lawmakers illegally bypassed voter-approved spending limits to enact the new fees.

The judgment, issued by Superior Court Judge James Allendoerfer in Everett, invalidated an omnibus tax plan that Democratic lawmakers used to balance the two-year state budget during the 2005 session.

…

The court challenge was launched by the Washington Farm Bureau, Washington State Grange, state chapter of the National Federation of Independent Business, the Building Industry Association of Washington and the Evergreen Freedom Foundation.

Their lawsuit targeted the 2005 Legislature’s overhaul of state taxation and spending limits stemming from Initiative 601, which was approved by voters in 1993.

In a verbal ruling from the bench, Allendoerfer affirmed their assertion that lawmakers artificially inflated the state’s spending limit by moving $250 million between various state accounts.

The law rapers makers have been having a grand time gutting the provisions of I-601, and misusing the emergency clause, including the infamous gas tax last year.

For those with short memories, here is some history:

It started in 1993 when the voters passed a tax reform by initiative, I-601.  It put limits on the tax increases,  and also required a 2/3 majority to raise taxes.

Last year the legislature overrode that provision and revoked the 2/3 majority clause.  They filed it as an emergency bill and the governor signed it the same day, without a 90 day waiting period normally required.

Then they were free to pass tax increases with a simple majority vote. 

Why this is important, is that in Washington, any bill passed in the Legislature can have a referendum on the bill or measure placed on the ballot, if they gather signatures equal to 4% of the legal votes cast in the previous governors election, which this year would be around 110k signatures.  But measures passed with an emergency clause, are exempt.  To deal with them you must file an initiative, which requires 8% of voters signatures, or about 220k.

What this has done is make it harder for people to file referendums, because the legislature is invoking the emergency clause at will here are some examples of the 98 emergencies they passed:

• HB 1397 - Adopting California vehicle emissions standards. The new standards do not go into effect until the 2009 car model year. 
• SB 5034 - Amending Initiative 134 to allow unions and corporations to make campaign contributions in excess of original limits adopted. 

Hey….didn’t the State Supreme Court just rule on that?  Against the people, of course….

• HB 2255 - Rolling back some of the unemployment insurance reforms adopted two years ago.HB 1003 - Allowing off-road vehicles (ORVs) to be used on nonhighway roads when authorized and exempting ORVs operating on nonhighway roads from vehicle licensing, equipment and lighting requirements.
• HB 2221 - Exempting canning, preserving, freezing, processing, or dehydrating fresh fruits and vegetables from business and occupation tax.
• SB 5274 - Implementing a state-registered real estate appraiser trainee classification.
• SB 5581 - Creating the Life Science Discovery Fund Authority. The Authority can enter into an agreement with the state to receive tobacco settlement funding starting in 2008.
• SB 5951 - Exempting certain information held by the Horse Racing Commission from public records disclosure.
• SB 5952 - Exempting trams used for transporting people to and from parking lots to horse race facilities from vehicle licensing.

The emergency clause is supposed to be for when the bill adopted is "necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, support of the state government and its existing public institutions."

Right.

Anyway, a group attempted to file a referendum on the I-601 modification provision but were rejected due to the emergency clause, and in the legal challange, the courts upheld this rejection.  When they passed the gas tax increase (along with the tax increases on cigarettes and other stuff), they did so as an emergency as well.  This meant that it was signed immediately and to revoke it required an initiative.

In real terms this whole thing is been a lesson in government out of touch and out of control because it feels it is above reproach to the people.

Thank you Judge Allendoerfer.

Pity it will likely be a short lived victory for the people.  The State Supreme Court has a good history of telling the voters to get stuffed, and likely will reverse this, giving the Legislatures another victory against the people.

And even if, God forbid, they should uphold the ruling in appeal, the legislature doesn’t care.  They will do what they want, when they want to, and Gregoire will sign it as an emergency.  Again.  And again.

But today is the day when a Snohomish Judge told the Legislature to listen to the people.

But they won’t.  They never do.