PGI logo cropped.png
Congressional Millionaire’s Club
The Personal Gain Index shines a light on how members of Congress benefit during their tenure.





Difference between revisions of "Washington Repeal of the Motor Vehicle Tax, Initiative 912 (2005)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(updated templates, added path to the ballot section)
Line 101: Line 101:
 
*[[2005 ballot measures]]
 
*[[2005 ballot measures]]
 
*[[List of Washington ballot measures]]
 
*[[List of Washington ballot measures]]
*[[List of ballot measures by year]]
 
*[[List of ballot measures by state]]
 
  
 
==External links==  
 
==External links==  

Revision as of 09:54, 23 September 2013

Voting on Taxes
Taxes.jpg
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Ballot measures
in Washington State
Seal of Washington.jpg
Constitutional amendments
Initiatives to the People
Initiatives to the Legislature
Statutes referred by Legislature
Veto referendums
Political topics on the ballot
LawsHistoryConstitution
Initiative 912 was on the November 8, 2005 election ballot in Washington as an Initiative to the People where it was defeated. I-912 would have repealed motor vehicle fuel tax increases of 3 cents in 2005 and 2006, 2 cents in 2007, and 1.5 cents per gallon in 2008, enacted in 2005 for transportation purposes.

Election results

Washington Initiative 912 (2005)
ResultVotesPercentage
Defeatedd No991,19654.62%
Yes 823,366 45.38%

Election results via the Washington Secretary of State.[1]

Text of the measure

The language that appeared on the ballot:[2]

Initiative Measure No. 912 concerns motor vehicle fuel taxes.

This measure would repeal motor vehicle fuel tax increases of 3 cents in 2005 and 2006, 2 cents in 2007, and 1.5 cents per gallon in 2008, enacted in 2005 for transportation purposes.

Should this measure be enacted into law?[3]

Fiscal impact statement

The 2005 State of Washington Voter Pamphlet lists the fiscal impact statement as follows:

Summary of Fiscal Impact

Initiative 912 would over 16 years eliminate $5.475 billion in fuel taxes and net bond proceeds, eliminating 80 percent of funding for 265 new transportation projects specified by the Legislature. About $562 million in fuel tax revenue for cities and counties – for new, local-government transportation projects over 16 years – also would be eliminated.

Assumptions for Fiscal Analysis of I-912

The Initiative repeals the phased-in, 9.5-cents-a-gallon increase in the state gasoline tax that is scheduled as follows: 3 cents a gallon on July 1, 2005; 3 cents on July 1, 2006; 2 cents on July 1, 2007; and 1.5 cents on July 1, 2008. The Initiative does not affect scheduled increases in the state tax on diesel fuel. Over 16 years, the gasoline tax increases would generate $4.434 billion plus $1.041 billion in net bond proceeds – or 80 percent of the cost of 265 new transportation projects specified by the Legislature. Eliminating the scheduled gasoline tax increases also would eliminate $562 million that cities and counties would have received over the next 16 years for local transportation projects. This revenue includes $482 million that cities and counties would receive as direct revenue distributions from the gasoline tax increases, as well as $80 million in grants to local government.[3]

Support

These arguments in support appeared in the official State of Washington Voter Guide:[4]

THE DECISION IS YOURS. VOTE YES ON I-912 TO REPEAL THE NEW GAS TAX.

If you think you’re getting good value for your money in Olympia, then by all means support the recent gas tax increase. But if you’re dismayed by how Olympia’s been spending your transportation dollars, then please vote yes on I-912 and repeal the huge new gas tax increase.

THEY DID THE WRONG THING THE WRONG WAY. VOTE YES ON I-912.' Just three short years ago, voters overwhelmingly rejected an increase in the gas tax. The next year, the Legislature passed one anyway, giving us the fifth highest gas tax in America. Some politicians in Olympia even said they opposed raising the gas tax again until they knew that we were receiving good value for the new increase.

