On his Facebook page (Don’t have one? Too bad, Facebook is almost as much fun as writing provocative columns!) former Rep. Toby Nixon queried about naming this most recent storm. He noted that it couldn’t be called the Hanukkah Eve storm since that name is already taken by last year’s.
Given that over the past few years we seem to be having nastier and colder winters (Winter? The dang storm dumped tons of snow and it was still fall!) I suggested calling it the Great Global Warming Storm of 2008. As good a name as any, don’t you think?
Lucky it is that I work out of my home. Watching the snow fall through a picture window beats watching it through a windshield.
Since we’re discussing cold and wet things, that brings me to Gov. Christine Gregoire’s proposed budget and expectations of the coming legislative session in Olympia.
I have to hand it to the governor: she said she wouldn’t propose a tax increase, and she stuck to it. The Washington Legislature, on the other hand, isn’t to be trusted since, in the words of the old saw, nobody’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.
A recent article in The Seattle Times contended that, contrary to almost everyone’s belief, the Washington State Constitution doesn’t require a balanced budget –- the governor is only required to propose one. That hyperventilating sound you heard were scores of legislators lusting in their hearts to float bonds to pay routine expenses, which is akin to paying your monthly bills with a credit card after blowing your paycheck on fun and frivolity.
For four years, state spending zoomed up by one third. Good times were had by all in government and among those on the receiving end of government spending. Now, however, the only ones being had are taxpayers.
Figuratively speaking, the days of free food -– who doesn’t like free food? -– are over.
That brings us now to the City of Kirkland and the tax-increase lunacy it embarked upon to ostensibly pass a balanced budget.
What better way to toss cold water on whatever embers of economic growth still exist than to increase taxes during a recession? Why not do what Kirkland families do when faced with hard times, and that’s cut spending? If that means you cut it to the bone, then you cut it.
Some City Council members shed crocodile tears, saying how they didn’t want to pass a tax increase -– then why did you? –- or how it’s more important to sustain services or be “consistent with sister cities” (keeping up with the Jones’ are we?) or how government is way too dependent upon sales and property taxes, which is like families saying they’re way too dependent upon wages or investment income.
No, City Council, you don’t really need the money, you need to cut spending with the sharpest knife possible. Irrespective of special interests, including public employee unions who always make out like bandits in these things, pare that budget to match revenue levels.
Despite budget deliberations in December, you weren’t elected to be Santa — you were elected to lead and be tough. Quit complaining about the tax system and the alleged tax slights you feel you’ve endured — live within your means! Less government is better, not more. Eliminate programs. If necessary, lay off more employees and slash executive salaries.
The sales tax may be volatile, but it’s the best measure of taxpayers’ economic health. City Council, figure out a way to link spending with that health, with the sales tax.
You’re killing small business with tax increases.
Tax increases don’t occur in a vacuum, they have consequences: fewer jobs, less business spending, higher prices resulting in less growth, and more. City revenues go down, not up.
Bothell does it right, so why can’t Kirkland?
Want help? Send me the budget, I have a sharp knife.
