the official blog of the evergreen freedom foundation

iLearn Update: Francine hits the books and the open road

Posted by Diana Cieslak - July 29, 2010

“Francine, wake up! You’ve got to see this sunrise!”

Francine Wilde is a seventh grader at Washington Virtual Academy. After years of struggling in

traditional public school, Francine's mom decided to give online public school a try. Now Francine rides with her mom in her commercial truck, getting a first-class education while they cross the great Northwest together. Read their Pioneer Profile at www.iLearnProject.com.

Online learning meets students’ unique learning needs, fulfills state standards, and puts taxpayer dollars to good use. Learn more here.

[0 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

Federalist Society publishes assessment of Washington Supreme Court

Posted by Mike Reitz - July 28, 2010

The Federalist Society has published a white paper review of the Washington State Supreme Court and its record in three specific areas where the state constitution plays an important role in limiting state government. The three areas are property rights (especially with regard to eminent domain), the Washington Constitution's Privileges or Immunities Clause, and individual liberties (free speech, privacy, gun rights, and religious liberty).

This paper - The Washington Supreme Court and the State Constitution: A 2010 Assessment - is a good resource for citizens and voters who want to be informed about the importance of our state constitution and the court's record in several key issues that affect the rights of Washingtonians every day.

[0 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

King County Council holds public safety hostage in order to raise sales tax

Posted by Scott "The Piper" St. Clair - July 28, 2010

The Metropolitan King County Council wants voters to approve a two-tenths of one percent hike in county-wide sales and use taxes. Ostensibly, the increase, if approved, would go exclusively toward public safety services and replacing the King County Youth Services Center.

Why, of course - who could be against public safety? Let's everyone get on board, and we'll tolerate no dissenters because this tax increase is necessary or children will die...more or less.

Oh - really?

What if this is another example of King County holding public health and safety hostage in order to extract more money from the taxpayers? What if money to fully fund public safety services and replace the Youth Services Center was already in the budget, just apportioned to some other item or items? What if?

And if that is indeed the case, what does that say about the priorities of the King County Council?

But what should those priorities be? According to the English political philosopher John Locke, "Government being for the preservation of every man's right and property, by preserving him from the violence or injury of others, is for the good of the governed". (First Treatise, Chapter 9).

In other words, government is supposed to safeguard the lives and property of the governed before it does anything else. So, is that what King County is doing?

In the current King County budget, which voters do not have a chance to vote on, are the following line items of appropriation:

King County civic television $625,502

Federal lobbying 368,000

Membership & Dues 426,757

Internal support 7,782,733

Cultural Development Authority 11,889,836

Youth Sports Facilities Grants 615,352

Northwest Immigrant Rights Project 10,000

Refugee Women's Alliance 44,753

Unemployment Law Project 12,500

Parks and recreation 27,825,262

Geographic Information Systems 4,382,631

Employee Benefits 221,547,877

I'm not going to total them up - your calculator is as good, if not better, than mine.

No doubt, these are worthy programs and projects. Not going to debate that here. But are they higher in priority or importance than cops on the street, a functioning criminal justice system and other related programs?

If the appropriations listed above were subject to a public vote, would they pass - or go down like a manhole cover in a lake?

Should full public safety funding be at the top of the receiving line in the King County budget instead of being subject to a vote and increased taxes in order to make it happen?

You tell me, and we'll both know.

The Piper

[3 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

Race to the Top Over for Washington State

Posted by Diana Cieslak - July 27, 2010

This morning Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced the finalists for the second round of the Race to the Top grant competition. Washington didn’t make the cut.

Gov. Gregoire, Randy Dorn and State Board of Education Chairman Jeff Vincent issued this statement in response to Washington state’s elimination:

Today’s news does not mean the end of meaningful education reform in Washington. When we put together our application, we were committed, win or lose, to making sure we would carry out education reform our way, the Washington way. Race to the Top enabled us to spend time creating a road map to our education reform efforts through a draft plan that reflected the work of many diverse groups as well as the good work started by our most recent education laws. We will finalize the plan this fall and use it to prioritize and allocate resources as we move ahead with our state education reform efforts. It is a plan that reflects our views and values, is unique to our state and one that we know will work.

The News Tribune reports Mary Lindquist, president of the Washington Education Association, saying:

While we are extremely disappointed that the federal government did not recognize the collaborative effort between the governor, the Legislature, parents, other education advocacy groups, local school districts and WEA, the steps we have already taken in preparation for Race to the Top money set a framework for investing in a stronger public schools system. The application process itself proves that we can and will continue to work together to continuously improve public education across Washington.

