Latest polling doesn't bode well for a tax vote
The poll, taken last week amid tax protests and tax-paying day, shows soft support for boosting the sales tax to pay for health care and softer support for an income tax. No wonder Olympia politicians are skittish.
So what did the latest round of polling show on the appetite of Washington voters for a tax hike? The results were lousy enough for the Washington State Hospital Association to temporarily abandon plans to fund a referendum campaign. The Association is now reconsidering.
I got my hands on a summary of the poll that was given to the Senate Democratic Caucus. It’s not the complete poll, and I don’t have a sample size or margin of error; however I believe 800 likely voters were polled. The poll was taken last week — right when people were filing their taxes and there were anti-tax demonstrations all over the country, including at the State Capitol in Olympia. The health care groups who paid for the poll say it was the "worst possible" week to be asking voters their mood on taxes.
That said, here are some key results. The pollsters asked about both a temporary three-tenths-of-one-percent sales tax increase (which has been introduced by State Rep. Eric Pettigrew, D-Seattle) and an income tax on people making more than $250,000 a year (an idea Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, has floated). The sales tax garnered better than 50 percent support if it included a tax rebate for working families and if the money raised was used to support hospitals, nursing homes, and other health care programs. Both elements are part of Rep. Pettigrew's proposal. But as the poll summary notes, support is "soft" with just better than 20 percent of voters "strongly" supporting the proposal.
The income tax proposal polled under 50 percent even if the money was dedicated to education and health care.
Neither the sales tax nor income tax polled over 50 percent in "targeted" legislative districts. I would interpret targeted to mean competitive swing districts where incumbent lawmakers would take a sizeable risk in voting for putting a tax on the ballot — even one that goes to voters for their up or down approval.
My understanding is that the potential backers of a tax referendum wanted to see 60 percent support for the sales tax. They know once an opposition campaign revs up chances are they will lose voter support, not gain it. It’s hard to tell from the bar graphs on the summary I have, but it looks like the three-tenths sales tax idea got 54 to 55 percent support. Pollsters also found arguments against a sales tax (and the boost would make Washington’s sales tax among highest in the nation) were more compelling to voters than arguments for a tax hike (to save health care).
Probably one thing that's giving supporters of a tax measure some hope is that 10 percent of "no" voters on the sales tax are soft opponents — meaning they could potentially be persuaded if shown the impact of the cuts to programs without the tax.
Finally, an unrelated but interesting poll result: Gov. Chris Gregoire’s approval rating is 44 percent as compared to 57 percent for President Obama. The poll says Gregoire fares worst among independent women with only a 32 percent approval rating.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!
Comments:
Posted Sun, Apr 19, 11:05 p.m. inappropriate
I do think the Gregoire item is interesting: I myself am a lifelong, committed Democrat who will not be voting for her next time around as a protest vote; I find her rhetoric and political posture to be too often too anti-Seattle to merit the support she gets from the Seattle area and that shoos her into office (which she takes for granted). For instance, her viaduct posturing, her attitude toward funding for the UW, and the fact that zero federal stimulus money is being spent in Seattle, despite the fact that about 50% of the state lives in metro Seattle... She has had some notable successes, e.g. I applaud her signing the domestic partner bill this week, but we could have progressive social policy AND more pro-Seattle stances on things, so Gregoire is only half the governor she could be as far as I'm concerned.
Posted Mon, Apr 20, 8:48 a.m. inappropriate
The state takes in plenty of revenue already. The issue is spending priorities, not a lack of money. The size of state government grew more than 30% in the last two legislative sessions. Pare back that to free up funds for the real priorities. The legislators need to get off this kick of throwing a "punish the taxpayer" tantrum every time the business cycle interrupts their dreams of a grand state-led socialist utopia.
Posted Mon, Apr 20, 9:29 a.m. inappropriate
I wish I had any faith in either the governor (the only this she has going for her in my book is that she is not Dino Rossi) or the legislature to do the right thing. I wish I understood how the sales tax hike rebate is supposed to work. Until I do understand, I will vote no on any sales tax hike.
Of course I realize the legislature will de-fund the most appealing, heart-string-pulling government functions and put those to the voters. In the end, they have dug themselves one heck of a hole - because of the rhetoric over the years of "Government is wasteful" and "Government is too big."
What I want is a legislative body with a real spine--one that will attempt to educate the public about how screwy the tax structure is in this state and to put forward a new tax structure that includes an income tax, a lower sales tax, and a corporate income tax to replace the B&O; tax. Hooray for Lisa Brown of Spokane. If she continues along this vein, I'd be glad to vote for her for governor.
