Washington State has a handful of very important initiatives on the ballot this November.

There is I-1098, the initiative that seeks to impose a state income tax in spite of Washington being only one of seven states with no income tax and therefore more attractive to businesses.* (See Idaho's governor, C.L. "Butch" Otter, and his "love letter" to WA businesses.)

There is I-1053, the initiative that seeks to reinstate the requirement that any tax increases are approved by a two-thirds majority of the Washington State Legislature, or a statewide popular vote. You see, Washingtonians had already approved this initiative years ago, but the legislature "suspended" it recently in order to raise taxes to deal with the current shortfall. (Pay no mind to those pesky... whatchamacallums... oh yeah, voters.)

There is I-1107, the initiative that seeks to repeal some of the taxes enacted by the legislature in their effort to reduce the budget shortfall. (Because cutting spending is never an option in Washington State, after all, there is just "nothing" left to cut.)

Finally, though there are more initiatives Washingtonians will see on the ballot, the last one highlighted here is I-1100, the initiative that seeks to privatize the sale of liquor by closing state liquor stores and authorizing the sale, distribution, and importation by private parties. (Seattle's Mayor McGinn is pushing hard against this initiative with his talking points in hand, complaining that this measure would increase the city's deficit by $3 million, from $56 million to $59 million.)

It is strange to see the pro-business, anti-tax measures alongside the pro-tax, big government initiative, but such is the initiative process in Washington State. This odd mixture is the result of reality catching up with lawmakers: "State's Spending Chickens Come Home to Roost" is an article written by Paul Guppy, the Vice-President for Research at the Washington Policy Center, and he knocks it out of the park with his analysis of the situation.

The constant budget crisis is not caused by lack of money. Washingtonians are generous in paying taxes, and year-over-year revenue has dipped only slightly. Also, lawmakers passed a $500 million tax increase in 2005 and added a further $800 million boost this year (more on that later).

The problem is the state's spending chickens have come home to roost. The proof is in the numbers. During the fat years, lawmakers boosted long-term spending by more than 30 percent in four years, raising the state's financial obligations an astonishing 16 percent in 2005 alone. Olympia lived like the good times would last forever.

Basically, the state legislature has had too much fun and now wants the taxpayers to pay for it, or at least wants "the rich" to pay for it. Mayor McGinn's thought process and solutions are the same as the state legislators' - i.e. tax and spend. They never consider the possibility of not only cutting spending, but of totally restructuring the budget. They want to continue the spending orgies rather than look at outcomes and seriously prioritize funding. Reality-based budgeting is outside their comfort zone as it would require discipline, restraint, and a non-ideological view of the role and responsibilities of government.

To add insult to injury, when the state legislature repealed the two-thirds requirement on tax increases, they also repealed the section of the law that required complete disclosure about those same tax increases.

Interestingly, Section 3 of the bill canceled a number of disclosure provisions designed to inform the public. Disclosure would have meant that each tax increase, its annual and 10-year cost, the name and contact information of each lawmaker, and how he or she voted on each tax increase would appear in the official pamphlet mailed to every voter in the state.

Most lawmakers had cast votes for more than a dozen tax increases. Seeing one's name listed on page after page of tax increases is not a comforting thought for an officeholder seeking re-election.

Knowing their names wouldn't appear cleared the way for the tax increases themselves. 2010's tax hikes add up to some $6.7 billion over 10 years and impose new levies on items ranging from bottled water to nursing home beds.

It is up to the voters of Washington State to take a good hard look at the initiatives and decide if they want their state government to be able to keep spending with no regard for the reckless expansion of government and debt, or if they want to force the state to be responsible by limiting how much money they are allowed to take from citizens.

Paul Guppy sums it up perfectly:

State leaders fail to set priorities and try to do too much. They enact policies based on ever-rising spending, and government ends up overpromising and underdelivering. The result is a chronic sense of fiscal crisis. No matter how much lawmakers increase our tax burden, they always seem to need more money.

*Rumor has it that the left-wing activist group, Washington CAN, actually wrote the state income tax initiative.