Everybody keeps saying there will be suits. Mostly the anti-695'ers. But if somebody is going to sue, what would they sue under?

I-601 took that same tax and spend policy and placed it on it's ear. Representative government had their rights taken away then as it will do in I-695. There were no suits against I-601. So what makes you think any suits will be filed.

The initiative process has the right to take away taxing authority from government, just as it has the right to take away their spending authority as 601 did.

Business or corporations can't sue the state or voters for the loss of business. That's just like Microsoft suing IBM over loss of business because IBM will not use Windows NT.

Bus drivers, cops, and the like can't sue. They can't sue an employer for laying them off because they can't afford to pay them.

Can somebody post here some concrete issues that can bring a suit against I-605 if it passes? Please, real stuff, not has beens or mabeys.

-- Bill Sheehan (wsheehan@billsheehan.com), October 31, 1999

Answers

The law suits will be generated by the section of the initiative that states:

Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 43.135 RCW to read as follows: (1) Any tax increase imposed by the state shall require voter approval. (2) For the purposes of this section, "tax" includes, but is not necessarily limited to, sales and use taxes, property taxes, business and occupation taxes, excise taxes, fuel taxes, impact fees, license fees, permit fees, and any monetary charge by government.

The Supreme court has long ruled that an amendment to an existing law must be explicit. That is, the exact chapter and section of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) must be included in the legislation (an Initiative is legislation by a vote of the people). RCW's can not be amended by a mere reference - such as "any tax increase imposed..." It's a fine legal point, I know. It will be interesting to see how the (elected) Court will rule if the Initiative is challenged.

-- Tom King (---@---.---), October 31, 1999.

Bill:

Regarding the same section, courts have also ruled that taxes and fees are not the same thing; and 695 seeks to regulate bothe taxes and fees in the same initiative. That can also be a constitutional problem.

Many suits may be filed to clarify how section 2 should be interpreted regarding the different tax and fee situations being used by state and local government. Does it apply to housing authority rents? Does the "monetary increase" language prohibit the application of the property tax rate to new construction value, resulting in an increase in property tax revenue? Does the "monetary increase" language apply to minor items like copy charges, and the driver license fee? The initiative does not tell us, but most people expect that the "rate" language applies to the sales tax but not the "monetary increase" language; since it is a rate based tax. How are those distinctions made? Is the property tax a rate based tax, or a monetary amount based tax?

Read some of the posts by Bob Dick for more information on possible legal challenges. You can also look at www.foster.com for a major law firm perspective on some of the legal issues to be resolved if the initiative is approved. Several other lawyers have written on possible problems.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), October 31, 1999.

d-

This is quite interesting. for comparison, I'd refer you to Referendum 47 (http://www.secstate.wa.gov/vote97/vp97gen.pdf) If you read through its 20+ pages, it covers,what to me at least, would be a large array of issues from how to assess value, what to pay those assessing values, limitations on taxes that can be assessed, what to do with ythe ytaxes collected, etc., etc., etc., If this passed constitutional muster for being a bill with a single subject, it's difficult to believe that I-695 won't. It is INFINITELY more focused then referendum 47 which was a BILL and clearly subject to the constitution's restrictions on single subject, as opposed to initiatives which arguably are not. Re-read 47, and tell me which one you believe truly is most clearly related to a single issue.

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), November 01, 1999.

Actually, I thought 601 did wind up in the courts, and was successfully upheld. Oh well. 695 will end up in court, if for no other reason than politics, let alone any real constitutional issues. It's just 'too dangerous' to let the people make tax decisions for themselves.

-- Paul Oss (jnaut@earthlink.net), November 01, 1999.

Craig:

I noted all the points you mentioned were about how to regulate the tax. If it is all about a tax, it could be one subject. The length actually works against 695. It is so short and simplistic, it does not make clear many of the "how to" questions that need to be answered. It may even be considered unconstitutionally vague, because of the several different interpretations that can be applied to section 2 in particular. The court may find that a reasonable voter (and several lawyers) could not know what they are voting on tomorrow, because the language is unclear on some important points.

I'm not saying these challenges will necessarily win approval, but they will be argued by lawyers who have a lot more knowledge of this than I do. I have seen some of the analysis and case citations, and they sound like they know what they are talking about.

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), November 01, 1999.