Do you think we are stupid? We have had lawyers review

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

Just watched Tim on 11 pm news. I will always remember his statement about "being stupid" and as I watched, it dawned on me that he and his group actually were. The initiative was full of holes but Tim and his "snake oil" worked wonders on the voters. In a few years we will be paying taxes again, but in other ways than the MVET.

-- Bob Wheeler (pavlichwheeler@uswest.net), March 15, 2000

Answers

If you read the ruling, there are several instances where the judge mentions that had the campaign's attorneys followed the reasonings of the AG's office, then several aspects of the initiative might have passed muster. Instead, they argued several points that ended up PROVING that the initiative violated the constitution.

Boy those people who donated money to the 695 legal defense fund sure got their money's worth.

I wonder if the same legal dream team that drafted 695 wrote the other two initiatives....

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), March 15, 2000.


Patrick writes, in part:

"I wonder if the same legal dream team that drafted 695 wrote the other two initiatives.... "

One can only hope.

Just when I was beginning to like Mr. Eyeman, he pulls that stunt in the court room and destoyed his credibility. In one act, he has lost my support.

-- Curious George (---@---.---), March 15, 2000.


Why are you upset because he tore up the sign? His frustration with the tax and spend "representatives" in Olympia and the reclaiming of the people's power over them, all gone with the stroke of a pen, was shown in this small act. The problem with people today, and the media, is that anyone that shows any emotion isn't considered "professional". Everyone has to play "cool-hand-Luke" or else be labeled a fanatic.

Right on to Tim for tearing it up. Too bad he couldn't have gotten away with doing more. Must've been tough sitting there listening to Judge Alsdick ramble on in his pious manner. That Judge deserves to lose his job, which he will do in the next election.

-- Martin Yeager (myeager10@aol.com), March 15, 2000.


Martin, by the same token why should Tim be so frustrated? This is going to have expedited review and was going to be reviewed by the Supreme Court no matter which way the judge ruled. My list of possible explanations is this: (1) it was really just a stunt by a demagogue who wants to make a favorable impression on every knee- jerk, anti-tax reactionary for future political reasons, or (2) he was actually frustrated because there isn't really any good response to Judge Alsdorf's legal analysis. In fact, Judge Alsdorf's decision is correct and it will be affirmed by the Supreme Court--I'm sure Tim's own people know that.

-- Howard Morrill (morrill@bundymorrill.com), March 15, 2000.

And it just doesn't matter, because the MVET is gone and the voter approval is on the agenda, and likely to be approved by the legislature, if only in a diluted form, before the general election. And the anti-tax base is energized. And the special interest groups are spending time and money, while seeing their tax revenues go down in any event. Anybody who believes that Eyeman lost is deluding themself. He won less than complete victory. The pro-tax forces lost.

-- Mikey (m_alworth@olympusnet.com), March 16, 2000.


To follow up on Howard's comments about Tim's "frustration" there was this funny item in the News Tribune:

"Minutes before a King County judge deemed Initiative 695 unconstitutional Tuesday, the car-tax cut's sponsor, Tim Eyman, said he wasn't nervous about winning or losing.

"It's just a matter of who appeals," Eyman shrugged, noting the Washington State Supreme Court ultimately will decide the fate of his initiative.

But then Superior Court Judge Robert Alsdorf threw out I-695.

The moment the judge adjourned the court, Eyman's philosophical attitude got elbowed aside by apparent outrage.

Grim-faced, Eyman held up one of his I-695 campaign signs, slowly ripped it to pieces and tossed the scraps on the courtroom floor. News cameras crowded to record the moment."

Can you say publicity stunt? I hear Tim is now out stoking the troops about how 695 is so obviously constitutional. Of course he's not offering any explanation as to WHY it's so obvious. That would require him to come back to reality.

-- Patrick (patrick1142@yahoo.com), March 16, 2000.


"Can you say publicity stunt? I hear Tim is now out stoking the troops about how 695 is so obviously constitutional. Of course he's not offering any explanation as to WHY it's so obvious. That would require him to come back to reality. "

But he IS rallying the troops and mobilizing his base. That helps him get the two additional initiatives on the ballot and keeps the pressure on the politicians. It doesn't matter if it's legitimate pique, or merely theater, he's getting his desired result. As opposed to the transit union that paid their money to bring the case, and will pay MORE when it goes to the supreme court, for the purpose of restoring the MVET, and that's NOT going to happen because Eyman has out-flanked them politically and even the Governor and Sid Snyder say there ain't no way the MVET is coming back, and Locke's even waffling on voter approval (and HOV lanes, among other things).

And the REALITY is this; If you haven't figured out yet that he's winning the (political)war, notwithstanding losing the (legal) battle, you aren't paying attention, IMHO.

the craigster

-- Craig Carson (craigcar@crosswinds.net), March 16, 2000.


"Can you say publicity stunt? I hear Tim is now out stoking the troops about how 695 is so"

"Stoking the troops" means something is hot. Tim's initiatives are not hot anymore. As paid signature solicitor's arm themselves with pens and head to the malls, ferries, streetcorners, etc., people now ask "is this Tim's other "unconstitutional" initiative? No thanks, I may agree, but the courts will find it flawed. it will be thrown out by the courts.

-- Bob (pavlichwheeler@uswest.net), March 17, 2000.


""Stoking the troops" means something is hot. Tim's initiatives are not hot anymore. As paid signature solicitor's arm themselves with pens and head to the malls, ferries, streetcorners, etc., people now ask "is this Tim's other "unconstitutional" initiative? No thanks, I may agree, but the courts will find it flawed. it will be thrown out by the courts. "

OK, Bob. Just sit back and ignore them, just like the political establishment did until I-695 qualified for the ballot, then waste your money trying to stop it, and waste more fighting it in the courts, while the AG defends it with YOUR tax dollars, and the politicians leap all over themselves to bring their views in line with the initiatives. Rest easy. Never happened before, will never happen again. Right!

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), March 17, 2000.


Zowie writes "while the AG defends it with YOUR tax dollar"

You know I wondered about their defense of I-695. I see Christine didn't participate in the defense. Wouldn't you put your best on the case, especially after her success against "Big Tobacco". I really wonder about the arguments by the AG's before Judge Alsdorf. Bottom line is the "will of the people" was $30 tabs. They are getting it. I really don't see alot more coming "the peoples" way by our esteemed politicians in the near term or through "grass root" efforts by the Timmy's of the world.

-- Bob (pavlichwheeler@uswest.net), March 22, 2000.



"I really don't see alot more coming "the peoples" way by our esteemed politicians in the near term or through "grass root" efforts by the Timmy's of the world. " I see property tax relief, partial opening of HOV lanes, basically whatever it takes to steal support from Eyman's initiatives and reduce him to a footnote in history. After the mobs have cooled off, the politicians will gradually sneak the taxes back up.

-- (zowie@hotmail.com), March 22, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