According to the folks quoted above, the money isn't that important because we made significant strides toward improving education in our state. But did we? No.

What we got was watered-down policy and proof that collaboration between the state and the WEA results in policies that better serve the interests of adults more than kids.

Washington’s failure to qualify as a Race to the Top finalist shouldn’t surprise anyone. Why not? Because the legislation that was supposed to qualify us was full of good intentions and weak policy.

For example, Washington committed to reforming teacher and principal evaluation procedures, but fell short of including the single most important indicator of effectiveness: whether or not students learn. Plus, rather than improving the dismissal process for

persistently poor-performing teachers, the state maintained an archaic system that simply shuffles them to a different classroom or pays them not to work.

When it came to “turning around our lowest-achieving schools,” Washington’s reform efforts were unimpressive. Legislators created a new three-year improvement process, but any glimmer of reform fell flat when you reached the end of the legislation and found that there are no consequences for schools that fail to improve after the three years. The bill merely creates a working group that will decide what to do next. While they’re meeting, more students will be deprived of a good education. Oh, and they forbid the creation of charter schools in school turnaround models. (Other states increased the number of charter schools.)

Today’s announcement just shines one more light on the fact that our policymakers and education system are keeping our kids on a treadmill when they should be going somewhere.

[1 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

Get Free - Live at Right Online 2010 - Episode 48

Posted by Gregg Santee - July 27, 2010

We’re back with the popular Get Free Video Podcast - Episode 48

This week's episode was shot live at the Right Online new media conference in Las Vegas. We talk about the Government wanting to instate new regulations over what food is made available on public properties.

It's a fun time, so click play and enjoy our video podcast while you work!

Subscribe to this podcast on iTunes

[0 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

Gov. Christine Gregoire seeks to transform state budget - serious effort or shell game? Part III

Posted by Scott "The Piper" St. Clair - July 27, 2010

Here is the final installment of the analysis of Gov. Christine Gregoire's budget panel:

Suzanne Petersen, Vice President of External Affairs, Children’s Hospital – Nothing sucks down tax dollars more than health care, and nobody advocates on behalf of more and larger handouts than hospital executives. “Strong federal financial support is especially important to Seattle Children’s Hospital and the patients we serve,” said Peterson in a Children’s press release. Need we say more? Grade: MINUS – When asking what to do for those who constantly have their hands out, is it wise to ask those who constantly have their hands out?

Chief Don Pierce, Executive Director, Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs – With nearly 40 years in law enforcement, Chief Pierce has seen more than his share of budget imbroglios. While one might expect him to be someone who always wants more, there isn’t enough information available on the Internet to make an evaluation. Grade: QUESTION – Cops deserve a massive benefit of the doubt.

Stephen Reynolds, Chairman, President, and CEO, Puget Sound Energy – A career natural gas and electric power executive, Reynolds is also big on community involvement. While a lot of executives with regulated industries really like the cozy relationship they have with government, including keeping out the competition, there’s nothing to indicate that Reynolds would be anything other than the businessman he is. Grade: PLUS – Really, I just don’t want to risk getting my Puget Sound Energy bill jacked any more than it already is.

David Rolf, President, SEIU 775NW – Is this explanation really necessary? Rolf’s union represents tens of thousands of health care workers who are completely dependent upon state funding. Of course there’s no interest in reforming a system that plops largesse in his lap. Grade: MINUS, MINUS, MINUS – Fox/guard/chicken coop.

Orin Smith, former Chief Financial Officer of Starbucks and former director of Office of Financial Management – A Seattle scion if ever there was one, Smith served as director of the state Office of Financial Management under governors Dixie Lee Ray and Booth Gardner. He’s on more civic and business boards than five gallons of paint. Grade: PLUS – Noblesse oblige but with knowledge of a balance sheet.

Lyn Tangen, Director of Government and Community Relations, Vulcan – That she’s a Patty Murray campaign supporter pretty much says it all. I could say that her list of Facebook friends reads like a who’s-who of big-time pro-government-spending types, but I have a lot of the same folks as my FB friends – tolerance is a virtue. Grade: MINUS – Did I mention she supports Patty Murray?

Melinda Travis, Spokane community leader – The exact definition of “community leader” is unknown at this time. What is known is that Ms. Travis has a bachelor’s degree in psychology from Berkeley; works to create “a sustainable, equitable and regional community,” whatever that is; and pumped well over $8,000 into Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. Grade: MINUS – It’s that whole sustainable/equitable thing.

