Editor’s note: This opinion piece was published prior to Gov. Bob Ferguson’s deadline for signing legislation approved during the session. Look for updates at yelmonline.com and in next week’s edition of the Nisqually Valley News.
The people of Washington are about to watch their new governor make what would seem to be the most important and revealing choice of his short time in office.
No later than Tuesday, Gov. Bob Ferguson must decide whether to go along with the largest package of tax increases in state history, approved by his fellow Democrats in the state Legislature, or throw the new state operating budget out of balance by vetoing the many tax increases that would fall hardest on Washington’s working families.
Republicans would encourage him to get his veto pen out and use it liberally. The operating budget Democrats submitted to Ferguson is wrong for our state in so many ways, starting with the sheer size of the tax package: $12.5 billion over four years, between higher state- and local-level taxes that include a property tax increase.
If the governor ends up calling legislators back to Olympia to try again, so be it. Maybe the majority would then be more open to considering the Senate Republican approach — our “$ave Washington” budget, which is balanced without a single tax increase and wouldn’t cut anyone off of state-funded services.
But suppose Ferguson lets even some of the new taxes through. Shouldn’t the people on the hook to pay those additional hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions, have reason to be upset, especially if they know how Democrats consistently rejected the no-new-taxes budget we proposed?
Apparently not, according to the senator from Seattle who was the primary instigator of the Democrats’ record breaking tax package. In her own words, it’s a “privilege” to pay taxes.
That’s a heck of a claim to make, but it helps explain the mindset Republicans are up against in Olympia. We heard it in the Senate chamber late in the session, while debating the bill that will significantly expand the Democrat-approved state income tax on capital gains, only two years after collection of the tax began.
A fellow Republican senator who represents another part of Clark County had just related the story of a very successful business owner who moved out of the county, and our state, because Democrats began taxing the income from capital gains.
The Democrats’ tax instigator, a self-described progressive policy champion, responded with the tone-deaf comment about how paying taxes — to support K-12 public schools, early learning and childcare, which was the excuse for creating the capital-gains tax — is a privilege.
“The fact that somebody would leave our state because we ask them to do their fair share and contribute to the children of our state is a sad statement,” she added. “That they would leave our state and not contribute to the future of our state. I think that’s very unfortunate, a poor choice. I think we should fund our public schools.”
Of course we should fund our public schools. Providing for K-12 education is the paramount duty of state government, so it’s not even a choice. And the truth is, we can do it without an income tax on capital gains. It’s less about resources and more about priorities and resolve.
In 2017, when Republicans led the state Senate and well before Democrats imposed the income tax on capital gains, we made sure the new budget sent to the governor put more than 50% of general-fund dollars into K-12 public schools. That seemed appropriate, considering support for public schools is our top constitutional priority.
Democrats can think it’s sad when their tax policies cause Washingtonians to relocate, but what’s really sad is that the majority has allowed K-12’s share of funding to fall below 44% of the budget, despite the promises made when the capital gains tax was imposed.
It’s sadder still that despite the record tax increases approved this year — some of which also are earmarked for schools — the majority chose to allocate an even smaller share of the new budget to K-12. That conflicts with what the governor said he wants in a new budget. It’s yet another reason for him to exercise his veto power in a way that forces legislators from his own party to do better.