darin
11-07-2007, 02:13 PM
So far - "the People" seem to have made most of the right decisions. Here are the BIG choices:
Initiative 960
This measure would require either a two-thirds vote in each house of the legislature or voter approval for all tax increases. New or increased fees would require prior legislative approval. An advisory vote would be required on any new or increased taxes enacted by the legislature without voter approval. The office of financial management would be required to publish cost information and information regarding legislators’ voting records on bills imposing or increasing taxes or fees.
YES: 52% - NO: 48%
R-67
Under our current law, there is no penalty for insurance companies that do not deal honestly with consumers. Unfortunately, some bad companies abuse the system by intentionally delaying or denying payment of legitimate claims.
If an insurance company unfairly denies a legitimate claim, your only recourse is to sue. But if you win, the only thing they have to pay is the amount of the original claim. Referendum 67 creates an incentive to treat legitimate claims fairly by allowing the court to assess penalties if an insurance company illegally denies or delays payment of a legitimate claim.
Referendum 67 would help to ensure that the insurance industry honor their commitments to treat all policyholders honestly by making it against the law to unreasonably delay or deny legitimate claims.
Referendum 67 covers claims related to homeowner’s insurance, auto insurance, long-term care insurance, property insurance and small business insurance.
YES: 57% - NO: 43%
HJR 4204
Under our current law, School Levies need a supermajority (60%) to pass. Enacting 4204, that would change to a simple majorty (50% +1). This would allow school districts to more-easily raise property and other taxes
REJECTED: 52% - APPROVED: 48%
SJR 8206
...The principles outlined in SJR 8206 create a protected Budget Stabilization Account to help the state weather tough economic times. SJR 8206 was adopted in the Senate by a vote of 45-3 and in the House 74-23 this past legislative session. To become part of the constitution, the measure must now be approved by voters.
Here is how the Budget Stabilization Account would work. Each fiscal year, one percent of general state revenues would be deposited into the account. General state revenues are different than General Fund revenues and are specifically defined in the constitution as being all state revenues that are not dedicated to a particular purpose.
Additional money can be placed in the account at any time. The Legislature could only spend money from the account with a three-fifths vote unless the following scenarios occur:
1. Forecasted state employment growth is less than one percent; or;
2. The Governor declares an emergency set forth in a separate piece of legislation adopted by the Legislature that is limited to a catastrophic event requiring government action to protect life or public safety. The funds withdrawn are restricted to address the emergency declared.
These two circumstances are the only ones that permit the legislature to spend money from the Budget Stabilization Account with a simple-majority vote. Since these requirements would be constitutional, they could not be avoided for the sake of short-term political expediency.
Since 1960, state employment growth has been less than one percent only ten times, in 1961, 1964, 1970, 1971, 1981, 1982, 1983, 2002, 2003 and 2004.
YES: 68% - NO: 32%
Proposition 1
Prop 1 contains the biggest local tax increase anywhere in America, ever.
Prop 1 more than doubles--even triples--the average car license tab tax. Doubles the Sound Transit portion of the regressive local sales tax. And taxes you and your family---forever.
The tax bite is staggering: $157 billion over the next 50 years. That averages almost $2,000 per year for most households for the next half century. By comparison, voters said no to the Monorail when its understated taxes ballooned to $11 billion.
This is not a balanced plan. Only 10% funds roads. Just a fraction of that goes toward fixing dangerous bridges and crumbling freeways. Nearly 90% funds Sound Transit – which moves about 1% of all trips – while everyone else is stuck in even worse gridlock. With or without this plan, traffic congestion will still double by 2028 according to Sound Transit’s own documentation.
In 1996, Sound Transit promised completion of its Ten-Year Plan within budget by 2006. So what happened? Billions in cost overruns, 10 years behind schedule, transit use declining as a percentage of travel, traffic increasing, and global warming worsening.
Keep in mind our state JUST approved a 10-cents-per-gallon gas tax increase to cover transportation, etc.