Remy Trupin, Executive Director, Washington State Budget and Policy Center – WBPC is described on its website as “an independent, progressive policy organization.” While that’s enough to flunk him, add the remarks he made upon being appointed to the panel: “One Fundamental reform that should be considered is justifying millions of dollars in tax breaks…In looking for savings, we should not abandon our values nor forget about our long-term well-being…The effects of the recession cannot be solely managed through cuts – it requires a balanced approach that includes revenue.” Translate: big government and high taxes forever. Grade: MINUS – My meds will have to be seriously adjusted for any of this to make sense.

Marilyn Watkins, Policy Director, Economic Opportunity Institute – EOI talks about “building public structures for the greater good,” which translates into single-payer health care and a high minimum wage. Never mind their effect upon the economy at large, you can always increase taxes. Dr. Watkins – she has a PhD in U.S. history – studies “the community basis of political reform movements.” Uh oh. Grade: MINUS – How about pondering the thesis is that the greater good is enhanced when fewer public structures are built and the people have more liberty and freedom?

Senator Joe Zarelli, Senate Republican Caucus – According to VoteSmart.org, in 2005 Sen. Zarelli supported the interests of the Freedom Foundation 100 percent. And he’s gotten good marks from many pro-taxpayer groups and bad marks from many pro-big-government groups. During the last legislative session, he was a voice of sanity. Grade: PLUS – There are a few legislators who aren’t solely interested in erecting monuments to their own folly.

David A. Zeeck, President and Publisher, The News Tribune – When it comes to the media, we always hope for objectivity and no evidence of partisan leaning. With Zeeck, we might have that since his long and distinguished career in the newspaper business is exceeded only by a total absence of information that evidences his opinion on anything other than journalism. Grade: ZERO – Zeeck is the only toss-up I could find.

The final total: eight PLUS, 18 MINUS, 5 QUESTION and one ZERO.

May I see the hands of anyone who thought the result would show a balanced panel? What…no hands? The deck chairs on the Titanic are being rearranged all over again.

The Piper

[0 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

Gov. Christine Gregoire seeks to transform state budget - serious effort or shell game? Part II

Posted by Scott "The Piper" St. Clair - July 27, 2010

Gov. Christine Gregoire must think that the more people she involves in the Washington state budget process, the more there are over whom she can spread the blame, hence her creation of a 32-member panel to develop “a new budget-building process.” The 32 are called “leaders from outside government (who will) provide input on state spending.”

Earlier this month, this reporter decided to look at them to see if we could get some insight into what we can expect from all this. I was not encouraged.

A quick review of the process – cribbed from my last post on the subject:

This reporter has rated each member of the panel with one of four grades: a PLUS means the individual is a serious person intent upon real reform. A MINUS means "here we go again" - more taxes, more spending, bigger and less accountable government and, generally, the same old, same old.

A ZERO indicates the person is a toss-up. Finally a QUESTION indicates there wasn't enough information readily available on the Internet to make a determination.

Criterion used to evaluate include whether the individual is a net recipient of tax-payer dollars or a net contributor; has the person any real, private sector, job-creation experience - has the person ever met a payroll as opposed to only being on one; has the person expressed a taxpayer-friendly point of view, or is he or she on the side of bigger, more profligate government and has the person been more on the side of solving the problem versus creating and perpetuating it?

This is NOT a scientific survey or analysis - it represents one reporter's opinion and commentary. In other words, if you have a beef with it then take it up with me - don't harass the office staff, thank you very much.

To date, the panel has met two out of its scheduled four times, once in Tacoma and once in Everett. News reports from both events show that those members of the public who attended can be divided into basically two groups: citizens who advocated for budget cuts and spending restraint and special interest and social welfare organization representatives who advocated slashing every budget but their own while raising taxes to increase funding to their own.

Word is that some on the panel may already be so disgusted that they will eschew attendance at further meetings, which will be held:

July 27 – 7-9 p.m.

Gaiser Hall, Clark College

1933 Fort Vancouver Way

Vancouver

July 29 – 5-7 p.m.

Spokane Community College, Lair Student Center

1810 N. Greene St.

Spokane

NOTE: The governor's office reads this blog. Barely two hours after this piece was posted, they notified this reporter personally that the locations for the Vancouver and Spokane events had changed. Thank you to all you folks in the Governor's Executive Policy Office for tuning us in. "You shall know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

Picking up with the second half of the governor’s panel, I will post the analysis in two parts in order not to have the world’s longest blog article:

Rep. Kelli Linville, House Democratic Caucus – Chair of the House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee, Linville has had her finger in all the tax and spending increase shenanigans since before she started wearing those strange kimono-style jackets on the floor of the House. Grade: MINUS – If the Legislature mucks up the budget process now, why put key legislators on a panel to reform it?

