What may also affect voters are the employees of the state and municipal governments. I have been unemployed for a significant amount of time, in my dealings over the phone with state unemployment offices; I have been dealt with courteously, and efficiently, excluding the 45-minute wait in the phone queue which is to be expected in these days. If only other state and municipal employees could learn from them. I hear stories of surly State Patrol, Rude Sheriffs. Nasty and condescending counter people in almost any government office. If the point of contact people in the different government offices would act nicer, government would have a better image, and, image sells ideas. Ask any marketer. Safeco Field was a wonderful example: Government: “We are smart, you are dumb.” Why would people want to give money to agencies that insult you?

Jordan, when you have a State that is so tone deaf to the concerns if it's citizens, you have to wonder why they keep returning the same Party to the Governors Mansion and Majorities in the Legislature. Stockholm "Voter" Syndrome? The critical mass of voters in Puget Sound appear to be too afraid of change and embrace their abusers.

For all of those voters who think "Government can do know wrong" clearly a majority in the Western side of the State, They can simply volunteer to pay more. Write a check, make monthly deposits..whatever it takes to fill the gap that they believe exists between what is being collected and what is needed for delivery of adequate services. If it worth voting to force "others" to pay, they should be willing to pay themselves without being concerned the passage of a law compelling them to pay.

When taxpayers see thing like illegal aliens being invited into the area with sanctuary status and once here supported with social services and a refusal to cooperate with Federal efforts to deport them. Taxpayers legitimately wonder if their government will ever follow the rule of law, or if they are simply cash cows who should quietly line up to be milked every election day.

One thing I've consistently noticed over the years is how poorly elected officials communicate with their constituents. Instead of honest explanations of what services are rendered and how they are paid for, or not paid for in the current environment, we get little pats on the head, usually written by PR people, not the people who have first-hand knowledge. People are searching for substance, and instead they get spin. No wonder they distrust government.

And the media are no help at all, having basically given up on day-to-day coverage of Olympia. I'm not in Rep. Carlyle's district but I've read some of his stuff, and I think he understands the communications shortfall. He should be in leadership.

The state and local government managers here have imposed the most regressive tax regimen in the country. They show contempt toward people. It is a political culture that thrives on abusing individuals and families with excessive sales taxes.

The political class around here is comprised of tax pimps. They push tax increase ballot measures using deceptive pitches about the extent of the new proposed confiscations. Charlie Royer practiced that dark art in the mid-80's, and Nickels and Constantine made careers out of it.

Take the direct local taxing by Metro and Sound Transit: the average family of four here pays $455 per year, compared to in the Portland area where there is NO direct taxing of individuals for good bus and light rail service.

The political class here gets off on regressive taxing. It hurts the least well-off the most, acts as an anchor on the local economy, and widens the gap between the rich and the poor. Government managers here practice class warfare.

The public sector leadership shows contempt towards the public. The primary symptoms of the rotten political culture here include the dishonest justices, the most regressive tax scheme in the U.S.A., and the fact that every election has tax increase ballot measures.

We've got an entirely unaccountable local government (Sound Transit) planning on confiscating about $85 billion in local taxes just as security for an unconscionable financing plan for a train line of nominal economic significance. That's the kind of thing the political class here delivers, not needed services at a fair price to taxpayers.

The taxing class is hammering the people here with regressive taxes for no good reason.

Your rant is misdirected, Cross. Those terribly regressive sales tax increases were not imposed by Metro and Sound Transit, they were authorized by the voters! And why do voters up the sales tax to fund local needs? Well, it's virtually the only tax available. The first Eyman initiative eviscerated the motor vehicle excise tax. And we have to limit property tax increases to one percent, even when inflation runs higher.

Personally, I'd rather have several different tax sources to fund state and local government, all at modest levels, instead of just one big one. But that would mean Tax Reform, and in the current climate, that's quite unlikely.

Just write the check for everything you have not paid since the MVET was eliminated R on Beacon Hill. Nobody is topping you and everyone around you will be cheering you. Just imagine what the MVET would be right now $400-$500-$600 per car per year? Don't worry the County is going to be coming to you for an "enhanced TBD Fee" which is MVET light. They are collecting $20 per vehicle now and they will be looking for an additional $100 at the ballot box.

