After reading Mr. Olson’s letter in the October 20 issue, I felt compelled to respond. I can agree with two of his concepts: first to ask the real question on Initiative 1098, and second that this is an important vote for the children of Washington. By his own reasoning, however, he makes the case for a “no” vote.
The three “no” respondents to the man in the street poll expressed the wisdom of experience regarding the “safeguards” in the initiative. Has there been a tax instituted in recent memory that did not expand to fill the ever growing “need” of the overspending legislature? Has there been a tax instituted with assurances that it would fund a particular earmark that was not mingled with the general fund?
Property owners need to ask themselves if a two-year reduction in property tax offsets the amount they will pay in future income taxes. Business owners need to ask themselves if the temporary savings in B&O tax offsets the cost of administering the new income tax for their employees and themselves. Imagine how much $2 billion a year left in taxpayers’ hands could stimulate the state’s economy.
Here are some real questions voters need to consider as they fill out their ballots:
1: Will this tax be any different once instituted?
2: What do I wish for my children—the freedom to earn an unencumbered living, or a huge tax burden on the fruits of their labor?
3: Where do the solutions to social questions lie: in individual responsibility, or in big government?
I support funding first rate public schools and medical services for children in poor families but not by voting for my own serfdom. I am no longer as naive as I was to believe the framers of the lottery solution for education funding.
Don’t let the framers of this initiative fool you. Understand that the reductions are temporary and the income tax is forever. I will be voting “no” on Initiative 1098 and working to find private sector funding solutions for public schools and medical services for children of poor families.
Patricia Nero
North Bend
