Another kind of budget showdown took place today in the state Senate when Sen. Tim Sheldon asked for a ruling on whether a liquor tax increase required supermajority approval under I-960. Sen. Sheldon thought it did. Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown contended I-960 imposed an unconstitutional restraint on the prerogatives of the legislature.
Lt. Governor Brad Owen made the only logical ruling: of course it requires a supermajority.
Joe Turner has the details in the Political Buzz blog of The News Tribune. The link includes the entirety of the lieutenant governor's ruling. Here's the critical portion (the lieutenant governor is president of the Senate):
The Constitution is the preeminent law of our state, and all other laws and rules applicable to this body are unquestionably subordinate to the Constitution. Nonetheless, the President has taken an oath to uphold all of the laws of our state and nation, including both Constitutional and statutory law. Whatever the merits of Senator Brown’s legal argument—and the President is inclined to agree with her arguments—it is not for him to decide legal matters. Under our Constitutional framework of separation of powers, the authority for determining a legal conflict between the Constitution and a statute is clearly vested with the courts.
For these reasons, the President believes he lacks any discretion to make such a ruling, and he explicitly rejects making any determination as to the Constitutionality of I-960 and instead is compelled to give its provisions the full force and effect he would give any other law.
So the tax hike, falling short of the supermajority, failed.
This won't be the end of it. As I wrote here, I-960 will face tough sledding in the Supreme Court. And a challenge is likely, though perhaps not this year.
