Tax and spend state democrats get it right between the eyes: State Supreme Court rules for the People

.
The Mayor of the Senate Democrat Munchkin City, Lisa Brown (D-3) was handed her head on a platter today by the State Supreme Court when they refused to overturn I-960, passed in 2007 to limit the massive tax increases democrats love to inflict.

Now, a super-majority is required to jack up our taxes, and since the democrats have spent this state into at least an $8.3 billion deficit, there is no doubt that we're desperately going to need it, since the concept of cutting spending is simply beyond the technical grasp of most democrats generally, and democrat legilsators specifically. This is the money quote:

Many lawmakers, particularly Democrats, dislike the two-thirds vote requirement's infringement on their powers, and the liquor tax proposal was widely seen as a ploy by Brown to challenge the supermajority law's constitutional footing.

God forbid that there should be ANY restraint, required by the voters or otherwise, that would keep our resident socialists from jumping on the Obama Moron Wagon and join wityh him in his efforts to turn us into a socialist utopia.

Idaho looks better all the time.

Originally published Thursday, March 5, 2009 at 12:55 PM

Comments (0) E-mail article Print view

WA Supreme Court tosses tax limits case

The state Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed a case brought by a top Senate Democrat seeking to throw out voter-approved laws requiring a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to raise taxes.

By RACHEL LA CORTE

Associated Press Writer

OLYMPIA, Wash. —

The state Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed a case brought by a top Senate Democrat seeking to throw out voter-approved laws requiring a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to raise taxes.

The court ruled Thursday that the court cannot interfere in an internal legislative process.

The court, led by Justice Mary Fairhurst, said the challenge brought by Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, was a political question not to be answered by the courts.

"Intervention of this court into an intrahouse dispute over a parliamentary ruling to compel the president of the senate to perform a discretionary duty would be a grave violation of separation of powers," Fairhurst wrote.

Brown had argued that Washington's "supermajority" tax-vote rule is unconstitutional because it effectively alters the state constitution's provision that lawmakers need a simple majority to pass laws.

The supermajority law was passed by initiative, but Brown argued that a constitutional amendment - much more difficult to pass - is needed to alter the Legislature's voting powers.

The two-thirds vote requirements on taxes were approved in 1993's Initiative 601 and broadened in 2007's I-960. In the past, lawmakers have amended and even suspended the two-thirds provision at times.

A majority of the Legislature could amend such an initiative two years after it is passed by voters.

More:

Congratulations to Steve Hammond and his group: State Supreme Court nails Ron Sims' moronic Critical Areas Ordinance

Originally, I'm from King County... which, as it turns out, is a great place to be FROM.

King County Government is a reflection of, say, Portland city government... or the government of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Washington's Vancouver.

In other words, it's a place where the needs or wants or desires of the people get short shrift to the agenda of those unfortunately in power.

In everything from a lying light rail effort, where the closest thing to a Nazi government agency, Sound Transit, lied to the voters as to how much rail for how much money (something like 21 miles for $2.2 Billion, only later to be reduced to 14 miles at $4 Billion... after the vote... a move the Supreme Court allowed) and has admitted that, once built, the light rail system will have absolutely no impact on congestion, making it a waste of billions, to this moronic ordinance that would restrict the amount of a property that a property owner could clear (50 to 65 percent, depending on its size) to massive cost overruns on a sewage treatment plant to... you name it.

Until now.

The Supreme Court put an end to this idiocy on Tuesday when they refused to review the ruling of the State Court of Appeals overturning this monstrous imposition of dictatorial government.

So, congrats to former King County Councilman Steve Hammond and his group, the Citizen's Alliance for Property Rights. Well done!

Comments (52) E-mail article Print view

Big court victory for rural property owners

The state Supreme Court has handed a huge victory to rural property owners in King County who fought a part of the Critical Areas Ordinance package that requires them to keep native vegetation on 50 to 65 percent of their land.

By Keith Ervin

Seattle Times staff reporter

Rural property owners who fought a King County law severely restricting how much land they can clear have won a huge victory.

The state Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to review an appeals-court decision that struck down the law as an improper tax or fee on development. Chief Justice Gerry Alexander signed an order in which he and four other justices unanimously denied the county's petition for review of the Court of Appeals ruling.

The clearing restrictions, part of a package that includes the Critical Areas Ordinance, require rural property owners to keep native vegetation on 50 to 65 percent of their land, depending on its size. They were adopted as a way of protecting streams and wildlife, including the threatened chinook salmon.

Steve Hammond, president of the Citizens' Alliance for Property Rights, said the order "puts the nail in the coffin" of the most controversial element in the critical-areas package.

"I've been saying since 2004, when I was on the [County] Council, this is not the right thing to do," Hammond said of the clearing law. "This is the homeowner having to make a donation to the open-space program. Two-thirds of your property is a pretty significant donation. That's bad.