It is interesting that the less government people want more user fees for government services--except for autos. Why is this? It seems to run against the libertarian philosophy to subsidize a segment of society so much through unrelated property and sales taxes. Cameron, how do explain this inconsistency?

Also, it is hard to support a government that is proceeding with two nationally well known highway boondoggles--the Alaskan Way Viaduct Tunnel and the Cross-Base Highway, despite the people voting against them.

http://www.infrastructurist.com/2009/12/16/the-4-highway-projects-that-would-be-the-biggest-waste-of-money/

Jordan: Do you believe what you write, or are they just words on a screen? You decry "relentless attacks by those who see government as the enemy and all taxes as extortion" and then say leaders need to rise above "simplistic and harsh rhetoric."

People who don't like sweetheart shady deals for unions (SEIU) by King County and the Governor, people who don't like favored status for "special interests" (we're the only state that gets not one dime from tribal gambling), people who don't appreciate government that picks an chooses the laws if will follow, people who still see enormous waste (50-plus FTEs for the King County Council) in government while services are cut, and on and on, don't necessarily see see government as the enemy and all taxes as extortion.

What they see are people IN government who treat it as their birthright, who believe they are all-knowing and all-seeing, and who really don't give a rip about "the little people" until it's time to get re-elected.

You first noticed a disconnect with I-695? I first noticed it when one of my county commissioners, in explaining his recent defeat at the polls, said the voters just don't understand. And I've seen that tact - mainly by Democrats (I think its a "progressive" thing)- often over the ensuing years. They lose because we just don't get it. Or if they're being generous (as President Obama was after his party's recent shellacking) they'll accept some of the blame by admitting they could've done a better job explaining things to the people.

Jordan, it wasn't I-695 (or any other citizen's initiative) that's destroying the ferry system (and other valued infrastructures). It is politicians plundering the community pot to pursue personal agendas and pay back campaign supporters.

What kind of leader will it take to restore trust with the majority public? One willing to confront the entrenched interests of public employee unions, indian tribes, non-profit organizations, the agenda-ed press and all minions of community groups to say: this is the core business. This is what we will spend money on. Period.

Andy, there is a disconnect and it mostly with the electeds having to be accountable for their budgetary priorities and actions. MVET became a slush fund for all sorts of things it was never intended for. Under Ron Sims King County routinely declared a budget "emergency" and assessed the maxium 6% increase in property taxes year after year, yet there was always money for pet projects.

We currently have a substantial budget shortfall at the State, County and City, yet all three encourage illegal aliens to live among us through sanctuary policies and end up supporting them with programs and services. We do not have unlimited resources..especially now and yet these programs continue unabated. These are the sorts of things that need to be addressed before people will regain confidence in their government.

Cameron, on Inside Olympia the other day, Joe Zarelli said there are state programs SPECIFICALLY for illegal immigrants. He said these, alone, cost $300 Million per year to state government. I imagine this doesn't include the cost of various policy decisions (like granting in-state tuition to children of illegals, etc).

http://www.tvw.org/media/mediaplayer.cfm?evid=2010110079&TYPE;=V&CFID;=790675&CFTOKEN;=56977002&bhcp;=1

Poor Virginia Foxx.
Her thunder was stolen.
When giving her much-awaiting speech against,
what the republican party considers terrible government policy,
C-span broadcast on their other channel the monday Smithsonian associates interview with President Carter.
Americans who watch C-span channels tuned Foxx out.
Poor Virginia Foxx got her thunder stolen.

She had something to say about taxes, the same old stuff, private underlying understandings seem secretive, won't explain positions regarding Left objections, blah blah grr snap blah blah.

Voters voted down a FUNDING MECHANISM for renovating the Kingdome and building Safeco Field. At that point, local Government got creative. There was no general sales tax increase to pay for Safeco Field. The taxes have been nearly invisible. The stadium has been a success (we'll talk about the team some other time) and the bonds are going to be paid off early. Still, we get this constant myth about how Safeco Field was voted down but built anyway. Safeco Field was never "voted down" - the fact that people still believe this nonsense is beyond my understanding.

