Court weighs constitutionality of state's 2/3 vote tax rule
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - A voter-approved law that makes it more difficult for the Legislature to raise taxes is now in the hands of the Washington Supreme Court, which is working to determine whether the rule is constitutional.
Justices heard arguments Tuesday from education advocates and the state over the law, which requires lawmakers to pass taxes with a two-thirds majority, instead of a simple majority.
Advocates believe the state Constitution says lawmakers can pass taxes with a simple majority. They argue that the voter-approved rule has prevented the state from adequately funding education and other areas of government.
"The impacts from the two-thirds requirement are real and undeniable," said attorney Paul Lawrence. "It's taking off the table legislative options to address the state's most pressing problems."
Washington's solicitor general, Maureen Hart, reminded justices that the measure was approved by a majority of voters. She argued in written briefings that the Constitution provides a minimum for the votes needed to pass laws - a simple majority - but doesn't prohibit rules from going above that.
Justice Tom Chambers responded to that argument by asking whether voters could approve rules requiring a 90 percent vote of lawmakers and the support of Santa Claus to raise taxes.
Voters most recently approved the supermajority rule two years ago, and initiative promoter Tim Eyman is asking the public to renew the measure in November.
Justices also explored whether it was appropriate for them to even rule on the suit. The state argued that education advocates have not demonstrated actual harm from the law and that their claims are based on speculation.
The education groups argued that the matter was of great public interest, so the court should make a call.
The arguments come as the Supreme Court has also told the Legislature that it is not adequately funding education. Observers believe the state needs between $3 billion and $4 billion to fulfill its constitutional promise to fully pay for basic education - and one solution on the table is to increase taxes.
A lower court agreed with their assertion against the supermajority and the state Supreme Court has expedited its consideration of the two-thirds requirement.
Justices heard arguments Tuesday from education advocates and the state over the law, which requires lawmakers to pass taxes with a two-thirds majority, instead of a simple majority.
Advocates believe the state Constitution says lawmakers can pass taxes with a simple majority. They argue that the voter-approved rule has prevented the state from adequately funding education and other areas of government.
"The impacts from the two-thirds requirement are real and undeniable," said attorney Paul Lawrence. "It's taking off the table legislative options to address the state's most pressing problems."
Washington's solicitor general, Maureen Hart, reminded justices that the measure was approved by a majority of voters. She argued in written briefings that the Constitution provides a minimum for the votes needed to pass laws - a simple majority - but doesn't prohibit rules from going above that.
Justice Tom Chambers responded to that argument by asking whether voters could approve rules requiring a 90 percent vote of lawmakers and the support of Santa Claus to raise taxes.
Voters most recently approved the supermajority rule two years ago, and initiative promoter Tim Eyman is asking the public to renew the measure in November.
Justices also explored whether it was appropriate for them to even rule on the suit. The state argued that education advocates have not demonstrated actual harm from the law and that their claims are based on speculation.
The education groups argued that the matter was of great public interest, so the court should make a call.
The arguments come as the Supreme Court has also told the Legislature that it is not adequately funding education. Observers believe the state needs between $3 billion and $4 billion to fulfill its constitutional promise to fully pay for basic education - and one solution on the table is to increase taxes.
A lower court agreed with their assertion against the supermajority and the state Supreme Court has expedited its consideration of the two-thirds requirement.
The first thing we need to do is to get rid of our stupid initiative process. Why are the people making laws? That is not my job. I already have a full time job. I send representatives to Olympia to do the law making for me. I expect them to study the issues and make good sense decisions on what is best for the people and the state, and in that order. We should only be voting on changing the Constitution, and in that case it should be sent to us by our representatives for our two thirds approval. I must go back to my job now, which by the way, does not include reading proposed laws and researching the impact of them!
If we didn't have the tax and spend democraps (spelling intentional) in office and had responsible people in office who can handle the state budget in good times and in bad times, we wouldn't need the 2/3rds law to begin with.
You can lead a liberal to water but you can't make them drink responsibly...
And you can thank a liberal for having that clean water to drink!
I had clean water 55 years ago. NONE of my relatives 100 years ago had problems with dirnking water.
Â
Thank a liberal? That's a pretty big ego ya got there. Care to claim any other ignorant benefits?
Right now the state imbursement rate is over $12,000 per student.  if the average class room has 28 students that means per year $336,000 . So where is all the money going. The tax dollars are being mismanaged !. Do not forget there are many classrooms . Parents are being asked to pay for more after school activities ,why?  There needs to be some accountability here,do performance audits then implement the findings. Which is not done now.Â
Hey Eyman, go back to your hole in the ground and don't come back. You've screwed this state over enough. We're done with you.