That promise was broken. Instead, the Legislature passed the biggest gas tax increase in state history – 9.5 cents, a 33% increase! And it was done at the last minute with an “emergency clause” added to prevent you from having the right of referendum. Even worse, the massive transportation tax increase isn’t designed to reduce congestion – even gas tax supporters admit it! Broken promises, huge tax increases, and disdain for the people – Olympia at its worst.

IT’S ABOUT MORE THAN MONEY. VOTE YES ON I-912 TO REPEAL THE NEW GAS TAX.

It took just 32 days for volunteers to collect more than 400,000 signatures to put I-912 on the ballot. The message is clear: not another penny in higher taxes until we get reduced congestion and better value for our money.

Send the message! Vote yes on I-912.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. For more information, visit NoNewGasTax.com or call 206.330.9487.

Rebuttal of Statement Against Our gas taxes keep climbing while our roads get more congested. They want taxpayers to pay for a new Viaduct in Seattle but the proposed tunnel will cost billions more and actually carry fewer vehicles than the current one. We already pay one of the nation’s highest gas taxes. If that isn’t paying for safety and maintenance now, where is the money going?

Vote yes on I-912. Send Olympia a message they can’t ignore.[3]

The argument in support was prepared by Jane Milhans, Brett Bader, Steve Appel, Erma Turner, Sheryl McGrath, and Trina Wilbur.

Opposition

These arguments in opposition appeared in the official State of Washington Voter Guide:[5]

I-912 SLASHES FUNDING FOR ROADS, HIGHWAYS AND BRIDGES, DOES NOTHING TO RELIEVE CONGESTION.

Our roads, highways and bridges are crumbling; threatening our lives, leaving us stuck in traffic and wreaking havoc on our nerves and pocketbooks. I-912 drastically cuts funding earmarked to fix priority projects on Interstate 405, Interstate 90, US 12 and other roadways throughout our state. It offers no solutions for escalating congestion, it only makes matters worse.

I-912 PUTS CITIZENS AND THE ECONOMY AT RISK.

Highway engineers have declared 900 bridges in Washington to be obsolete or deficient. The Alaskan Way Viaduct and 520 Bridge will likely collapse or be rendered inoperable by another major earthquake, putting citizens at grave risk, striking a disastrous blow to trade and crippling our economy. I-912 guts a package that invests in every part of the state and creates thousands of private sector jobs.

I-912 IGNORES SAFEGUARDS THAT ENSURE OUR TAX DOLLARS ARE SPENT WISELY.

We need to protect transportation dollars. The state constitution mandates that gas tax monies be used for highways, roads and bridges. It is the only transportation funding source the Legislature cannot divert.

We are all concerned that our taxes haven’t always been used wisely. That’s why an unprecedented level of checks and balances – including extensive performance audits – is attached to new transportation dollars. You will get what you pay for.

Waiting won’t make it any cheaper. We must improve our roads and bridges now. Visit www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Funding/2005 to learn about projects in your area.

Save Lives. Reduce congestion. Create jobs. Please vote No on I-912.

Rebuttal of Statement For

We have a choice – pay a few dollars more per month to fix our roads, bridges and highways, or just accept ever increasing congestion and more dangerous roads. I-912 eliminates funding for 274 transportation projects across our state. I-912 offers no solutions; only delays and increased risk on our roads. Protect your transportation dollars and you’ll get results: fewer bottlenecks; reduced congestion; safer roads. Please vote no I-912, it takes us in the wrong direction.[3]

The argument in opposition was prepared by Kelly Fox, Ben Lindekugel, Denis Hayes, Terry Dorsing, Skip Rowley, and Terry Roxanne Tilton.

Path to the ballot

Initiative 912 was filed on May 12, 2005 by Jane M. Milhans. 400,996 signatures were collected to qualify it for the ballot. The measure was placed on the ballot as provided for by the state constitution.[6]

See also

BallotpediaAvatar bigger.png
Suggest a link

External links

References