Previously posted on September 11 at: http://spaces.msn.com/members/evandodds/Blog/cns!1phaOgcvNsBxzvBN9Zpx1vbQ!197.entry
I’ve been chewing over what to post about the Washington State voter initiative
I-912 for a few weeks. I have some very strong opinions on it. But when Katrina spun through the gulf coast and caused massive devastation due to the failure of underfunded infrastructure, it really hit home.
WE HAVE TO FUND OUR INFRASTRUCTURE HERE IN WASHINGTON STATE!
This cartoon was in this morning’s
PI, and really makes the point:
So, why is the I-912 seemingly so likely to pass? I can think of at least three reasons:
1) It’s been framed as “Vote Yes on 912 and get rid of this horrible gas tax you don’t need anyway”, and there hasn’t been much response on the other side
2) Gas prices are rising, so folks feel that the tax would be oppressive
3) There is much confusion about strategy opposing I-912, and strange bedfellows
Ok, let’s tackle these one at a time…
1) We really shouldn’t let this be framed in terms of “wow, it’s a big gas tax increase — vote yes on I-912″, but rather we should be doing what we can to reframe it as “fix our roads and traffic congestion — vote no on I-912″. Nobody likes paying taxes, but nobody likes having roads crumble in an earthquake or getting stuck in congested traffic for hours each day either.
Of course, even if you frame it that way, it’s possible some folks will still legitimately not support voting “no” on I-912. These people are either reasonable (they don’t have a car, they walk to work, etc) or they’re hypocritical (they don’t like to pay for the infrastructure but they want it to be fixed anyway).
And there’s those people who think they should vote “yes” on I-912 because they don’t live in Seattle. “I don’t care about the SR520 bridge or the viaduct”, they say. Well, have a look at the list of projects across the state! Or have a look at the county-by-county list. These seem to be sensible projects, and they will have an infrastructure effect ALL OVER the state!
2) Gas prices ARE rising. But if gas prices are rising, that means you’re going to pay more for gas… with or without the added gas tax. And, if gas gets more expensive, that makes the portion of the gallon cost eaten by this new tax very minimal (and the savings from removing the tax, not all that great).
A little background: The 2005 gas tax that I-912 proposes to repeal adds 3 cents per gallon as of July 2005 (approximately 1% of the total gallon cost of gasoline at 2.81/gallon). It adds an additional 3 cents per gallon in 2006, 2 cents per gallon in 2007, and 1.5 cents per gallon in 2008. This is a total of 9.5 cents per gallon in additional state tax. Let’s pretend that by 2008, when all 9.5 cents are applied, a gallon of gas still averages 2.81. To be judicious, we’ll even say that 2.81 includes all 9.5 cents of added tax to make the % seem as large as possible. That 9.5 cents will account for 3.3% of the total cost of a gallon of gas. In a 15 gallon fill-up, it will add $1.42 at the pump.
Compare that if gas goes up to an average of $3.00 per gallon by 2008, that same 15 gallon fill-up will cost you an additional ($0.19 * 15) = $2.85.. more than twice as much as the effect of the gas tax!
If you look at it that way, a better initiative might be to find a way to keep gas prices more manageable, rather than repealing the 2005 gas tax for much needed infrastructure improvements!
3) I’ve been following a lot of the chatter about the various transit initiatives around Seattle, and I have been dismayed to see some concerted efforts to support I-912 by those who should know better (and for the wrong reasons). There is some support for I-912 coming out of the transit groups — say, Monorail supporters — as a way of “sticking it to” the sheep in their cars. This is just plain stupid. If you’re “for transit”, you should be “for infrastructure”. Plain and simple. Yes, yes… we know you don’t like people driving their cars to work. We also all agree that you can’t just keep widening highways indefinitely to solve the “congestion problem”.
But COME ON! If you’re one of those people, do you really think that if I-912 passes and the tax is repealed, we’ll really “learn our lesson” without things first getting much worse (or perhaps even through a tragedy like an earthquake)?! Do you really think the rabid anti-tax crowd pushing for the tax repeal will follow up their I-912 work with a mass transit initiative?! We need mass transit. We also need updated roads and bridges. Period.
I don’t get some of the strange, informal partnerships that have developed around I-912. I find it disturbing, and I hope the I-912 opposition can get some momentum before it’s too late.
And most of all, I hope that those folks who *SHOULD* be opposing the I-912 initiative come to their senses soon. I can think of only one type of person who should be in favor of I-912: rigidly anti-tax people (who, presumably, don’t support any tax for infrastructure). Everyone else in the state of Washington stands to gain from this tax.
If I-912 passes and the tax is repealed, we all stand to lose! VOTE NO ON I-912!
Learn more about I-912 and the 2005 Gas Tax:
Municipal Research & Services Center of WA, I-912 page: http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/finance/912/I-912.aspx - Appears nonbiased, provides links to both supporters and opponents of I-912
Washington State Labor Council, I-912 Info page: http://www.wslc.org/cope/I-912.htm - Lots of good information, takes a “No” position on I-912
