This November we get to vote on how we are going to pay for future roadwork and transportation projects. We will vote on whether or not we want to raise the gas tax to do this. The problem with this proposal is more in the way it is packaged than anything else. As it has been pointed out, raising the gas tax will not improve the efficiency and speed of getting transportation projects completed, but rather keep it at its present pace, because of budget shortfalls this state is already experiencing.
It is true that we need to fill these gaps, but adding to the gas tax is a very poor way to do this. What this would do is disproportionately stick people who don’t have as high of an income with the tax burden. Why? Because of travel. Most of the jobs in this state are in Everett, Tacoma, Seattle, or the Bellevue-Redmond area, yet these areas cost of living expenses are rather high. Someone who makes $12 an hour in Redmond probably cannot afford to live in Redmond, but rather in Everett, which means they have to commute. The gas tax would increase their costs of commute time and lower the amount of food in their cupboards in the process.
The question arises of whether or not they should then get a car with better mileage. There you have to ask yourself: which is more affordable, a Honda Civic or a Ford Taurus (the Ford with the worse mileage is the correct answer)? So which will this worker be more likely to afford? In turn, a person who is making $25 an hour in Redmond is more able to live in that area, and purchase a vehicle that uses less gas. Less of a commute plus better mileage equals fewer taxes being paid and more money in the pocket. Of course, the query arises of whether or not person B should be paying for person A’s roads when they don’t use them. In a society where we all look out for only number one, of course they shouldn’t. But last I checked, here in the U.S. we look out for each other. This is where the major flaw is in Referendum 51. So, then you must ask where we get the money from to fill in this gap.
The solution is so obvious, yet at the same time demonized: a state income tax. When one thinks about it, a state income tax is what would be best for the majority of Washington citizens. It would work like the federal income tax (i.e. deductions for childcare, philanthropy, etc.), and at the same time, instead of spending out of pocket, for most of us we would never see the money that we pay to taxes because it would come out of our paychecks! In turn, this would allow the state to lower the sales tax (if not abolish completely) and not have to up all the rest of the taxes in the state. This way we also would probably have to worry less about the Tim Eyman’s of the state creating these budget gaps, and give them more time to irk our lawmakers other ways (like putting out initiatives to cap elected officials’ pay – talk about a waste of money).
So, even as a fervent Democrat, I would have to say that we all should vote no on Referendum 51.
Everett
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