This is a great article in that it at least references the threat of special interests to the country. The government has been subordinated by special interests to an unprecedented degree. Checks and balances have been whittled away to the point that the system no longer self-corrects, returning the usual suspects to office time and again. Legislative outcomes benefitting the few over the many are now simply bartered for or purchased.

Is there anger? We just witnessed what is arguably the biggest economic crime in the history of the planet. The only outcome so far are gossip columns estimating how many millions Wall Street will spend on their New Years Eve parties. So, yeah…we’re a little miffed.

If it’s not too late, the solution is leadership with the courage to moderate, to the best of their ability, between special interests and the true preferences and needs of their constituencies.

Currently not a lot of that type of leadership here in “Say WA.”

This series of reports arouses anger:

http://www.king5.com/news/investigators/Investigators-Waste-On-The-Water---a-series-of-special-reports-93442684.html

When I voted against public funding for the baseball stadium, and when the "No" campaign won, I thought it would mean NO PUBLIC FUNDING for the stadium. (If private interests wanted to use their own money to build a profit-making baseball palace with anti-egalitarian 'luxury box suites', that was fine by me.) The fact that, as martin7341 says, "local Government got creative" to funnel public funds into this project anyway, despite that vote's result, blatantly showed whose interests our elected leaders really served--and it wasn't "the people's". Martin7341 further suggests that the tax is "invisible" no doubt because the sales receipts from Seattle area bars and restaurants do not always itemize it, but the knowledge that the prices I'm paying at such places are higher because of this political trickery (Didn't the Legislature actually declare the matter an "emergency" to adopt the special tax?) still rankles till this day. You bet such shenanigans breed cynicism in how our 'representative' government operates!

And until Rep. Carlyle can bring himself to support fully privatizing the sale of alcohol in this state, then I can't take his views on the 'core functions of government' very seriously. I'm surprised the author would cite him as a kind of authority on this subject.

Like Martin7341, I too thought we were voting on a Funding Mechanism to build a new baseball stadium. I read the voters' pamphlet and generally know a little bit about what I'm voting on. It never occurred to me at the time that voters like Cocktail42 were taking this as a global Yes or No vote on the concept of a publicly funded stadium. I understand differently now. I also understand that there are folks out there who will demagogue any issue they can get their pick into, and the stadium debate was a huge and inviting opportunity.

I buy maybe one bottle of booze a year, and the state stores serve my needs just fine. In fact, I find them sort of quaint in an appealing sort of way, and don't look forward to massive end cap displays of booze in my grocery store.

But I can certainly concede that selling liquor is not a "core function" of state government, and some sort of privatization is in order. But initiatives written by industry insiders, special interest groups, are the absolute worst way to do it. Yes, the budget deficit is the biggest problem facing the state, but I hope a legislative committee can start working on a privatization bill that balances the interests, public and private, and doesn't deprive the state of needed revenue.

Here's one kind of "leadership" that won't restore trust: appointing political operatives to positions in, what are supposed to be, the people's institutions. See David Dicks at the Puget Sound Partnership and now the UW College of the Environment (climate change regulation anyone?). See Chris Endresen at the Puget Sound Regional Council. See Suzan DelBene at Department of Revenue. Using the citizens' social institutions as a political tool and treasure chest is not exhibiting "leadership" that will restore trust. But that's the "leadership" we have.

Cocktails - I meant creative in a good way. And I'm not the least bit ironic about it. I would have supported 100% public financing for Safeco - I believe that Professional Sports are a vital part of a city's culture - every bit as much as the Ballet or the Symphony. I believe that the Safeco Field is every bit as important to the quality of life in this city as the little league field that the Mariners donated $100,000 toward that my kids played on. The.5% sales tax on restaurant food (a yearly total of $10,000 of eating out would yield $50)seems like a pretty good idea to me. What really annoys me is the large number of folks who still believe that there was a general sales tax increase levied. What REALLY annoys me is that the "Citizens for More Important Things" didn't stick around to fight FOR any important things.