"The only way I know how to get folks who don't live in the affected area to understand it is to say, 'What if I walked into your bathroom and said you have three fixtures: You can keep one and the other two have to go?' "

More:

Washington State Senate Democrats pass bill to force Washington into the abortion business

Speaks for itself.

For Immediate Release: For Interview Contact:

Senate Democrats pass bill to force Washington into the abortion business

Senate Democrats abuse power by silencing minority voice

OLYMPIA… Today, Senate Democrats shut off debate and passed SB 5629 that eliminates reducing the rate of abortions as a goal of the state’s sex education policies.

“The Democrats cut off debate to keep me from alerting members to the real purpose of the bill, which is to expand state support of abortion,” said Sen. Don Benton, R-Vancouver.

The following Democrats voted to cut off debate: Senators Brown, Berkey, Eide, Franklin, Fraser, Hargrove, Hatfield, Haugen, Hobbs, Jacobsen, Jarrett, Kauffman, Keiser, Kilmer, Kline, Kohl-Welles, Marr, McAuliffe, McDermott, Murray, Oemig, Prentice, Pridemore, Ranker, Regala, Rockefeller, Sheldon, Shin, and Tom.

The measure eliminates as the Department of Health’s current mandate to “reduce the rate of illegitimate births and abortions” and replaces it with, “reduce the rate of unintended pregnancies.”

“If enacted, this would undoubtedly result in an increase in abortions in our state,” warned Holmquist. “Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice, no one wants that result.”

“The goal of sex education used to be to prevent illegitimate births and abortions among teens,” Sen. Val Stevens, R-Arlington, said. “Today the goal is to prevent ‘unintended pregnancies.’ That means abortion. This bill strikes the word ‘teen,’ which allows them to teach sex education to elementary school students. It’s just not right.”

“This bill is part of a concerted nationwide effort by groups like Planned Parenthood to cut off all abstinence education funding and deny that option to parents,” said Sen. Janéa Holmquist, R-Moses Lake. “Abstinence is a part of medically and scientifically proven sex education, and parents want abstinence education to be taught in an effective manner. So how does taking one of the tools out of the ‘sex education toolbox’ help Washington families?”

Senate Bill 5629 passed 33-14 with Republican Senators Becker, Benton, Carrell, Delvin, Hewitt, Holmquist, Honeyford, McCaslin, Morton, Roach, Schoesler, Stevens, Swecker, and Zarelli opposing the bill.

“This bill allows government to ignore the option of abstinence funding and crafting sex ed programs,” said Sen. Dan Swecker, R-Rochester.

In 2007, the Legislature passed a sex education bill that requires every public school that offers sexual health education to assure that it is medically and scientifically accurate. Holmquist rejected Department of Health officials’ claim that the comprehensive sex-ed law puts the state in conflict with the federal abstinence education grant program and makes Washington ineligible to receive funds.

According to federal standards, these funds do not have to be used by schools for abstinence education instruction. Nothing prevents a state with a comprehensive sex education program from requesting and receiving these funds for the benefit of community-based abstinence education programs that do meet federal standards.

“This bill would unnecessarily hurt community-based abstinence programs, like Teen-Aid in Spokane, that are proven to be effective,” said Stevens.

At least 11 states (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Tennessee and Utah) use federal abstinence education funding to distribute funds through community grants or faith-based programs.

In Iowa, for example, the state requires comprehensive sex education to be taught in schools, but still receives funding under Title V, Section 510 because it distributes grants to eight community-based abstinence programs.

“Why shouldn’t Washington do the same?’ said Holmquist. “Why should we reject federal funds, which are Washington’s fair share of the money our taxpayers send to D.C. It just doesn’t make sense to reject these funds, especially at a time when we are facing an 8.3 billion dollar budget deficit.”

According to a 2005 state Department of Health study, teen pregnancy rates peaked in 1989 at about 9.6 percent for girls ages 15-19. During the early and mid-1990s, those rates fell slightly, down to 8.9 percent in 1993 and 7.4 percent in 1997.

However, once abstinence education began being taught in the late 1990s, the state witnessed an even more dramatic decrease in teen pregnancy rates:

• 6.6 percent in 1999;

• 5.9 percent in 2001;

• 5.3 percent in 2003; and

• 5.08 percent in 2005.

Senate Bill 5629 now moves to the House for further consideration. The Senate passed a similar measure last year, but it died in the House.

“Abstinence education has played an undeniably significant role in the reduction of teen pregnancy and abortions in Washington state,” Benton concluded. “If DOH is allowed to completely cut off federal abstinence funding, the will of parents will be undercut and abstinence education will be boiled down to a one sentence footnote.”

—30—

For more information contact Booker Stallworth
at (360) 786-7536 or stallworth.booker@leg.wa.gov.

Please visit our Web site at www.senaterepublicans.wa.gov.

Please visit our Web site at www.SenateRepublicans.wa.gov and follow our updates on Twitter.

There is simply no lie this newspaper will not tell to further their agenda.

