Comment: For the People
Take a look at who the leader of this are, the politicians who say they are for the people, to protect them from run away Government by the Republicans, DEMOCRATS, yes Democrats proved that behind closed doors when they gave the Americans the biggest tax increase with Obamacare.
Here we go again, Government Agencies telling Americans to go to HELL, your votes don’t count any more, even if they did before, but now it really shows how elected officials think of the voting public, vote me in and I will protect your rights.
I can remember when people voted down Daylight Saving s Time, voted for Gambling, and there the Government said go to hell and that was the start of a Dictator Government, and today it has gotten to the point that, I will leave it there, you finish the story because the courts will not protect legal Americans for a right to a free America.
Today there are to many YUPPIES that want to control every thing, so to help them you have Environmentalist, Special Interest Groups, to many to name, and minorities, that includes just a hand full of people who have more control than the majority.
Today you can have a vote and it can go this way 50 to 300, and the 50 will win, so what do you think, do we recall every one who lies to get into office and send them to jail for treason against the state, REMEMBER the people are the State and Government, that also means local Governments as well, remember Washington State, the Government is thinking about turning over to the Local Governments the Power to Raise Taxes with out the vote of the people.
How about this, they say they are not going to go crazy on taxes, but yet they want to put Another tax on Gas to Make It, you might just as well say $.50 cents a gallon State plus Local and Federal to buy gas in Washington State, so it can all go to Seattle and King County, but they are not going to go crazy with taxes, look out U.S. you are next.
Bend Over Every One, you are going to get it with out grease or any lubricant because of the Environment, grease pollutes.
Education supporters celebrate WA court ruling
by KING 5 News
Posted on February 28, 2013
Getting two-thirds of lawmakers to agree on raising taxes has been considered next to impossible.
Now that the Washington Supreme Court struck down the vote requirement, two budget issues, transportation and education, may have another option for funding.
However, lawmakers are mindful that 44 of the state’s 49 legislative districts passed the two-thirds requirement, so don’t expect an immediate rush to raise taxes.
By Associated Press
Posted on February 28, 2013
Updated at 5:25 PM
SEATTLE — The Washington Supreme Court has struck down a requirement for a two-thirds majority vote in the Legislature to pass a tax increase.
A divided high court ruled 6-3 Thursday that an initiative requiring a two-thirds vote was in conflict with the state Constitution. And that lawmakers and the people of Washington would need to pass a constitutional amendment to change from a simple majority to a supermajority.
A coalition of lawmakers and education groups sued the state over the issue, and a King County judge decided last spring that the state constitution requires only a simple majority to pass tax proposals. The Supreme Court agreed to expedite its consideration.
“This ruling is a huge win for kids and schools,” said Chris Korsmo, CEO of the League of Education Voters, one of the lead plaintiffs. “Washington schools need to be fully funded in order to ensure that all kids reach their potential. This ruling, combined with the recent McCleary decision, will help ensure that our kids have all the resources they need to get an excellent education.”
Most people agree the state needs about $4 billion to fulfill its constitutional promise to fully pay for basic education by 2018.
Gov. Jay Inslee said the court had done the right thing.
“The supermajority requirement gave a legislative majority the power to squelch ideas even when those ideas had majority support. That is inconsistent with our fundamental form of representative democracy,” Inslee said in a statement.
State Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, said the court had opened the floodgates of taxation with its ruling. The chairwoman of the Senate Governmental Operations Committee has already proposed a constitutional amendment to make the two-thirds majority permanent.
“This is a seminal point in our history,” she said, noting that the people in every county have already shown their support for a two-thirds tax rule.
The two-thirds majority rule has been approved in a series of initiatives pushed by activist Tim Eyman. Voters most recently approved the supermajority rule last November.
The majority opinion, written by Justice Susan Owens, states that under a commonsense understanding, any bill receiving a simple majority vote will become law. No language in the provision qualifies that requirement by stating a bill needs “at least a majority vote.”
They wrote that without the simple majority rule in the Constitution, the people or the Legislature could require particular bills to receive 90 percent approval rather than just a two-thirds approval, thus essentially ensuring that those types of bills would never pass.
“Such a result is antithetical to the notion of a functioning government and should be rejected as such,” the justices wrote.
Justice Charles Johnson, writes in a dissent, that “In its eagerness to embroil itself in the political arena, the majority abandons any semblance of judicial restraint to declare the process of legislative enactment constitutionally infirm.”
Johnson wrote that voters have repeatedly voted for the supermajority provision, and that the court has repeatedly been asked to weigh in in past years and had previously “rejected the invitation to engage in this political dispute, exercising the wisdom, restraint, and temperance not to step outside the court’s constitutional authority.”
“Evidently something has changed, though the majority does not tell us what, to cause it to abandon these limiting principles and chart a new course for the court to more actively engage in the political process,” he wrote. “This change is both unwise and unprecedented.”