The fact that, when pressed, the local governments got creative to get Safeco built bothers me only in that we don't see that same creativity toward other governmental functions. I, by the way, am one of the "People" who's interest WAS served by the building of Safeco Field. The fact that whenever I do eat out, I know I'm contributing to the continued availability of professional baseball in Seattle makes the food taste that much better. My only wish now is that I could have that same feeling about building a new Basketball/Hockey Arena.

My, oh, my, what a dustup. But missing from this let's "restore the public's trust" discussion is the private sector's responsibility to show some leadership. In disposing of I-1098, business leaders loudly beat the "you can't trust government with your money" drum, thereby contributing to the public's reluctance to consider any taxes, even if they improve fairness and equity. But what now? Where is their interest in helping solve the state's $5 billion shortfall? Where are the folks who are quick to line up for their tax breaks ("incentives") in good times?

I'm sure those businesses are still paying their taxes, Dick, and thereby "helping" to solve the state's $5 Billion shortfall (it's closer to $6 Billion now, btw). A better question is: are all those wealthy supporters of I-1098 stepping up to help solve it? What about Gates the Elder? How big a check did he voluntarily send the state (which he purported to care soooo much about) after 1098 failed?

And if he is loathe to write that check (which I suspect he is; it's always easier to spend other people's money) perhaps he can spend a few Wednesdays in a dunking booth at the Capital. Citizens can pay $1/ball for a chance to put him in water. All proceeds to the state. What about it, Bill. You seemed to enjoy it on the commercial.

Hey, Blue. This ain't the Slog. Take your cheap sniping over there, where it's appropriate and welcomed.

R on Beacon Hill wrote: "Those terribly regressive sales tax increases were not imposed by Metro and Sound Transit, they were authorized by the voters! And why do voters up the sales tax to fund local needs? Well, it's virtually the only tax available."

Those unreasonably high sales taxes - and the other general taxes ST and Metro impose - were authorized by the legislature. The truly abusive aspects of the financing plan ST has implemented is how about $85 billion of tax confiscations will be pledged as security to bonds. No other transit services provider finances capital projects like that. It is a punishing financing scheme.

You want to blame voters. It is not the voters' fault the state and local government managers designed an abusive financing scheme and put it on the ballot. ST could have chosen to put a different tax or fee on the ballot, or the state could have guaranteed the bonds - either of those changes would have reduced by a considerable amount the regressive nature of transit taxes here.

The amount of taxing for transit here is about four times greater than in other regions. That is a clear indication of poor management by those running the transit services providers here.

Want to be able to trust government? Let's see it perform as well as its peers in terms of taxing. Right now it's at the bottom of the barrel.

Here's a reason not to trust the government managers around here: they put the Seattle Popular Monorail Authority ballot measure up to voters, then they blew it with the financing plan.

Here's another reason not to trust government managers around here: they designed Sound Transit's state and local enabling legislation so that government's management and policies never can be controlled by people using political means.

Here's another reason not to trust the government managers around here: they have not disclosed the tax costs of the ST projects and the ST2 measure was approved over two years ago. Anyone think that outfit is trustworthy? Provide a link to a ST document showing the anticipated financing costs, including the tax costs, of the approx. $18 billion capital spending plan. My estimate is the financing plan will be over five times the amount of that capital spending estimate of $18 billion. That's a ludicrous and abusive way to pay for any infrastructure.

Here's another reason not to trust government managers around here: that "cleaning up of Lake Washington" this piece lauds was done by old-Metro, and it was held to be an unconstitutional government in 1990. The government managers around here use unlawful entities.

A few facts you forgot to tell your readers regarding I 695, citizens had complained to the Legislature, the Governor and State Agencies about how outrageously high are car tabs were for years if not decades. Those complaints went nowhere. State Agencies loved that money and didn't want to upset that gravy train. Also the tab fees had no bearing in reality. The fees weren't based on your car's value or Kelly blue book value, the fees were based on some archane formula that the Dept of Licensing or Dept of Revenue (I forget which agency) had come up. No other state had used that formula. Eventually we got sick of it and low and behold Eyeman got an initiative passed... and with a pretty high percentage rate. Don't blame the citizens for this latest disconnect. It has to everything to do with a stone deaf State Legislature and State Agencies.