 @BluefireJaguar You have to be a progressive Democrat. Just keep raising taxes with no accountability. Money will not solve the education situation. The teachers unions and the federal government need to stop meddling in local affairs.
 @BluefireJaguar I think Eyman is doing a fine job, regardless of how much "he" profits from it. It's his "job". $30 tabs was huge. WA needs to learn how to budget better, not increase taxes to cover their poor budgeting. Maybe it's time for some pension reform, or actually lay some people off.
"Well, if government doesn't do what WE think it ought, let's just throw all these wooden shoes into the works and jam it up real good! That will fix those... &%$$^ 'Liberals'!"
If you dont like your government following the Constitution.. CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION! There are 26 (I think) specific provisions in the Washington Constitution that call for votes other than a simple majority. Those folks did it the RIGHT way and followed the Constitution. If you want to hamstring our governments, like CA did with Prop13. Change the Constitution. But Timmy Eyman and his initiatives have always been struck down as unconstitutional and always will... and will always cost teh state significant monies to reach the same conclusion time after time.
 @EMDF9A Problem is, Timmy I'm-an-idiot has a whole bag full of wooden shoes in the alternative form of paper initiative signature forms. And he seems to like to throw same in enormous quantity into the struggling works of state government. And Republicans PAY him to do all this. Think about that!
@JLS1950 - ah yes, rather than use the law in a legal manner (if you don't like that 2/3's majority is unconstitutional, just go do the hard work and get the constitution changed), you'd rather show wooden shoes where they don't belong. Fascinating.
 @FormerMarineSgt I'm almost wondering if y'all understand the meaning of quotation marks and the concept of critical sarcastic parody...
I blame Timmy I'm-an-idiot.
State Supers should recluse themselves, they are on the State payroll.....if a 2/3 vote is required for them to get a raise.....
Â
The Govt will work with what it gets, tax wise. If it can just demand more, there will never be a need to improve efficiency. Â
Â
 We need to have a Super Majority to raise taxes. If sizeable percentage are freeloaders and welfare cheats, what incentive do they have to keep taxes down?Â
Someone needs to get Tim Eyman a copy of SimCity, so he can see why taxes are necessary to keep the government running. Â And hopefully also so he can see that he really doesn't know anything at all about politics so should stay the hell away from them.
 @CommutingGuy Oblivious.
@CommutingGuy
How timely does your government check arrive?Â
Â
 @CommutingGuy Are you serious? The government gets plenty of money in taxes they just waste it all is the problem.
No doubt this liberal abortion of a court will side with and rule for the state. I mean, why would a liberal court rule on the side of the people whose representatives are supposed to be elected to represent them? "A government for the people by the people" means nothing to liberals. One day liberals are going to push it too far, that day they are going to find out that true social justice, as our founding fathers envisioned it, will be delivered at the business end of a gun. Which is why in their wisdom the founders granted us the right to own and bear arms, not to protect ourselves from a foreign enemy, rather to protect ourselves from an out of control government.
 @ByeByeBarry This is about the law. The issue is what is allowed under our state constitution. I'm in favor of this law, but it's unclear if our constitution allows it. We may need to change it.  Â
WTF?? Why even bother allowing people to vote if they are just going to dispute the will of the people anyway?
Â
What are our votes worth if some greedy lowlifes in government decide they have no merit?
Â
I am sick of being financially raped - Oh yeah, that's right, in a case of" legitimate rape" I won't feel it....
Â
Sick 'em, KARMA!
AND, it is the mandate of the people to change the Constitution when it no longer works. It was not written in stone by immortals, it was written by humans and with the clarity of it's inherent imperfection. We need a State Constitutional amendment, so how about it, all you politicos? can you put your partisan views aside long enough to work together to create meaningful changes that will benefit all of us?
Start a petition, gather signatures and lets get it over with, or plan B, Â remembering that the Parisian "cotillion" of 1791 wasn't that long ago..."Heads up!"
Actually to change the Washington Constitution, YOU cant start a petition. It requires an act of the legislature and THAT act must pass by a 3/4 (I believe) majority and THEN it must be approved by the voters with a similar majority (Its all in the Constitution)
Ah, so we DO live under a facist regime masked by the promise of democracy...
 @Smokin Bear ITG....internet tough guy
@tufa23 @Smokin Bear Bwa-ha-ha-ha... :-)
"education advocates" = Teacher union shills and the Democrat politicians they elect using our tax dollars.
