If 695 is unconstitutional, will 722 or 745 be null and void even if they pass?

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

How are 722 and 745 tied to the now defunct 695? Can lawmakers now take a week off in the islands to think up new taxes to screw us with? I am not a lawyer on constitutional law. Does anyone have an opinion? Please respond.

-- Rolex Hoffmann (rolex@innw.net), October 26, 2000

Answers

they are indeed very similar to 695. The most obvious ways is that 722 has 2 clear items and it amends state law by referring to the law and not clearly stating the law. 745 amends the state law by referring to the law and not clearly stating the law. They both have unconstitutional items when it comes to repealing taxes. I'm not an expert on taxes, but you can read the justices rulings and clearly see what I mean.

I don't think lawmakers will think of new ways to screw us. I do hope they come up with a way to clear up the whole direct democracy issue associated with initiatives. I also hope they can come up with a way to better screen these poorly writen initiatives before they waste all of our time and money waiting for the courts to decide on their fate. It's too bad a watch salesman can be a good speaker and get so many people to follow him and believe he's a tax expert and a transportation planner, but I guess when you're frustrated you'll believe almost anything.

-- samm smith (ssmith@smith.net), October 27, 2000.


The real problem is not that these initiatives are unconstitutional. The problem is that it takes a year to get the decision, the initiative process makes it relatively easy to pass a poorly drafted proposal, and government is tied up in uncertainty until the decision is issued. I agree some process to screen initiatives sounds like a good idea, but the problem of prior restraint of the legislative process by the courts makes that unlikely. The courts will not accept the role of issuing a ruling on any proposal before it becomes law.

The legislature deals with hundreds, even thousands, of bills every year; and only a small percentage become law. Those that pass have been through hearings, criticism by the opposition parties the public and the involved interest groups, and analysis by the legislative lawyers. Even at that, they sometimes pass laws later found to be unconstitutional. Initiatives have none of that analysis and comment before they are circulated as a petition. It is no surprise that initiatives produce more mistakes. That is at least part of the reason why the legislative process is the better way to create law, why a representative democracy works better than a direct democracy, and why a representative democracy is mandated at both the federal and state level by our constitutions.

The November election is on top of the budget process of all local governments. In 1999, I-695 upset and confused budgeting. If 722 passes it will do that again this year. Eyman has stated he will be back again next year with another version of the 695 proposal, which could do the same thing in 2001. I have an suggestion:

Laws passed by the Legislature are not effective until several days after the end of the legislative session, so that any conflicts can be addressed and resolved. It would take a constitutional amendment, but what about providing that initiatives are not effective until that same date after the next regular session of the Legislature? Any really big problems can be addressed during the session, and with a super majority can be adjusted to meet constitutional and practical requirements. It would also move the date to after the immediate budget cycle, and give everyone time to plan for the effects and organize implementation. It would also give some time for any constitutional challenges to be addressed.

As things stand, the initiative process causes more problems than it is worth.

-- dbvz (dbvz@hotmail.com), October 29, 2000.


I don't think the constitutionality of I-722 and I-745 are relevant. I-695 was found unconstitutional, but my family is now saving several hundreds of dollars a year. Not bad for an unconstitutional initiative.

In the worst case scenario, initiatives send a message to the politicians. In the best case scenario, they right wrongs.

I-722 will send a message to the politicians that they need to spend our money more wisely. There's no reason to raise to raise fees and taxes, when government agencies are swimming in surpluses. There are probably BILLIONS of EXCESS dollars in the state pension funds, alone.

Likewise, I-745 sends a strong message in support of the privatization of transit, coupled with society investing in the HOV system and car-carrying ferries. If you believe that light rail is a better investment than HOV lanes, then vote against I-745. If you believe Sound Transit should be privatized, then vote for I-745.

-- Matthew M. Warren (mattinsky@msn.com), October 30, 2000.


The message is still sent but some of the problems are avoided, if the initiatives are not effective for about 6 months until after the Legislature meets.

-- dbvz (dbvz@hotmail.com), October 31, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