"The solution is not in raising property taxes"

You voted for that?

The Supreme Court is sure you were just confused

Editor, The Times:

A couple of weeks ago, our esteemed State Supreme Court said it was all right to lie in political campaigns. Now it tells us that we were deceived back in 2001 and that we didn't know what we were voting for with Initiative 747 ["State Supreme Court rules Tim Eyman property-tax initiative unconstitutional," Times page one, Nov. 8]. Doesn't that mean that we were lied to?

The idiotic logic that this court uses defies both common sense and rational thought. As I understand it, I-747 was written by a current member of the court who removed himself from the case because of his participation.

So Justices Barbara Madsen, Susan Owens, Bobbe Bridge and a couple of temps decided we are far too ignorant to understand the written word, despite numerous editorials telling us exactly what the proposition would do.

Well, to the Legislature and the governor, your inability to understand where people are on the excessive taxation you have levied upon us has handed Dino Rossi a major issue to beat you over the head with [in the next governor's race], and I hope you acquire a headache the likes of which you have never known.

— Phil Bate, Lynnwood

State of negation

More than 50% of registered voters can be wronged

Last time I checked, this was still a democracy (although the current White House administration has raised some doubts), meaning rule of the majority. What gives Tim Eyman and the other supporters of Initiative 960 the idea that the minority (one-third plus 1) ought to be able to tell the majority (50 percent plus 1) what to do? ["Voters favor insurance bill, rainy-day fund; Eyman's anti-tax measure passing," Politics, Nov. 7].

My fervent hope is that someone with more time and money than I will take the stupid thing to court and that it gets declared unconstitutional.

On second thought, here's an idea: Maybe I'll launch an initiative that would require a two-thirds vote to approve Eyman's asinine initiatives.

— William Osmer, Bellevue

We won't stand for it

It should be readily apparent to even the densest Democrat that the results of Tuesday's election are saying loud and clear: NO MORE TAXES FOR LIGHT RAIL, RAPID TRANSIT, STAGECOACH OR ANY OTHER FORM OF MASS TRANSPORT! ["Huge roads-transit plan gets trounced," page one, Nov. 7.]

This society is not a society of cattle-car movement. We are not going to abandon our cars to satisfy the ego of politicians aspiring to be amateur social engineers at any level of government, and those who persist on this course of action will find themselves unelected next November.

Get back on the job and give us more freeways and better and safer bridges.

Have done with the foo-foo hand-wringing and procrastination and get on with the job.

— Preston Sult, Redmond

Call us anything

but done for later

Regarding "An election with a cease-fire" [editorial, Nov. 7]:

As The Times phrases it, the "opportunity was apparently not well-explained," to vote for the "... absolutely needed highway improvements in the roads package." Contrary to your arrogant and condescending statement, Proposition 1 was very well-explained and understood even by us intellectually inferior taxpaying dolts.

While no one questions the need for an expanded Highway 9 in Snohomish County, it should not come years from now and at the expense of an open-ended fiasco to fund public transportation in King County.

In our dullest moment we were not persuaded by the authors of this bill, who tried to sprinkle a little fairy dust on Snohomish County to get us to vote for the whole taco salad!

Since you cannot blame this one on Tim Eyman, try in the future to give us a little credit.

— Bill Coonce, Lake Stevens

The cane mutiny

Seattle pollster Stuart Elway's remarks about low turnouts and conservative older people ["Reading the election's tea leaves," Politics, Nov. 8], are quite insulting. All of us who voted in this election were informed voters. And even if the turnout went to 60 percent, we would have still voted.

Age has nothing to do with being sick of taxes and false promises. Age teaches wisdom and tells us if we want change, we have to stand up and fight. Yes, I am an older voter, but I am proud to say every item I marked on my ballot came true.

Elway's comment was like saying the people who voted on these issues do not matter as they are old and conservative. Perhaps if our government were more conservative, we would not have so many issues failing.