Our state constitution  specifically calls out education as the most important service the state needs to provide. @LockesChild
 @CommutingGuy And the initiative does not change that obligation (though it isn't much of an obligation when it only covers government schools--private students and home schoolers are truly second class citizens).
Â
And the Constitution requires that education is the most important service, not protecting incompetent teachers, administrative bloat, and money laundering for Democrat politicians.
@CommutingGuy  And the politicos in Olympia have been ignoring that part of the State Constitution for decades but now that they want to throw out the voter approved bill they drag it out and dust it off. Real impressive.
Nothing wrong with a 2/3 majority to increase taxes, after all look at the idiots the voters keep sending back time after time, need some kind of a fail safe system to save the taxpayer..
 @Windowseat just like the wapo says today.... the tenth, & final, stage of political denial: blame the voters....!
It's pretty apparent the some of the posters here haven't lived here that long.
This issue has been brought up time and time again. Talk about beating a horse to death...
Â
Much like the SCotUS, ya just drool at the matter of getting a majority so ya can trash the Constitution in its entirety.
Â
Â
 @bobalouie exactly. It is just paper and if those in power will not enforce it then the constitution becomes as useful as the constitution of the USSR.
This just shows how damn screwed up this state is. The people make a loud statement, and they challenge that! Since they clearly didn't hear us then, now it's time to speak the language they have to understand, voting them Democraps out!!! You people need to start paying attention to who you're voting for!
If they find it unconstitutional and you vote a Democrat you will be voting for huge tax increases..because that's all they know tax and spend... it's how we got to where we're at now isn't it..
People keep forgetting that the US is not a democracy, its a constitutional republic. It would be nice if it was a democracy so that the people would get a little bit of say in how this country is run but thats never going to happen. Just pay all your taxes like good little slaves because they are enforced at gun point.
The measure has already been ruled on. It's valid.
The problem is the liberals can't accept the fact, and keep wanting to impose the minority beliefs on the majority.
Â
Get over it! Quit WASTING taxpayers money on something that's LEGAL!
Â
This has already been challenged AND upheld. What part don't you understand?
 @bobalouie the reason it's before the supreme court is that it was ruled invalid by a lower court, and then appealed, no? Kinda like the last line in the article indicates...
What all of you grousing about "We've passed this before" and "The voters have spoken" unfortunately miss the point. The state Constitution states that acts of the legislature are passed by a simple majority. (50% +1) This (and the other Timmy initiatives doing the same thing) are unconstitutional because it places a requirement on the legislature that the Constitution says cant be there. It is for this reason I am certain the WASC will rule it unconstitutional (AGAIN like Timmys earlier attempts)
Â
If you want this to happen, you need to change the Constitution. An initiative or referendum cannot supercede the Constitution, they can only be enacted if they meet the Constitutional requirements. Now... before the Right Wing folks go off half-cocked and want to do that.. Remember what a RWNJ named Howard Jarvis did in California with Proposition 13. Its not pretty and NO their problems arent caused by their immigrants or the unions or other liberal causes.
Â
Also, the folks spouting yesterday about how much money the state can save by eliminating services for illegals... I'd like to see some hard variafiable data that shows there is any substantial savings to that proposal and not the opposite effect and increased costs in Law Enforcement, the courts, etc. I dont think you can find what you are looking for.
 @EMDF9A Oh goodie, tax & revenue. The one and only time the left comes out in defense of a Constitution that they spend the rest of their time pissing on LOL.
According to the left wing rag Seattle Times the State estimates they blow about $300 million on Illegal immigrants and state programs. Just a drop in the bucket for the left I know, if it makes you feel better I'm sure the estimate is on the low side.
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2014677745_immigrants04m.html
Â
"Everyone deserves access to health care, to services, to have a decent life," she said. "It's the humane thing to do. It's the morally right thing to do."
Â
Sure!! As long as we force someone else to pay for it!!
Â
"While Zarelli questions a lot of state spending on services for illegal immigrants, he said he would not cut funding for kidney dialysis and cancer treatment:"
"That's something you shouldn't pull the plug on. It would be inhumane.
Â
What is inhumane is left wing polices that make people already here or encourage people to come to this country to become so dependent on government in the first place with the sole purpose of keeping the left in power. Shameful to say the least.
The Voters have spoken.... I guess that means nothing in this state!
 @Rod And disregard the Constitution?
2/3 seems reasonable to me. Tired of taxes.