Tag Archives: payroll tax

‘No’ on Senate budgets that would raise your taxes

Click here to view my remarks in support of the no-new-taxes, no-cuts budget proposal offered today in the Senate chamber.

Dear Neighbor,

I don’t know why the Senate majority chose today to have us vote on the operating and transportation budgets, but I’d guess it is because both contain tax increases. Maybe they were hoping people would be busy on a Saturday and not paying as much attention.

Let me help call attention to what happened, by sharing the news release I issued today about the budget votes. It tells the story. And keep reading for how you can make your voice heard about the tax proposals themselves.

OLYMPIA, March 29… The record $21 billion in new and higher taxes included in the state Senate’s new operating budget and the gas-tax increase in its new transportation budget kept Sen. Perry Dozier from supporting either plan today.

“Both budgets have their merits, but I can’t overlook the fact that they would also add significantly to a cost of living in our state that is already too high. We can and should do better.

“I’m especially disappointed and concerned that the Democrats’ budget is based partly on tripling the growth rate of state and local property taxes. That contradicts what we’ve been hearing for months, about how the Democrats want to ‘make the wealthy pay what they owe.’ A property-tax increase hits every landowner regardless of their income, and is bad for renters too,” said Dozier, R-Waitsburg.

“We brought the Republican operating-budget proposal to the Senate floor as a common-sense alternative for our Democratic colleagues to consider. It spends less than the amount of revenue coming in, it wouldn’t raise a single tax or cut a single service, and it wouldn’t drain the state’s rainy-day fund. And still, the Democrats said no and went with their plan instead, even though it is the complete opposite of ours in all of those ways.”

The Republican “$ave Washington” plan failed on a 30-19 party-line vote. Senate Democrats then adopted their larger $78.5 billion proposal with a partisan 28-21 vote.

Prior to the final vote, Dozier reminded his Senate colleagues how the Democrat budget is balanced in part by cuts to higher-education funding which will mean tuition increases at the state-run colleges and universities, and other cuts to financial assistance.

“One of the most popular things the Legislature has done in the past decade was to cut tuition, then put a cap on it so students and their families could know what was coming,” he said, referring to a 2015 Republican-led reform that reduced tuition for the first time in state history. “It’s unconscionable for the Democrats to now break the tuition cap when they’re also raising taxes by $21 billion.”

On top of the tuition increase, Dozier explained, the Democrats’ budget cuts support for child care, cuts the state fair fund by 50%, increases hunting and fishing license fees by nearly 40% and hikes the cost of a Discover Pass by 50% — again, at the same time that it would raise taxes by $21 billion.

“I don’t know why the Democrats are so determined to raise taxes when the budget we proposed is proof that tax increases are completely unnecessary.

The state gas tax has been 49.4 cents per gallon since 2016. Dozier said he understands the need for more transportation money, but the proposed 6-cent increase in the Senate transportation package is more complicated than it sounds.

“If the Climate Commitment Act had been repealed in November, that hidden gas tax would be gone, and Washington’s gas prices would be closer to Idaho and Oregon. And if the Democrats weren’t also raising property taxes and so much more in the operating budget, a bump in the gas tax would look different. But this budget also indexes the gas tax, so it would automatically increase each year. All of that together is just too much,” Dozier said.

He said the third of the Senate budget proposals, the capital budget, will be released Monday. Dozier is assistant Republican leader for that budget, which allocates funds for public construction and other capital projects and is generally the most bipartisan of the spending plans legislators must adopt.

 

Let me recap the Democrat tax proposals that will cost the most:

  • SB 5798, which would remove the 1% cap on the annual growth rate of state and local property tax rate, and instead allow your property-tax rate to increase based on inflation plus population growth. That could average 4.5% per year based on recent history, but go as high as 8%.
  • SB 5797, called a “wealth” tax by the majority, is actually a new kind of property tax. Instead of taxing people for owning land, it would tax people for simply owning a certain volume of stocks, bonds and other intangible assets. Republicans see it as also discouraging the innovation that is at the heart of Washington’s high-tech sector.
  • SB 5796, which would basically mimic the payroll tax already being imposed by the city of Seattle. This new tax would be applied to nearly 5,300 Washington employers: the tech industry, professional services, finance, real estate and health care. My understanding is that it also would hit some public-sector employers, like universities and larger school districts.

Before 3 p.m. Monday, I encourage you to go online to the Ways and Means Committee sign-in page for these bills. You may state your comment on one or more by clicking here and following what should be a user-friendly process. Here’s where the link will take you:

If you would rather testify instead of simply supplying your position on this legislation, see the link below.

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

My priorities (shared by Senate Republicans) are:

Here’s how to:

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

E-Newsletter: The ‘freeze’ is coming!

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from… here in the 16th District!

Let me begin with a quick piece of housekeeping. Legislators who declare their candidacy for public office (like being re-elected to the Senate) must abide by a strict set of rules when it comes to communicating using official tools.

