Opposition To I-912 Keeps Growing

Judging by an article in the Olympian and an opinion piece in the Seattle Times today, Conservative support for I-912 by moderate Republicans seems to be dwindling.

The Olympian reports that moderate Republicans, unhappy with their own party's endorsement of I-912, and the prospects of higher taxes in the future and more gridlock if I-912 passes, are pouring money into defeating the initiative.

"I-912 offers only more taxes in our future. We must build roads now or later, and later will cost us more tax dollars," [Mainstream Republicans chair and former state transportation secretary Sid] Morrison said in a statement released Friday.

Big contributions by Republican John Stanton and Mikal Thomsen have helped bankroll a mass mailing campaign.

"This is enough to mail to every person we think is certain to vote and hasn't voted yet," [Alex Hays, executive director for the Mainstream Republicans] said. "It is statewide. We are leaving no corner of the state out of this project."

Hays said, "Mainstream Republicans reflect the Republican tradition of solving problems. The other voices on this topic reflect that hesitancy to trust government and opposition to taxes."

Of course Washington State Republican Party chairman Chris Vance tried to downplay the significance of the opposition:

"I've said from the beginning, the Republican family is not of one mind on transportation. That's why about a third of Republican members of the Legislature voted for the gas-tax increase. So that shouldn't be surprising to anybody," Vance said.

Indeed, thanks for reminding us Chris. The Republican party is very divided on this issue. Over at HorsesAss.org, David Goldstein, still in his Rossi vigil, points out the significance of John Stanton's contributions to the "No of I-912" campaign, and how Rossi is bound to be hurt even by not taking a stand one way or another on I-912 should he decide to run for Governor again in 2008. Rossi may just find that not taking a stand will be viewed as bring in support of gridlock, and the business community will likely remember that when it comes time to support candidates in 2008.

Meanwhile Dan Sytman, conservative talk-radio host, offered up a guest opinion in the Seattle Times in which he argued against I-912:

A yes vote on I-912 is really a no vote on the very priorities conservatives like myself have been pushing all these years. We've been demanding roads, not transit. Well, now they're building roads and using one of the fairest kinds of taxes to do so — and we're going to try to stop them? Unfortunately, I think many I-912 advocates have not realized the hypocrisy of their dubious position on transportation taxes.

The 2005 transportation package — and the 9.5-cent gas-tax increase — was passed with support from about one-third of Republicans in Olympia, including highly respected conservatives like Sens. Bill Finkbeiner, Joseph Zarelli and Dan Swecker, who voted for the package because it includes projects not just for infrastructure-needy King County, but for all 39 counties. They voted for the gas tax along with an audit feature that will help enforce wise spending.

Moreover, the performance audits initiative, Initiative 900, is on track to pass this November, ensuring more accountability. Most importantly, conservative leaders in Olympia supported the gas tax because it provides almost $3 billion to address major congestion choke points and $279 million for frequent-accident locations.

Cynics that have left comments here in the past would probably ask who's paying Sytman off to say such things. Could it be he actually believes what he is saying? Could it be he actually believes that I-912 is a hypocritical effort to block the very things so many of I-912 proponents would have you believe they support: fixing and improving our roads and paying for it with a user tax?

Sytman continues:

In the meantime, shutting down a bipartisan transportation package that includes accountability measures and gets to work building roads and reducing congestion would be horribly dangerous for the future of our state and damaging to the conservative cause.

If a post-I-912-era earthquake brings down the viaduct or sinks the Evergreen Point Bridge, who do you think people are going to blame? Keep in mind that the Washington State Republican Party has officially taken a position against its traditional allies in the business community by supporting I-912. It doesn't take a wild imagination to predict where the blame will fall if Washington suffers from a bridge- or viaduct-breaking catastrophe.

It's up to right-thinking voters to take a principled position on the future of transportation — and on the future of the conservative movement — by voting against Initiative 912.

Sytman's anti-tax credentials are similar to those of many tax-shy Republicans. Like Republican senator Joyce Mulliken who never supported a tax increase until she voted in favor of safer roads and congestion improvements when she voted for the transportation bill in April, Sytman describes himself as having "voted for every tax-limiting initiative that has come up over the past 10 years". Yet he realizes the need to defeat I-912 to allow the transportation bill projects to proceed as planned.

Every day I search the online news sources for commentary and articles on I-912, and it is increasingly becoming rare to find anything in support of the initiative. Even over at the right wing blog, Sound Politics, there is a battle going on regarding I-912. Blogger Matt Rosenberg has written a number of times against I-912. The other bloggers have been mostly quiet about it. Meanwhile, newspapers statewide have been running articles about endorsements, mostly against I-912, or articles investigating one aspect or another of the transportation bill I-912 would effectively kill. Legislators are now even considering what they'd have to do to get funding for roadwork should I-912 pass, including changing the way projects are financed by moving to localized funding which would allow the Puget Sound area to fund projects its citizens support, but that would leave other regions to fend for themselves. This isn't something anyone wants to move to, but the choices will be few should I-912 pass.

Citizens of different ideologies are coming together in agreement that passage of I-912 would be a big mistake. If you are still wondering how you'll vote, please consider the ramifications of repealing the gas tax on the future safety or our roads, the traffic we all have to suffer through each day, and the higher future costs to address these same problems, which won't be going away, should we delay dealing with them today.

Please vote "No" on I-912.