The unconscionable lies of the Columbian are part and parcel of why I, and thousands of others refuse to by this colossal waste of space... a crime of the First Amendment's freedom of the press, because they are left to actually LIE in support of their agenda. And that makes them no better then scum

Today's lie?

-- A bill allowing C-Tran to designate a subdistrict for light rail funding advanced out of the House Transportation Committee on Friday. It moved out of the Senate committee earlier.

This would be a significant development for light rail in Vancouver, and it should appeal to all Clark County residents — in or out of the subdistrict — because it would advance the user-pay concept. Taxes would increase only in the area directly affected by light rail, and only residents who are directly served by light rail would vote on such an increase. The increase, likely a small boost in sales tax, would fund maintenance and operation of light rail, which could be built with up to $750 million in federal transit funds.

And here are two more good things about a transit subdistrict: It would be an option, and voters are the ones who decide.

Words fail me... almost.

To call this a lie is to do disservice to the term "lie."

If the people of Clark County, who will be denied the right to vote on this entire project, actually SUPPORTED this garbage, then we wouldn't NEED a "taxing district."

These scumbags would just put the whole thing up for a vote county wide, and then live with the consequences of that vote.

But the little worms supporting this are doing so,not BECAUSE we want it... but because THEY know we don't.

And along comes The Columbian, who lies over and over and over in ways that would make either the Nazi's or even that empty-suited clown Obama blush, and he's lied more in one month than the last 5 presidents put together in 30 years.

From a comment on this utter lie of an editorial:

Clark County residents are appalled at the notion that you can keep us from having a voice on a tax while you force us to pay it. Clark County residents view that as a stain on democracy, a kind of organized crime that would make Al Capone blush with envy. And Clark County residents view those who support such a concept as scum. And yes, that includes this newspaper.

Like the C-Tran scam you were so wild about, "voters" will NOT get to "decide."

SOME voters will make that decision, but not ALL voters. ALL voters will just be given the privilege of being forced to PAY this tax. And that is as despicable now as it was when you supported the last worthless effort.

The demise of this newspaper simply cannot come soon enough. Minister Goebbels could learn a thing or two from you.

It is of note to point out this paragraph:

SOME voters will make that decision, but not ALL voters. ALL voters will just be given the privilege of being forced to PAY this tax. And that is as despicable now as it was when you supported the last worthless effort.

The Columbian knew when they printed this sewage that the lines will be drawn precisely like they were drawn for the C-Trans crime. That is, they will be gerrymandered to maximize revenue, and minimize participation by the very voting public that should be, according to this excuse for a newspaper, glad that this disaster... this mass screwing of the people of this county is taking place.

It's time to organize a boycott of this despicable rag and anyone who advertises in it. This cancer has got to go... for they have long since lost any legitimacy when they are reduced to lying to the public... just like their Nazi and Communist predecessors.




In our view March 4: Three Small Steps
TIF bill, C-Tran subdistrict proposal, Zarelli’s rainy-day refinement all advance
Wednesday, March 4 1:00 a.m.

Tired of the deluge of negative news out of the Legislature? Depressed by all the moaning and groaning about lawmakers gulping and gasping as they wrestle with a projected $8 billion budget shortfall? Ready for some good news from Olympia?

We've got three small pieces of good news, none of which warrants organizing a parade, but when combined are fairly encouraging. These were not milestone achievements in themselves. In fact, the headline might be no more assertive than this: Three good ideas did not die in recent days when they could have. These days in the Legislature, you take your good news whenever you can get it.

Monday was do-or-die day for bills passing out of policy committees. These three measures still need to be brought before both chambers, so a lot of work remains. But here's the good news:

-- The concept of tax increment financing took a step forward as Senate Bill 5045 was advanced by the Ways and Means Committee. Tax increment financing — which exists in 40 other states including Oregon — allows local governments to use projected tax revenue generated by revitalization projects to fund the construction of those projects.

Two good examples are the Riverwest project in downtown Vancouver (C Street and Evergreen Boulevard), which through a similar Local Infrastructure Financing Tool (LIFT) program three years ago secured $12.5 million over 25 years; and Vancouver waterfront redevelopment. The waterfront project is using other funding sources and is too advanced to take advantage of any TIF bill that might be approved by the Legislature this year, but it symbolizes the type of community revitalization that TIF stimulates.

"TIF would be a huge advance for Vancouver and Clark County because it would put us on a level playing field with Oregon, which has a very robust TIF model," Vancouver lobbyist Mark Brown said on Tuesday.

More:

The mind-numbing idiocy of Washington State Government: Now issuing checks for ONE CENT.

.

God help me, I just want to scream.

Earlier, the geniuses at the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services issued 250,000 one dollar checks...

And now, in a move designed to cause heads to explode, they're now issuing checks for one cent.

One.

Fricking.

Cent.

Will this kind of government waste and incompetence EVER end? One person has received, she claims, DOZENS of these checks.

What the hell is WRONG with my government?