finally, it will get challenged

greenspun.com : LUSENET : I-695 Thirty Dollar License Tab Initiative : One Thread

Papers have finally been filed. It seems that many people will be paying more in taxes after 695 than before, and getting fewer services. This is just the thing that gave 695 signature gatherers a hell of a time the first round. that is why 2% tim felt the need to team up with the soon to be found unconstitutional direct democracy.

talk about a waste of money. instead of voting 695 down and forcing tim to write something that looks like some thought was put into it, you all had to embrace crappy legislation. Now many of us are paying higher property taxes and will also have to pay for the trial.

call it vendictive, a "payback" for voting for 695, or lies. the truth still remains that the people who voted for 695 rarely vote and probably will not have the same passion or fire when it comes time to make good on their promise and vote everyone out of office who crossed them. where's the cost saving in voting for a different beurocrat. And, when 695 is found unconstitutional and thrown out, good luck getting the same turnout. why spend the energy when the last time turned out to be a futile effort.

-- theman (theman@wuzzup.com), November 17, 1999

Answers

Who has filed what where when? Which issues has which court been requested to resolve?

-- Bob Dick (bdick@harbornet.com), November 18, 1999.

I have voted in every election since I turned 18 in 1975

-- Dave A (davarc@Premier1.net), November 18, 1999.

themouse--"Papers have finally been filed. It seems that many people will be paying more in taxes after 695 than before, and getting fewer services. This is just the thing that gave 695 signature gatherers a hell of a time the first round. that is why 2% tim felt the need to team up with the soon to be found unconstitutional direct democracy."

The logical fallacy behind this paragraph is that it assumes we wouldn't have paid more taxes for less services w/o I-695. . .chortle.

"talk about a waste of money. instead of voting 695 down and forcing tim to write something that looks like some thought was put into it, you all had to embrace crappy legislation. Now many of us are paying higher property taxes and will also have to pay for the trial."

Hmmm. . .the city of Seattle has raised property taxes to the limit every year since I-601 passed. Put another way, with the exception of property taxes on automobiles, it's logically fallacious to immediately assume higher property taxes have much to do with I-695.

"call it vendictive, a "payback" for voting for 695, or lies. the truth still remains that the people who voted for 695 rarely vote and probably will not have the same passion or fire when it comes time to make good on their promise and vote everyone out of office who crossed them. where's the cost saving in voting for a different beurocrat. And, when 695 is found unconstitutional and thrown out, good luck getting the same turnout. why spend the energy when the last time turned out to be a futile effort."

Interestingly enough, according to a column yesterday in "The Seattle Times," a good number of no voters didn't care about any other issue on the ballot either.

You do point out one thing--"where's the cost saving (sic) in voting for a different beurocrat (sic).(sic)" In general, I agree that it doesn't really matter who is in charge. Everyone in office wants funding for his or her pet programs. Similarly, everyone who works for the government (the bureaucracy) wants to see job security, higher wages, promotions and increased staffing levels (see promotions). Furthermore, every company who receives government contracts wants to see increased capital expenditures.

Is it any wonder that taxpayers get hosed? Conversely, is it a surprise these organizations are disillusioned with the plebiscite provisions of I-695?

-- Brad (knotwell@my-deja.com), November 18, 1999.


What do you know about a direct democracy, we don't even have that today. What we do have is a dictatoryship that doesn't give a damn about anything the people say. Government wrote a tax in lieu of property tax in 1937 specificly to separate those in service for hire(commerce) from those paying property tax on an article called an automobile used as a matter of Right. Ignorants like you come along and talk about everything but the problem of the issue ie "people who voted for 695 rarely vote" You on the otherhand have not a clue what you vote for or against, tell me on what grounds 695 will be thrown out...It will not be over governments power to tax so try another one.

-- Chuck Brezina (antifed@foxinternet.net), November 18, 1999.

Bob, Suit has been filed by the Amalgamated Transit Union local that represents Metro Drivers, as well as those in Clallam and Jefferson Counties. Sounds like a desperate attempt to me.

http://www.msnbc.com/local/king/435706.asp

-- Marsha Schaefer (acorn_nut@hotmail.com), November 18, 1999.



Hmmm, Metro bus drivers, eh? Sounds like greed to me.

-- Paul Oss (jnaut@earthlink.net), November 18, 1999.

""I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious." Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626) English philosopher, essayist, statesman"

-- (mark842@hotmail.com), November 18, 1999.

"Papers have finally been filed". Hmmmm..sounds like this person was hoping that big brother would step on us lowly little insects and show us our proper place in life. Sit down, shut up and don't make waves appears to be the attitude here. And when it's found "unconstitutional"? If you remember, that is why our ancestors came here in the first place, and they made taxation without representation "unconstitutional". And if you want representation, you tell me where every penny goes. Why else do toilet seats for the military cost $500 [rough estimate of course]. Let them go to the general hardware store like the rest of us for a change.

-- Jerry Amos (Orpheus75@hotmail.com), November 19, 1999.

comments from a far right Republican radical of long ago:

"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), November 19, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