It Was Worth The Fight: I-912 Fails!
Most of the ballots have been counted, and with still 25% to be counted in King County, which is rejecting I-912 66%-34%, the current overall 52,000 vote lead (52.5%-47.5%) looks insurmountable at this point.
I must admit that I don't like making premature statements, but things look very, very good that I-912 will fail, even with at least 300,000 ballots to be counted.
After all the effort to get the word out about why and how I-912 was bad for Washington state, and then only recently seeing the bigger push by the official campaigns against the initiative, after they saw that the measure was vulnerable, I must admit that I am very happy at the results.
I've always felt that if I contributed to convincing only one voter to vote against I-912 my five month effort on this blog would be worth the trouble. It would appear that perhaps I and other bloggers, who wouldn't let go of this issue, even while few others believed I-912 could possibly be defeated, had a bigger impact than we ever could have hoped.
The bloggers may have gotten the ball rolling. In the past couple of months we started seeing almost daily MSM coverage of the issues, focusing on many of the same angles we had been talking about. The business community, reticent to fight the initiative at first, took heart and put together a winning campaign. And tonight we're seeing that when voters are provided with information and facts, they can get past the short term appeal of saving a few pennies and vote for the state's future.
Well done Washington voters!
Update: They're not calling this vote yet, but as of 12:42am they've just posted that there are approximately 200,000 ballots in King County to still count. If you add those to the remaining ballots in all the other counties that are rejecting I-912 and use the 55.97% average rate that these counties are voting against the initiative as your guide to determine the breakdown of those votes, then the other 200,000 votes in pro-I-912 counties would have to go in favor of I-912 at a rate of 74% for the initiative to make up the 61,000+ difference.
I wouldn't call that likely, especially since the 200,000 votes in KC could go closer to the 65% rate against than the 55% average.
We also don't yet know the number of ballots to count in Snohomish, so that's another "no" voting county that would make it harder for I-912 to pass.
I think I can rest easy tonight!
Posted at 11/08/2005 11:26:00 PM PT
Permanent Link
10 Comment(s):
Congratulations, and thank you, Daniel, for leading the charge against I-912.
You led the charge?
Now, let's make sure the money is going to be used for transportation and not funneled to the General Fund. That goes for the rest of the transportation money.
I am not happy with the results of 912 (remember I am a $1/gallon tax proponent).
Darryl is being charitable of course, but certainly, amongst bloggers I believe I did. I think beyond Andrew at NPI you'd be hard pressed to find another blogger who committed more of his/her blogging to defeating I-912.
And I don't think you should minimize the impact the blogging had on the energy that was put into covering the issue in the MSM, and eventually within the campaigns to combat it. I think we would all anecdotally be able to point to a number of indicators that show that, or have spoken to reporters and politicians who would confirm that.
I think you can also juxtapose that with the right wing blogs that were practically mute on the issue.
I too believe we should tax gas higher. I even voted for Ross Perot because of his stance on at least a dollar national gas tax. Twice! Yet, the reality is that few people would ever support such a larger increase, so you have to work with smaller amounts that people can support, and this initiative, though not its intention, showed that Washingtonians will support a gradual increase that at least makes up for some of the impact of inflation on gas tax rates since the early 90's.
One thing I was going to suggest as a big factor in the failure of 912 and that was the gas price increase. I mean, who amoung us didn't realize that 5 cents was pretty minor to the 2 dollar a gallon increase we got. I think that over and above anything, it was the factor.
You did Perot twice? I learned after the first time I voted for him and didn't do it the second time. And while I will say that I didn't want Clinton reelected and won't ever vote for a Clinton again, I will also say no more Bushes even though Jeb is supposedly the best of the litters.
I hope you are not a one trick pony- transportation.
Perot twice - the other options didn't look better, even the second time around. I guess I didn't learn - or maybe I just stuck with my guns.
The fluctuation of gas prices certainly gave people a chance to see how a 3 cent gas tax increase would get lost in all that. Shoot, in the past 3 weeks prices have actually dropped 25 cents. That too may have helped people vote against I-912.
One trick pony? I certainly hope not. If Eyman tries a different initiative to hurt the transportation bill I'll be all over that, but beyond transportation, I actually started blogging because of the Iraq War situation and the economy (read deficit and national debt). Those problems are still with us and will be for many years to come.
Oh, and don't forget, before I-912 there was the election recount. I wrote a lot about that as well to the detriment of a social life.
yes, I curse the internet and blogs. I don't get anything done at work anymore, but I have a social life with wife and two kids.