Mike McCarty, Chief Executive Officer, Association of Washington Cities – AWC is a lobbying organization for Washington state cities and towns, which always have their hands out. Before joining AWC, McCarty was the city administrator of the city of Shelton. Grade: MINUS – “I’ll never say no to you…” The Unsinkable Molly Brown.

Jason Mercier, Director, Center for Government Reform, Washington Policy Center – One of us, Jason is a former Freedom Foundation policy analyst now working for our friendly competitors up the road. He knows the full-monty score. Grade: PLUS – It’s lonely being perhaps the only sane one in the room.

Stephen F. Mullin, President, Washington Roundtable – The roundtable is the voice of 40 CEOs from major Washington state employers. They ought to know a thing or two about out-of-control spending and crippling taxes. Grade: PLUS – Here’s hoping the CEOs aren’t keeping “Come to South Carolina – Business is Great” brochures in their suit pocket.

Fred A. Olson, former Deputy Chief of Staff to the Governor – Olson spent a long time working for Gov. Gregoire in a variety of capacities before retiring. Prior to joining government, he was a reporter for The Olympian. Grade: MINUS – Once you’re in the governor’s pocket, you’re always in the governor’s pocket.

Stay tuned for parts two and three...

The Piper

[4 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

LeBron James, Sen. John Kerry and the late Judge Learned Hand - three of a kind?

Posted by Scott "The Piper" St. Clair - July 24, 2010

The late Judge Learned Hand, the greatest American jurist ever screwed out of a seat

on the U.S. Supreme Court, wrote in 1935:

"Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister
in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands." Gregory v. Helvering 69 F. 2d 809

There is no patriotic duty to pay high taxes or more than you are legally required to pay. And if you can legitimately adjust your affairs to reduce your overall tax liability, you have the legal right to do so. Seems pretty clear.

But now everybody and his mother are dumping on two noted Americans who have done just that. It's as if they have some heretofore unknown duty to do what others want in order to pay more taxes.

Sen. John Kerry owns a boat, but it's not just any boat: it's a 76-foot New Zealand-built Friendship sloop with an Edwardian-style, glossy varnished teak interior, two VIP main cabins and a pilothouse fitted with a wet bar and cold wine storage. The yacht was designed by noted Rhode Island designer Ted Fontaine..

Sen. Kerry is a Democrat from Massachusetts. But the yacht is berthed in Rhode Island. And this is because...? How about the fact that Rhode Island doesn't tax boats, but Massachusetts does. The Bay State levies a 6.5 percent sales tax and annual excise tax on yachts, which means that the Isabel (pictured below right), the name with which Kerry christened his new

toy, would have cost him $437,000 in sales tax and about $70,000 in annual excise taxes on the the yacht. Reports say that it sold for something close to $7 million.

The non-U.S.-built issue aside, since the yacht was purchased from a Rhode Island firm, designed by a Rhode Island resident and berthed in Rhode Island, then Massachusetts can't touch it.

LeBron James is the biggest name in basketball. Not since the legendary Michael Jordan has a player so dominated the game. Recently the free-agent James signed a contract with the Miami Heat, choosing them over the New York Knicks, who were salivating over him, and his now-former team the Cleveland Cavaliers.

The sports world was shocked: why would James go to smaller-market Miami rather than the Big Apple. Aside from the fact that Pat Riley coaches the Heat and has a winning record, tax analysts discerned a real reason. Consider:

"In addition to the basketball reasons for signing with the Heat, James is going to walk away from this deal with less money in his contract but more money in his pocket. This is because Florida offers a number of tax advantages over New York -- a fact that hasn't gone unnoticed in the tax world.

Assuming that James took just under $17 million from the Heat (which is probably pretty close to accurate), he would pay no state income tax, leaving him with the same $17 million. If he had gone to New York, even if he nabbed an additional $1.5 million (as the salary difference has been speculated), he would shell out close to $1.7 million in New York state taxes. That doesn't count James' endorsements with companies like Nike, Sprint and McDonald's. Those deals are said to bring in $40 million per year for James, landing him at #19 on the Forbes list of the 100 most powerful celebrities of 2009 (just behind his idol, Michael Jordan).