Interesting that some conservatives complain that "government" doesn't listen to the voters, meaning that Democratic legislators and a Democratic governor don't listen to the voters. Yet the voters are the ones who voted them in. Other conservatives complain that our government doesn't do as well as other governments do, one commenter referring to the fact that Portland's voters don't have to cough up as much for transportation. But Oregon has an income tax, the thought of which causes all conservatives to become apoplectic but which means that they do not need to constantly attempt to raise their sales tax.

Government is us. We vote government in. "We" may be rather bi-polar, voting in Democrats and yet voting for initiatives which most Democrats decried (rightfully so) as injurious to the state's financial health. Perhaps we should add lithium to the water supply. But until we do, we should at least be rational enough to admit our own mistakes and not blame them on the people we elected.

Thanks for a breath of fresh air, Sarah. Nice to see interspersed with the rants.

Cross, your "ST could have chosen to put a different tax or fee on the ballot, or the state could have guaranteed the bonds..." doesn't fly. ST is only allowed to propose the taxes that the Legislature authorizes, and the only one that can begin to raise enough money, to build the plan that the voters want, is the sales tax. How much time and effort did you spend working with Legislators to get better funding sources for local and regional transit? Uhh, yeah; I thought so....

I don't like sales taxes either, but it's either that or nothing -- and yes, I know you'd prefer nothing, but that's a discussion for another day. And let me repeat, if the voters shared your beliefs, surely they would've joined you in voting NO on the regional transit plan and the tax increase necessary to fund it. But they voted Yes. Live with it.

Sarah

You complain that conservatives defeated the Income Tax. From the map in this link it looks like a whole bunch of Democrats joined in to defeat it as well.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2013558144_seattle_stood_almost_alone_in.html

Are they all "Apoplectic" as well?

You still are trying to blame the voters: "And let me repeat, if the voters shared your beliefs, surely they would've joined you in voting NO on the regional transit plan and the tax increase necessary to fund it."

The fault lies with the government managers who put the abusive financing plan on the ballot. None of their peers put forward a capital plan for 50-some miles of light rail that calls for the sale of $8 billion in long term bonds secured by $85 billion in tax confiscations. Most of that will be of highly regressive sales taxes, stacked on top of what already is being imposed to give us the most regressive tax regimen in the country.

The infrastructure that will be delivered will be of marginal utility. The tax cost vs. benefit ratio never was analyzed by the state or local government managers who put this abusive financing plan together.

This article is about whether we should trust those who are running the show at the state and local levels of government around here. The contempt they show - especially when it comes to pushing unwarranted tax measures on ballots - demonstrates the answer is an unequivocal "no". Exhibit A is the Sound Transit financing plan they pimped, with its nasty feature of $8 billion in bonds secured by $85 billion in new regressive tax confiscations. Just try finding a peer that would pay for commuter trains that way. Hint: you can't. Take TriMet - it only needed a couple of billion dollars of progressive local tax revenue from businesses to build out 50-some miles of light rail. Our government leaders set Sound Transit up so it would confiscate $85 billion in regressive tax revenue to pay for the capital costs of the same amount of light rail.

Why are the government managers so abusive toward the finances of people and families here, R on Beacon Hill? The people in Portland wanted trains as well, but they aren't being punished for decades in the name of transit.

Somebody with knowledge deficits wrote: "Other conservatives complain that our government doesn't do as well as other governments do, one commenter referring to the fact that Portland's voters don't have to cough up as much for transportation. But Oregon has an income tax"

TriMet doesn't use income tax revenue to provide bus and train service - it never has.

Another thing that poster is wrong about is this: "Government is us. We vote government in." That poster REALLY doesn't understand government around here. Sound Transit is run by an appointive board. 15 of the 18 seats are filled with political appointees. The people can exert no control over any of the management or policies of that huge taxing machine by any political means.

R on Beacon Hill thinks that poster is a "breath of fresh air". That's the thing about the pro-government apologists, they interpret ignorance as "fresh air".

If my memory serves me correctly, the Portland LRT was hinanced with 90% federal funds.

This due, in total, to Jimmy Carter's Secretary of transportation being the ex-mayor of Portland.