Well, Kirk, I was wrong to assume that the voters would do the correct thing and retract the taxes. You were right, I was wrong. I salute your ability to read the voter base better than I.
Yep, the voters have cemented this into place and emboldened your thinking. Now, there's NO barrier to all the things you want. You, and those who think like you know that you can do ANYTHING you want at this point. So, go ahead, take all that money and divert it to social programs and come back for more taxes to pay for the stuff we were supposed to get out of this tax. Before you get outraged at my statement, look at the history of what happens to the taxes collected, and the results. If history is an indicator, the future will have these funds diverted to things that will not ease congestion, and yes, we will be called upon for more taxes to pay for the same things again. (It's a vicious cycle)
And, let's just admit on the front end that you and those like you will bring to us in the next couple of years congestion pricing, tolls, more Sound Transit taxes, excise tax increases, Regional Transportation taxes, yet another Sound Tax increase, odometer fees, HOT lanes, more trains to nowhere, even more gas tax increases, and putting sales tax on gas, and, yes, income taxes. You have managed to snow the public into thinking that this is the end, but honestly, you and I both know that it's not.
Meanwhile, you have also achieved another important function. You have managed to convince that every other dollar used by government is critical and untouchable. It's not even up for discussion, or judgment that we spend money on incubators for wineries, asparagus grower subsidies, building infrastucture and increased costs so we can complete the splitting of the department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development into three separate departments with their own staff, buildings, and increased costs. Yeah, accountability. How funny! Yeah, we'll apply the same sense and level of accountability to Transportation as we do to all other aspects of government. That'll make it better. HA!
I know. I am a mutant. I don't take for granted that the government is inviolate. That makes me evil somehow, I am sure.
And, for what it's worth, the Transportation department is nonresponsive to my requests for progress to project timeline, expenditures to date, and projected final completion cost of the SR527 widening. It's a tremendously impactful project, with the most current expenditure information being reported as July, 2003. NONRESPONSIVE!
Am I the only one that sees a problem here? Is this what is meant when I read high concepts like 'by the people, for the people?' and high talk of 'accounatbility?
THIS is the level of accountability, responsiveness, and 'customer service' that I can expect? That I am to come to a level of comfort with? That I should just continually open my wallet and gladly keep tossing money into?
Yeah, I can only imagine how much better the Transportation Department is going to get in responding to citizen requests as a result of this.
But hey, the PI is happy, Daniel is happy, this is the end of the vitriol, and all is well in the spend happy, government knows best liberal world.
Steve
Steve - You seem like such an angry person, which hardly compels me to want to respond to much of what you written (especially since I'm not "Kirk"), but here are few comments nevertheless, because you are trying to engage, however clumsily:
- If you paid attention to any of what I wrote on I-912 (and I wrote a lot on it), you will see that I made it clear that we have $30 to $40 billion of transportation infrastructure needs. The $8.5 billion spending is only a start, and it addresses safety issues as a priority, with congestion relief at bottlenecks and some added lanes.
- The transportation bill is tied to a project list. That's what the money will pay for. The same was true of the Nickel package.
- The money can only be used for transportation projects. I'm not outraged at your statement - your statement is simply wrong.
- Completing funding for the 520 bridge has always included the likelihood of tolls or additional taxes. However most of these, if not all, will be local to the region. The AWV will now go though the process of seeing if funds are there for more than the most basic solution. Again those additional funds would be locally raised.
- I-912 lost badly. It seems that supporters of it can't get over that. They thought they spoke for the will of the people. Obviously the people thought otherwise. Still, we all know there will be other initiatives that will try to cut taxes because it isn't hard enough to get initiatives on the ballot. 200,000 signatures represents too small a sliver of the voting population. We've seen that even 400,000 is not representative.
- There will be audits. I-900 will likely mean even more. That process will yield some results. The WSDOT has also done a better job in the past few years. That needs to continue. As for responding to private requests for information, don't be so naive to believe that's going to be a quick turnaround. I've had my own issues with getting access to documents, but you can get at them if you push hard enough. Maybe one day the WSDOT will have a people's library of info beyond their Web site. That will come at a budgetary cost. There isn't much room for such expenditures, but it wouldn't be a bad idea. Let's face it, the WSDOT is not in a customer service mode like a department clerk might be. This will have to be learned.
Post a Comment
All comments are welcome, however, rather than posting an Anonymous comment please consider selecting Other and providing your name or nickname so others know who you are. Thanks.
Links to this post:
Create a Link