The total bill? Over five years, that means James could save more than $25 million in state taxes alone by relocating to Miami over New York. And that doesn't count other taxes such as local taxes (New York has a bunch) or property taxes (on average, New Yorkers pay a bigger percentage of their income for property taxes than Floridians). In fact, overall, Florida has a fairly attractive tax picture. Compared to other states, it is ranked by the Tax Foundation as 47th in terms of state and local tax burdens; New York, on the other hand, is 2nd (just behind New Jersey, the home of the Nets, also desperate to sign James).

Is the lure of lower taxes enough to have convinced James to make the switch? Not on its own: James is too smart for that. But you can bet it figured into the equation. He would not be the first mega-star lured down to Florida for tax reasons. Prior to his legal and marital woes, Tiger Woods was said to have relocated from California to Florida primarily in order to save on taxes."

Less on the gross, but more on the net - welcome to the world of business.

To all those who are complaining about Sen. Kerry's boat-docking scheme or LeBron going to the Heat (especially all you Knicks fans out there), consider that all both of them did is follow Judge Hand's dictum: "Nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands."

In fact, there is a legitimate school of thought that holds that the good senator and James did the moral thing since paying more in taxes than you have to only serves the encourage the government to engage in hanky panky.

If you want to get mad at someone, try the state legislature, but in this instance leave Sen. Kerry and LeBron alone to follow the guidance of their tax guru, Judge Learned Hand.

The Piper

[5 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

D.C. school chancellor Michelle Rhee fires 241 teachers

Posted by Scott "The Piper" St. Clair - July 24, 2010

Leaders who lead and take action attract attention and respect. Last Friday,

Washington, D.C. School Chancellor Michelle Rhee (pictured right) fired 241 teachers who had received poor performance appraisals under a new evaluation system that held teachers accountable for student standardized test results.

Another 737 teachers were rated "minimally effective" and given one year to get their performance up to snuff or face termination. There are approximately 4,000 teachers in the D.C. school system.

Not unexpectedly, the Washington Teachers' Union put up a stink saying that it would challenge the terminations.

Rhee justified the actions based upon the results of a standardized evaluation system for teachers that intensively monitored both their performance and that of their students on standardized tests.

This follows closely after New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's aggressive challenge of the teachers' union in New Jersey where he laid down hard fiscal-markers against the union.

Sometimes when you want to make progress and shake up the orthodoxy you have to take a hard stand and risk rather than pander to to the very people who are a large part of the problem.

We will keep an eye on both Rhee and Christie and let you know how things turn out.

The Piper

[1 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

Crosscut: All the News that's Fit to Print, Even If It's Wrong

Posted by Brett Davis - July 23, 2010

Earlier this week, I blogged about a Crosscut piece that describes Initiative 1098 as cutting property taxes by 20 percent, when in fact I-1098 cuts only the state’s portion of property taxes by 20 percent. That’s an important distinction, because a 20 percent reduction of the state’s portion of the property tax is much less than a one-fifth reduction of your overall property tax bill.

I would have thought Crosscut would have been eager to provide a correction or clarification. Apparently, I was wrong. I sent an e-mail to the author of the piece, and got no response. I also sent an e-mail to David Brewster, Crosscut editor/publisher. You can read the text of the e-mail below:

Dear Mr. Brewster,

On 19 July you published an article by Knute Berger, “Should Seattle have an income tax?” This article contains the statement that Initiative 1098, the high-earner income tax, would “cut property taxes by 20 percent.”

In fact, Part III, Section 301 of I-1098 states, “Beginning in 2012, the state property tax levy is reduced by twenty percent of the levy amount that would otherwise be allowed under this chapter without regard to this section.” According to the Department of Revenue’s Property Tax Levy Rates chart from 2009, the state portion of the property tax makes up only 21 percent of the total property tax bill on average. In other words, 20 percent of 21 percent is slightly more than 4 percent. That’s a far cry from the 20 percent property tax cut mentioned in Mr. Berger’s article—a figure still cited in the story as I write this e-mail. (I sent Mr. Berger an e-mail informing him of the error.)

I believe you owe it to your readers to make a correction/clarification. After all, you wouldn’t want to mislead your readers into thinking I-1098 will, if approved, cut people’s overall property tax bill by 20 percent, would you?

Brett Davis

Economic Policy Analyst

Evergreen Freedom Foundation

The response: zilch.

In addition, I posted a similarly-worded response in the Comments section of the article.

As I write this blog, the online article still states I-1098 would “cut property taxes by 20 percent.” Crosscut readers deserve better than to have the news organization run an article with misleading information and then fail to make a correction or clarification. Honesty, as it turns out, really is the best policy.

[0 Comments ][ Post a Comment ]

<< View all older posts >>