After reading all of the Tim Eyman quotes regarding Initiative 745 in the Oct. 22 news articles, all I could do is shake my head. He wants to take money from transit to achieve the proposed 90-to-10 spending ratio for roads, but admits that it’s probably unconstitutional to do so. Doing this would put more cars on the roads without adding money for roads since transit is supported by local not state taxes. To achieve the ratio you could also increase the amount that is spent on roads. Here he advocates financing billions of dollars in bonds year after year, while at the same time insisting that this can be done without any new taxes. Show me how so I can continually take out second mortgages without increasing my income to repay them.
Should I vote for I-745 because Tim Eyman has expressed confidence that lawmakers could find a way to achieve the financing balance without raising taxes? Isn’t this the same Tim Eyman who said that lawmakers could implement I-695 without making significant cuts? We need real solutions, not empty rhetoric. Vote no on I-745.