This November, the citizens of Washington State will decide on six ballot initiatives. The most recent survey from the Washington-based Elway Poll (PDF) found all six initiatives’ popularity below 50 percent. The conventional wisdom is that any high profile ballot measure polling below 50 percent this far out from the election is in serious danger of losing, as most of those left undecided on an initiative tend to default to voting no. According to Leslie Graves at Ballotpedia.org, “Realistically, they each have a very, very steep mountain to climb.”
Elway Poll (PDF) (9/9-12)
I-1053: Require Two-Thirds Majority for Tax Increase
Yes 48
No 27
Undecided 25
I-1098: Establish “High Incomes” Tax
Yes 44
No 42
Undecided 14
I-1107: Repeal Tax on Candy, Soda Pop, and Bottled Water
Yes 47
No 38
Undecided 15
I-1100: Privatize Liquor Sales
Yes 45
No 34
Undecided 21
I-1105: Privatize Liquor Sales (slightly more regulated)
Yes 41
No 33
Undecided 26
I-1082: Authorize Private Industrial Insurance
Yes 31
No 31
Undecided
If you live in Washington State and want to replicate the gridlock and endless budget problems found in California thanks to that state’s two-thirds requirement on votes to raise taxes, then ballot measure I-1053 is for you. The measure has lost a huge amount of support since June when it was polling at 65-25, according to a previous Elway Poll.
I-1053 was sponsored by Tim Eyman, who is known for working on dozens of initiative campaigns in the state. A similar measure, I-960, also backed by Eyman, was approved by a narrow 51 percent of voters in 2007, but was repealed by the state legislature in 2010. (A month before the 2007 election, an Elway poll found I-960 leading with 56 percent planning to vote yes.) Some of the measure’s top donors include BP Corporation North America, Conoco Phillips, Equilon, Tesoro Companies Inc., Bank of America, and the Washington Bankers Association.
Interestingly, this year, people have tried to depict the Tea Parties as a grassroots movement emerging from a national wave of anger about being overtaxed, combined with a strong desire to shrink the government. Some will no doubt claim that if Republicans win big this November, it is because Americans really want lower taxes and much less government.
The polling data in Washington State, at least, doesn’t seem to bear that out. The two anti-tax initiatives have pretty weak support at this point. Nor does there seem to be a very strong desire among voters for privatizing the state-run liquor stores or workers’ compensation insurance program.
I see this as fairly good proof that voters are not embracing Republican ideology this election. They are simply getting rid of Democrats because the economy has floundered terribly under Democratic control of the federal government.



14 Comments
great work, Jon
What is “privatize” liquor sales? Do they now have state liquor stores as some states do?
Hard liquor is sold in State stores, as well as wines. However wine and beer are also sold at other retail stores and restaurants if they have a liquor license.
Privatizing liquor sales would cause the state to lose million$ in revenue, not to mention the displacement of hundreds of state workers.
It’s interesting that I-1098 is polling so well. There is a *very* strong anti-income tax contingent in Wash State, especially those of the “slippery-slope” theory…
Thanks for the answer. I know that Ms has state owned stores but didn’t know that Wa did.
Imhotep, actually all the stores are private and they are granted licenses by the state. The state makes the purchase of all the liquor and sells it to the stores at its marked up rate.
It’s another reqressive sales tax and I am not sure why liberals keep supporting raising regressive sales taxes in this state. We need to support an income tax.
It’s interesting that I-1098 is polling so well. There is a *very* strong anti-income tax contingent in Wash State, especially those of the “slippery-slope” theory…
It is getting a lot of support from Bill Gates, Sr. He is the one providing the funding and support.
if what you say is true (i really don’t know) then privatizing the sales to other stores like walmart and such wouldn’t change the prices much, but would flood the poor people with liquor and be worse for them and society overall.
the current liquor setup is fine, you just have to buy liquor a day ahead, and not when you’re already drunk and run out
vote no on 1053, 1107, 1100, 1105. vote yes on 1098. and i have no idea what that 6th one is about
the sixth one is pretty bad.
The state will loose funding from the liquor sales because it will allow the stores to buy directly from the wholesalers. I am actually in favor of I-1105. I am not anti alcohol and a I am not anti Jon is right 1098 is horrible it is sponsored by the insurance industry. Think of private health insurance as compared to medicare. 1105 will install a tax yet to be determined.
my votes will be:
No- 1053, 1107, 1100, 1082.
Yes- 1098, 1105
Initiative 1082
If there are any other Washington voters out there please get the word out to vote no on 1082 it basically privatizes workers compensation insurance.
This seems like as good a place as any for me to state what I believe to be the outcome of any measure adopted by a mere majority which imposes the requirement of a supermajority for some future act.
I believe it is a denial of equal rights and due process, and thus is unconstitutional.
Does anyone know whether it has ever been tested in court?
Article II, Section 22 of the Washington State Constitution declares:
PASSAGE OF BILLS. No bill shall become a law unless on its final passage the vote be taken by yeas and nays, the names of the members voting for and against the same be entered on the journal of each house, and a majority of the members elected to each house be recorded thereon as voting in its favor.
in english “Simple Majority”.
There will definitely be a court challenge if it passes in Washington State. Whether or not it is constitutional depends on the state constitution. The Federal government has almost always stayed out of State taxing authority.
It seems straight up unconstitutional to me, also as a real of thumb I believe any law to raise the vote requirement over 50% should need to pass with that same margin.
If it is an Eyman initiative it is an automatic NO vote for my husband and me. The construction and logging industries are pushing for the privatization of workers compensation insurance. There is a lot of frustration with L&I allowing people who everyone knows wasn’t injured on the job to soak the company they worked for. Not sure how I’m going to vote on it. We have a high L&I rate business, and the whole process is very frustrating.
Usually I just vote NO on initatives, but 1098 and 1100 are going have to require a bit more thought, before I decide which way I’m going to vote.
I will be voting YES for my library district levy.