— Ronald Sorenson, Snoqualmie

Zero unmasked

I did not vote in the election. It is the first time I have not voted in more than 30 years and, sadly, I did not feel guilty. I read all the Voters Pamphlets, listened to the various candidates and issues being discussed and debated on television and the radio. I did my homework and just could not feel anything but confusion, disillusionment and frustration.

Take Proposition 1, for example. It reminds me a lot of Sen. Dianne Feinstein's recent comment about why she decided to support Michael Mukasey for U.S. attorney general — her comment that at least "he is no [Alberto] Gonzales" mirrored what most experts were saying about Proposition 1: It doesn't offer what we need, but at least it is something that attempts to solve our transportation issues.

Then you have the likes of [Seattle City Council candidates] David Della and Venus Velázquez. Why bother to vote for any of them? Why bother to vote for any of the incumbents on our City Council? Why vote for any legislator, mayor or governor? They cannot even figure out how to fix the mess on the Alaskan Way Viaduct. They will all be pointing fingers when people are crushed to death during the next earthquake when the viaduct comes down!

Amazing! We can't find one person in city or state government who can actually bring reasonable, effective and understandable legislation to the table.

What Seattle needs is a hero. Someone who has a brain, who can step up to the plate and figure out how to solve our transportation issues — a City Council that actually has people on it who know what they are doing; a mayor and governor who can lead and not pass the buck back and forth because they don't want to take the blame for any mistakes.

Until that hero comes forward, we should just keep voting out the incumbents. When that hero arrives, believe me — he or she will be elected mayor or governor for life.

— Mary West, Seattle

It takes a village

The failure of Resolution 4204 is not only disappointing, it gives me concern for our society.

Childless adults often feel that they have no responsibility to pass school levies or to support schools and students in their educational needs. However, regardless of whether one has kids or not, we all have a responsibility in our community to our youth because they are the future leaders and workers in our world.

When we retire and have greater health needs, we have more dependence on society for our well-being. Investing in schools and education also sends the message to our children that we care about them. It teaches an invaluable lesson to them that they are worthwhile and models for them to be good citizens who then, in turn, can make better decisions for themselves and their future, which is ultimately our future.

Maybe our teachers didn't stress enough the importance of civic responsibility (to be involved in the community and democratic process, to vote and be a productive member of society), but let's not pass on this ignorance to our kids. They deserve better.

Although I have no biological children of my own, I feel obligated to support my students, who are my kids, and by extension, all of our kids. It's a big investment that we all have a part in.

— Jill Warner, Shoreline

It takes our house

I voted against Resolution 4204 because it is puts the burden unfairly on homeowners.

My wife and I are childless by choice and, in our mid-50s, unlikely to change our minds [about children]. As ardent progressives, we have always supported public education and gladly pay nearly 50 percent of our property taxes for that support.

However, we are also now disabled and on fixed incomes and are getting fearful for our future as we see that tax rising steadily every year.

We worked very hard to own our land and house after renting for most of our lives and now, strangely, we seem to be getting penalized for that effort.

I posit that the majority of children in the public-school system are from house-renting households and pay almost nothing, compared with our property taxes, toward the support of that school system. This is not equitable for most homeowners and particularly not for us as we haven't added kids to the burden of the schools, while supporting them as if we had.

The solution is not in raising property taxes even higher and with even greater ease than at present. The solution is in an equitable tax that is required from all parents who have children in school.

As distasteful as I and probably most Washingtonians find it, an increase in the sales tax or a state income tax seem to be the only choices left. It's either that or my wife and I and many others on fixed incomes will be losing our homes and all that we worked so very hard for. We will become renters and, ironically, there will be even less in the public-education fund.

— Donald Mack, rural Shelton

Lost it to the dumbbells

TV news film of a local high school MRSA [staph infection] scrub-down may have contributed to the defeat of the school-tax measure.

The film, which included pictures of a weight room that would rival LA Fitness, may have led viewers/voters to conclude that schools — at least that one — were not setting appropriate priorities for the money they already have.

— Nick Olson, Tacoma

Half count on one finger

I think I know why voters didn't pass the school levies' simple-majority vote.

They couldn't do the math.

— Henry Mark, Seattle