YES: 44% - NO: 56%
Initiative 960
This measure would require either a two-thirds vote in each house of the legislature or voter approval for all tax increases. New or increased fees would require prior legislative approval. An advisory vote would be required on any new or increased taxes enacted by the legislature without voter approval. The office of financial management would be required to publish cost information and information regarding legislators’ voting records on bills imposing or increasing taxes or fees.
YES: 52% - NO: 48%
R-67
Under our current law, there is no penalty for insurance companies that do not deal honestly with consumers. Unfortunately, some bad companies abuse the system by intentionally delaying or denying payment of legitimate claims.
If an insurance company unfairly denies a legitimate claim, your only recourse is to sue. But if you win, the only thing they have to pay is the amount of the original claim. Referendum 67 creates an incentive to treat legitimate claims fairly by allowing the court to assess penalties if an insurance company illegally denies or delays payment of a legitimate claim.
Referendum 67 would help to ensure that the insurance industry honor their commitments to treat all policyholders honestly by making it against the law to unreasonably delay or deny legitimate claims.
Referendum 67 covers claims related to homeowner’s insurance, auto insurance, long-term care insurance, property insurance and small business insurance.
YES: 57% - NO: 43%
HJR 4204
Under our current law, School Levies need a supermajority (60%) to pass. Enacting 4204, that would change to a simple majorty (50% +1). This would allow school districts to more-easily raise property and other taxes
REJECTED: 52% - APPROVED: 48%
SJR 8206
...The principles outlined in SJR 8206 create a protected Budget Stabilization Account to help the state weather tough economic times. SJR 8206 was adopted in the Senate by a vote of 45-3 and in the House 74-23 this past legislative session. To become part of the constitution, the measure must now be approved by voters.
Here is how the Budget Stabilization Account would work. Each fiscal year, one percent of general state revenues would be deposited into the account. General state revenues are different than General Fund revenues and are specifically defined in the constitution as being all state revenues that are not dedicated to a particular purpose.
Additional money can be placed in the account at any time. The Legislature could only spend money from the account with a three-fifths vote unless the following scenarios occur:
1. Forecasted state employment growth is less than one percent; or;
2. The Governor declares an emergency set forth in a separate piece of legislation adopted by the Legislature that is limited to a catastrophic event requiring government action to protect life or public safety. The funds withdrawn are restricted to address the emergency declared.
These two circumstances are the only ones that permit the legislature to spend money from the Budget Stabilization Account with a simple-majority vote. Since these requirements would be constitutional, they could not be avoided for the sake of short-term political expediency.
Since 1960, state employment growth has been less than one percent only ten times, in 1961, 1964, 1970, 1971, 1981, 1982, 1983, 2002, 2003 and 2004.
YES: 68% - NO: 32%
Proposition 1
Prop 1 contains the biggest local tax increase anywhere in America, ever.
Prop 1 more than doubles--even triples--the average car license tab tax. Doubles the Sound Transit portion of the regressive local sales tax. And taxes you and your family---forever.
The tax bite is staggering: $157 billion over the next 50 years. That averages almost $2,000 per year for most households for the next half century. By comparison, voters said no to the Monorail when its understated taxes ballooned to $11 billion.
This is not a balanced plan. Only 10% funds roads. Just a fraction of that goes toward fixing dangerous bridges and crumbling freeways. Nearly 90% funds Sound Transit – which moves about 1% of all trips – while everyone else is stuck in even worse gridlock. With or without this plan, traffic congestion will still double by 2028 according to Sound Transit’s own documentation.
In 1996, Sound Transit promised completion of its Ten-Year Plan within budget by 2006. So what happened? Billions in cost overruns, 10 years behind schedule, transit use declining as a percentage of travel, traffic increasing, and global warming worsening.
Keep in mind our state JUST approved a 10-cents-per-gallon gas tax increase to cover transportation, etc.
YES: 44% - NO: 56%