It helps to know people in high places.

Seebee

seebee -

Below is a "fact sheet" document that lays it all out re: how TriMet pays for its light rail. The light rail in Portland has come on line gradually, and all of it was well after Carter left office. You are right though, federal funds covered a lot of the costs. With Murray as a ranking majority member of the Budget and Appropriations committees, Gary Locke a Cabinet member, and Sims in a senior position, our region has plenty of juice to obtain New Starts and other grants. Very little Fed. money is being sought though, and as near as I can tell, almost none for the $4.8 billion East Link project. In fact, less than 10% of the $100 billion financing plan for the $18 billion in capital spending ST is launching into would be grant money - a FAR lower percentage than its peers.

The comparisons to how transit is paid for there vs. here show our government managers to be abusive jerks.

Compare how well TriMet finances its top-quality bus system (along with better light rail construction and operations) to what we have:

http://www.trimet.org/pdfs/publications/factsheet.pdf .

TriMet never has imposed regressive taxes targeting people and individuals. Metro and ST sure do. Here are three differences between here and what goes on around Portland. There is NO good reason for any of these discrepancies, only bad ones:

- Progressive taxing of businesses there vs. heavy regressive taxing targeting families and individuals here.

- A couple of billion dollars of a reasonable mix of federal grant money and progressive tax revenues used to build out a 50-some mile light rail system there vs. a $100 billion mostly-regressive local tax revenue package to pay for the same number of miles of track, and fewer stations here.

- $0 direct regressive taxing targeting individuals and families for bus and train service there vs. $455 per year direct regressive taxing on the average family for bus and train service here, and that amount will grow every year for decades.

Hey, our government managers blow! Great job – you really are shafting people.

Now "R on Beacon Hill" is going to post again, and try blaming the voters for these differences even though the financing plans for Metro and ST were designed by state and local government managers.

What don't you get about this "R on Beacon Hill"? Just because people want trains and buses doesn't mean your friends the public sector managers should condition those transit services on grossly excessive and regressive tax schemes. You want to try explaining those discrepancies with how it's done here vs. by TriMet?

Who appoints or hires these nasty, venal, and stupid government/public sector managers? Do they simply walk into government buildings one day and install themselves in offices and start doing what they want?

I think they're appointed or hired by people we elect. But I'm probably wrong, because otherwise Crossrip and others above would realize they'd have to take some responsibility for voting for the people who hired those "abusive jerks". That certainly wouldn't be any fun.

However Oregon funds its public transit systems, because it has a fairly steady revenue stream from income tax, it doesn't have to starve other sectors of government. That's one of the advantages of having a non-regressive tax system. I'd thought that would be obvious, but I guess not.

Oregon, it's only two hours away on the train, if it sounds like the promised land to you, take a ride...one way.

The problem of the Washingtonian is simple -- he demands premium public service while being only willing to pay bottom dollar.

Not only is the Washingtonian not willing to pay for these services himself, he whines and rants about making others pay (1098)! Thus the productive people are saddled with fees, high sales taxes, attempted income taxes -- while idlers sit on acres of property that are way undervalued.

The Newcomer to this area gets hit with the bill for the "natives" who are not being properly charged for "Fair Use" of their property. Yet, the issue of property taxes and all the covenants on fair assessment are never discussed! Even the Gates' "tax on the rich" included a hefty property tax cut -- which would have benefited them mightily!

Am I for more property taxes? As a Republican -- HECK NO! But I am for equal treatment of all taxpayers. Right now -- I'd say there are too, too many freeloaders in Washington State.

That "hefty property tax cut" was for 20% of the State portion of the property tax or about 4% of the total bill.

A fair or flat tax or perhaps VAT would be the way to go,but anything that would make everyone pay would be viewed as "Unfair" by those who pay nothing now.

Very interesting piece, but what I feel is lacking in these discussions are some basic facts about whether the tax burden in WA state has been growing or shrinking over time. Of course that will vary from individual to individual, county to county, but I'm sure some averages could help frame the discussion. I'm tired of the endless of opinions divorced from some facts that can frame the discussion.

For example, are people in King County paying a higher percentage of their income in local and state taxes than 10 years ago? If they are, that would help explain some of the angst.