Posted Mon, Apr 20, 12:07 p.m. inappropriate
Even as a supporter of a state income tax and more health care I'm not in favor of a tax increase. The governor seems to believe that state union employees are an elite who, unlike the rest of the workers in the state, deserve salary increases and over-the-top health benefits. Automatic adjustments of salary and benefit levels in hard times is absolutely the right way to address the current economic down turn. This is much better than laying off thousands of workers. If the apparent priorities of State government are really the priorities of State government, then supporting the salaries and benefits of those who operate in an inefficient and ineffective burueaucracy appears to be number one.
Posted Mon, Apr 20, 12:18 p.m. inappropriate
Coupling a sales tax reduction with a new income tax will never fly. The voters aren't that stupid. They realize that any reduction in the sales tax rate will only be temporary. So is any promise to target the income tax only on "the rich." The only practical way to implement an income tax is to simultaneously eliminate the sales and property taxes, and to apply the income tax to all equally. This does away with two of the most regressive taxes we have, and institutes some transparency in how much state government is costing us. Until the Legislature is willing to do that, any talk of an income tax being the gateway to tax reform is disingenuous.
Posted Mon, Apr 20, 12:23 p.m. inappropriate
I will propose that our education system has become a mediocrity. The UW is mainly a research institution, the K12 system has been sliding downhill for decades, and the teachers' union remains unaccountable for educational outcomes and stymies experimentation and pay for performance in the schools. Basic education has become bare bones education and the dropouts from that system will be the criminals, unwed mothers, and homeless of the future.
At the other extreme we have a huge number of people who have extreme educations and extreme incomes, and who understand the connection between the two. What should be obvious is that education funds itself, but we let the benefits of education accrue mainly to the educated and their children.
I propose that we institute a graduated income tax on all those with high school, college and advanced degrees, with taxation commensurate with the level of one's degree. The scheme would be used to make the UW solvent, to lower tuition levels, to double the number of under-graduate slots, to create a pay-for-performance fund equal to 20% of current K12 education salaries, and to pay for general, free distance learning across the state so that all money doesn't go to funding and bricks-and-mortar.
By the way, this tax should be set so that the sales tax can be rolled back at 1 or 2%. Ultimately, this is an income tax of sorts, but really an intellectual property tax on each individual's education.
Posted Mon, Apr 20, 3:15 p.m. inappropriate
A modest defense of the sales tax:
1. It is not as regressive as its critics generally allege. A family that has an income of $150,000 pays a lot more sales tax than a family that makes $50,000. Rents, food and prescription drugs are after all exempted.
2. Everyone pays sales tax, even visitors to our state. Those who have an all cash business, legal or otherwise, do buy things and, while income may be hard to document, if you buy an new Yukon or sound system you pay the tax.
3. Admirers of the Value Added Tax (and the European economic model generally) seldom bother to admit that VAT is a sales tax; it's just more insidious.
4. People who lament the sales tax frequently mention, after warming to the subject, that we need a tax system that encourages saving and discourages consumption. Anybody up there in the comment section who disagrees with that? explain please.
Posted Mon, Apr 20, 4:39 p.m. inappropriate
Call me a contrarian, but I would strongly encourage you to consider imposing both an income tax and raising the sales tax. Higher taxes, applied judiciously, can be seen as an investment in the future, like what is being practiced in California and the Northeast.
I know that the citizens of Alabama and Georgia will applaud your efforts and will be there for you. Don't they build airplanes down there somewhere? Hey, did you know that a college education in Georgia can be free, funded by the lottery? What does your lottery fund? (In 5000 words or less...)
Posted Mon, Apr 20, 6:27 p.m. inappropriate
RE: smacgry
Where in the state constitution does it say the Gov's paramount duty is to get stuff for Seattle? There are 6 mil in the state. About 2 mill in KC (33% not 50%) 600k in Seattle(10%).
No stimulus funds to Seattle? What about: $35 million to build two buildings at Amtrak's Seattle King Street Maintenance Facility, $41.8 million for Water Infrastructure in WA; $7m to Seattle Housing Authority and $7.44 million for the King County Housing Authority,$8.5 million to KC to support employment and worker retraining programs and hundreds of millions to state services - which people in Seattle/KC consume their share of.
The state spent its transportation dollars on STATE projects that were immediately ready to go, mostly repaving projects. Stimulus money for local projects is flowing though the Puget Sound Regional Council. Only arrogance - no shortage there - would lead to the assumption by the papers, the mayor, and bloggers that those dollars were destined for Seattle.
I live in Seattle but when I read blog comments like this one I am ashamed of how elitist and out of touch Seattle's so-called-left is. Remember "ecology"? All parts of this state are interdependent. No citizen of this state is more worthy than any other citizen.