John McCroskey Commentary: Not Surprising -- State Income Tax Proposed

Posted

Didn’t take long. First the Democrats and League of Women voters sue us and get a judge to set aside our voter-approved initiative to limit taxing by some insatiable legislators. Now, and for our own good, for the children and in the name of “fairness,” our Democratic treasurer Jim McIntire wants a state income tax. 

And oh how good he made it sound too. 

Some of what he proposed is a good idea and should be done immediately — reduce taxes on and costs to business here so they can be more competitive and create more jobs. 

But history and facts are stubborn and even he knows voters have rejected an income tax several times, largely because we don’t trust politicians to say or do what they promise.

The trust problem is worse today.

He said his idea is fairer, less regressive, more competitive for business, and matches demands for public services driven by economic growth. Hmm … is that what happened in California? They’re so very progressive there and they have a state income tax, property tax, sales tax and are still screaming for more “revenue.”

Passing more taxes is what most elected legislators do no matter where you find them. It’s not their fault really, they are programed that way.

He acknowledged voters haven’t liked the income tax idea in the past, so this time, he promised to make passing new taxes more difficult. Sounds familiar, but voters keep getting sued by Democrats to block them so what’s going to change?

History proves no matter what they say, they will raise taxes and they’ll never have enough of our money to satisfy them. 

For now though, the income tax he proposes would only be 5 percent, and only fund education; but that’s never the end of it. That’s just where they want to start because taxes have always gone up, always will, and it’s always for our own good.

Every time these knuckleheads come up with something like this, I wonder who else has tried it? And did it work as they promised? The answer is always the same: nope. But that doesn’t stop them from trying again. 

Along with imposing an income tax, he promised to reduce property taxes by up to 30 percent, lower state sales tax by 1 percent (wow, a whopping 1 percent), and cut businesses taxes by 33 percent.



Impressive, but it brings me back to the trust factor. When was the last time a government program cost what they promised, did what they said it would, and worked like it should?

Still thinking? Me too; I couldn’t come up with one.

The voter protection leg of his proposal would require the Legislature could (yes, he used “could” not “would”) include a constitutional amendment requiring a 60 percent legislative majority to change sales, income or business taxes.

Of course they could (would) make up other taxes not specifically named in his idea, like carbon tax, emission taxes, global climate change tax, just because tax, and presumably raise those as they wish. Or continue to bury business with costly regulations they can’t help themselves from passing, and claim those don’t require the super majority vote.

But, in the spirit of bipartisan cooperation, here’s what I’d counter with: Pass the constitutional amendment requiring 60 percent majority for any tax, regulation, fee or other boneheaded idea that costs anybody anything first.

Once you have, and presumably survived the popular practice Democratic legislators have of challenging them in court, and they lose, then we can discuss the rest. 

In the meantime, I have a problem with promises being made and kept in Olympia and don’t want an income tax for any reason. 

See, despite some who claim otherwise, I can be reasonable too.

 •••

John McCroskey was Lewis County sheriff from 1995 to 2005. He lives outside Chehalis, and can be contacted at musingsonthemiddlefork@yahoo.com.