Joe

"For example, are people in King County paying a higher percentage of their income in local and state taxes than 10 years ago?"

That wouldn't provide useful data, for several reasons:

- Ten years is too short of a time frame to measure, make it 40 years (that's when the state and local government taxing really started to ramp up).

- Measuring the state and local tax burden on King County residents against income growth isn't appropriate. Most people haven't had steady employment over even a 20-year period. Many people only have part-time work, or they're unemployed/retired/disabled/students, etc. over some or all of the relevant period. Moreover, the state and local tax burden is not a function of income (there is no state or local income tax, and the regressive nature of the taxes the state and local government managers impose hits people with little or no income disproportionately hard).

A much better way to measure the state and local tax hit would be to look at the growth of that tax burden on the average family of four, from say 1965 to the present. That annual aggregate amount could be compared to the CPI, to provide some reference (e.g., the cost of living vs. the tax costs of living here).

Anyone disagree?

I wish we'd shift more to income tax and away from sales, property and business taxes. It makes so much sense to pay for shared expenses out of healthy cash flow, rather than sapping people indiscriminately. If we could only be disciplined about setting the level and sticking to it.

I also hope things get better... this has been a hard few years. I don't expect it will anytime soon, but this is my Christmas wish.

Hey Crossrip,
You may have a good suggestion there. Do you agree with my point though, that it would be helpful to provide a wider factual framework for discussions on governance and the true tax burden in this state?

Sure, we all feel overtaxed. Are we? I would love it if someone could point me toward a credible comparative analysis of this. I suppose if I have time I'll try to dig one up somewhere....

joe

I would like to return to the core questions Mr. Royer posed: Why don't citizens trust the government? and What can the government do to restore trust?

The answers are simpler than anyone wants to admit. The government isn't trusted because it has proven itself untrustworthy. It can restore trust by being trustworthy. How is this hard to get?

Citzens don't trust the government because they believe that the government regularly betrays their trust and because they feel incapable of holding the government accountable. Examples abound.

Regardless of what a few exceptionally well-informed voters thought, nearly everyone thought and believes that we voted down Safeco Field, and then the state legislature did an end-run around the will of the people, declared an "emergency", and signed our name to the invoice anyway. Technically correct or not, that's how people perceive it.

Basic services, such as 9-1-1 Medic Response, are supported by special taxes while general fund money - it is perceived - is spent on pet projects. Shouldn't basic services be paid from the general fund? Shouldn't it be special projects that are subjected to a vote of the people?

Widespread fraud was found in the calculation of highway capacity and volume counts. Remember that? Eastside developments got approved with fantasy traffic projections.

The state legislature was deaf to complaints about the car tabs and refused to fix the situation themselves. The initiative was seen as the people's way around an obstructionist government.

Then, after it was found unconstitutional, the same politicians who claimed that $30 car tabs would be the end of the world and the worst thing ever, voted by themselves to implement them. I nearly got whiplash from that rapid reversal of deeply held beliefs.

Every politician talks about how devoted they are to public education, yet they are unable to fully fund it as the state constitution requires.

The Governor herself goes on and on about how much she hates her own budget.

We all know that it is nearly impossible to get anything passed in Olympia, largely because it is so easy to stop anything in Olympia.

Even the politicians complain that they are incapable of affecting policy, how much worse must it be for ordinary citizens.

So maybe the problem is that the state rules for government are totally unworkable. So government officials, at the state level and at the municipal level to the extent that their actions are constrained by the state, have to cheat to move anything forward. And if they don't cheat, then they are mired and incapable of taking action. Consequently we are subject to government by initiative. Tim Eyman didn't usurp power, he filled a power vacuum.

What can be done to improve the situation. Certainly more candor from elected officials. Certainly a more open and effective process for legislation. Certainly government officials that pay attention and respond to the citizenry. And, of course, policies that reflect our real interests and budgets that pay for essential services (schools, criminal justice, infrastructure, public health, etc.) before paying for any extras. This isn't that hard to figure out.

The people are telling the politicians exactly the problem and the cure, but the first problem is that the politicians aren't listening to the people.