Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

KevinCarbonara t1_ivn8q29 wrote

Why the hell are people voting to repeal the tax on jet fuel?

28

TrainingCartoonist30 t1_ivn9zps wrote

Those stupid advisory votes are worded so poorly I'm convinced that many people don't know what a yes or no means. Cost money for gov't spending? What? Every time I see those I wonder what the people who voted to put advisory votes on the ballot were on.

27

[deleted] t1_ivnjozx wrote

[deleted]

11

Eminem_McFlurry t1_ivnpvf5 wrote

Exactly fucking this. We elected representatives to figure this shit out for us. Giving it back to the people, with that wording, makes it sound like our elected officials went rogue or whatever.

5

tdogg241 t1_ivonq7j wrote

Thank renowned shoplifter Tim Eyman and his grifter initiatives for advisory notes.

So glad that chud is too busy with court to fuck with our democracy further.

6

smegdawg t1_ivp69xr wrote

>The legislature increased without a vote of the people, the tax on aircraft fuel from 11 cents to 18 cents per gallon, costing $14 million in its first ten years, for government spending.

For WA most of the time you can just cross this line out of the text and then re-read it to not get your head tongue tied.

Personally I don't think the bolded word should be there either as it reads as if it is costing the state this amount. A more accurate phrase would be "Generating $14 million in tax revenue..."

6

TrainingCartoonist30 t1_ivq3p2o wrote

Right, exactly. The wording is designed to confuse people into thinking that it's unnecessary government spending. It's bad policy and embarrassing to have on our ballots.

5

KevinCarbonara t1_ivnlk72 wrote

I wonder if that's part of it. I know there's been a big push against property taxes because people are upset that their houses are declining in value after buying at the ATH, but jet fuel? come on

0

MondayCrosswords OP t1_ivnbs2a wrote

Fortunately advisory notes don't mean anything anyway.

8

KevinCarbonara t1_ivnll5z wrote

Do they not? I know they're not binding, but wouldn't they influence politicians?

2

sarahjustme t1_ivogftr wrote

I'm not sure why they exist either, but I'm assuming it's just to "make people feel heard"

1

MondayCrosswords OP t1_ivpeaov wrote

I am not 100% sure about this, but I don't think there's any record of the results of an advisory vote significantly influencing legislation. '

They exist because of Tim Eyman. Excerpt of the main stuff if you hit the paywall: "The tax-related questions put to voters have been a staple of Washington ballots since 2007, when anti-tax initiative activist Tim Eyman ran and won voter approval for Initiative 960. The campaign’s success means that anytime the Washington Legislature opts to raise taxes, their actions are subject to judgment by voters."

3

sarahjustme t1_ivpv5id wrote

That's more or less what I figured. They're so obviously stilted and amateurish in their wording, it has to be about feelz not actual attempts at doing anything. Not worth the actual effort, but itd be funny to compare the stuff the anti tax people complain about, to the stuff their elected reps are voting for.

1

sarahjustme t1_ivpv78u wrote

That's more or less what I figured. They're so obviously stilted and amateurish in their wording, it has to be about feelz not actual attempts at doing anything. Not worth the actual effort, but itd be funny to compare the stuff the anti tax people complain about, to the stuff their elected reps are voting for.

1