Everyone Has an Opinion on the 747 Session - Even Me

Like a crack in the dike, the special session has released a flood of opinion on property taxes and politics.

This morning, The News Tribune calls for a temporary I-747 fix. And in the TNT's editorial blog, Patrick O'Callahan wonders about the Eyman-Rossi axis.

Seattle PI columnist sees the session as evidence that Eyman's got state leaders on the run. The PI also carries  an op-ed by Juan Martinez of the Washington Tax Fairness Coalition. He thinks I-747 was a "disaster" and believes the Supreme Court decision trashing the initiative gives political leaders an opportunity to do property tax reform right.

Daniel Jack Chasan uses the I-747 session as a vehicle to reprise in Crosscut the old line that voters want services but don't want to pay for them.

Policy researchers have been busy, too.

The Budget and Policy Center offers a six-part series documenting its preferred (more liberal) alternatives to the 1-percent cap.

At the Washington Policy Center, Paul Guppy weighs in with an early analysis of "the second bill," the  less-discussed tax deferral proposal lawmakers will consider tomorrow.  He finds it wanting.  Earlier this month the WPC urged the Legisalture to reinstate the 1-percent cap, repeal banked taxing authority and phase out the state property tax.

The Evergreen Freedom Foundation also wants the 1-percent limit, a phased-out state property tax, and elimination of the banked taxing authority. It also doesn't think much of the tax deferral proposal.

John Burbank, of the Econoomic Opportunity Institute, thinks it's time to scrap the whole tax system.

In the Spokesman Review, I suggest that there's risk in a special session.