For me, those tools include my Senate website, my legislative Facebook page, and e-newsletters. Therefore, I can’t update my website and FB page or send you another report like this until after the November election. Some refer to this as the “campaign freeze.” However, I am free to continue responding to questions and messages – so please, keep the emails, phone calls and letters coming!

The session summary from our 16th District delegation was also mailed recently; click here or on the image below to view it. Among the topics it covers are the history-making six initiatives submitted to the Legislature, and how three were passed – with the other three going to the November ballot.

The post-session report also details some of the dozen bills I sponsored that are becoming law this year, led by my SB 6328. It updates a property-tax exemption that benefits the widows and widowers of honorably discharged veterans. I wish we could have done more to control property taxes, but at least we kept the majority from clearing the way for the largest property-tax increase in state history.

Also, thanks again to the many who took time in early April to attend our 16th District town halls in Prosser, Pasco and Walla Walla. I always appreciate the questions and conversations!

Stunning loss of Washington farms
confirms need for ‘Cultivate Washington’  

I knew the number of farms in our state has been dwindling, in part because of onerous state regulations. But I didn’t realize it was to the extent described by another farmer recently in The Seattle Times.

A guest column from Pam Lewison, who farms in the Moses Lake area and directs the Center for Agriculture at the Washington Policy Center, cites some painful statistics from the U.S. Census of Agriculture.

Between 2017 and 2022, our state lost 3,717 farms and ranches. That’s 14 farms per week, on average. And more than the 3,456 farms lost during the decade ending in 2017.

Click here for the full column, which does a thorough if sobering job of ticking through many of the factors that are behind this stunning drop in the number of farms, and explaining why it should alarm people across our state, not just those in the agriculture sector.

After more than 40 years of farming, I can relate all too well to these concerns. As a senator and former county commissioner, I have an even broader sense of why they exist and how government is involved.

If you did not receive my special post-session report on agriculture, it’s posted online here. Also, several of the reasons line up with the priorities in the Cultivate Washington agenda I and other Senate Republicans unveiled late last year. Click here for it.

Sen. Nikki Torres, R-Pasco, has been a tremendous ally on issues facing our part of the state.

16th District among many caught up in ‘gerrymandering’

During the 2022 session I was among the majority of legislators who supported the resolution adopting new boundaries for our state’s 49 legislative districts.

In Washington, the boundaries are set by an independent, bipartisan commission, using the latest U.S. Census data. Because our state’s population expanded and shifted in the previous 10 years, the commission had to create and approve a map that would make legislative districts as even as possible in population – approximately 157,000 residents per district.

The map we endorsed had been created and approved by the commission in November 2021. One of the notable aspects was that it made the neighboring 15th Legislative District, which spans most of the Yakima Valley, a “majority-minority” district.

The commission agreed that the voting-age population in the 15th District, based on the census numbers, would be 51.5% Hispanic; the overall population was 73% Hispanic.

Amazingly, the district wasn’t Hispanic enough for the out-of-state interests that filed suit soon after we had approved the new map(s). In the 2022 election, the district’s voters overwhelmingly chose a Hispanic woman as their new senator – a first in the 15th District. Even so, the plaintiffs chose to continue their legal challenges. I figure it’s because that senator, Nikki Torres of Pasco, is a Republican.

Under Washington law, responsibility for modifying a legislative-district map clearly belongs to the state redistricting commission. We could and should have called a very brief, “special” legislative session back in the fall to reconvene the commission. The governor and the Legislature’s top Democrats all refused.

I also supported an effort early in this year’s legislative session to reconvene the redistricting commission. Our majority colleagues said no, knowing it would allow a federal judge to take over and redraw the map without any legislative oversight or assurance of bipartisanship.

As a result, many legislative districts have new boundaries – from a map drawn by the plaintiffs, which doesn’t seem impartial.

Senator Torres, who has been a terrific colleague these past two years, now finds herself a resident of our 16th District. She can still serve the rest of her term without having to relocate, but I know there were other ways to redraw the 15th District without having such a ripple effect. The senators for the 12th and 14th districts also got “redistricted out.” They too are Republicans.

The term “gerrymandering” goes back more than 200 years. It refers to giving one party an unfair advantage. In 1983, when Washington voters handed the responsibility for redistricting to an independent, bipartisan commission – at the Legislature’s request – it seemed like our state would be safe from gerrymandering.

Apparently not, because a bunch of partisans figured out how to do an end-run on the commission. I realize the 15th District has been represented in the state Senate by Republicans since 1943, but come on. Let’s play fair. This is wrong.

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

E-News: Hearings scheduled on initiatives next week; this week went to budgets

with Sen. L. Wilson

With Sen. Lynda Wilson of Vancouver in the Senate chamber. The supplemental operating budget passed today by the state Senate reflects some of my input, which I worked through her as Senate Republican budget leader and her counterparts on the majority side. Keep reading for details.

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from the state Capitol! I have important news about voter initiatives that couldn’t wait… for reasons that will become apparent.

This past weekend I reported to you how our Democrat colleagues had finally committed to holding public hearings for three of the six initiatives submitted to us by the people. Now we have a schedule for those hearings, and opportunities for you to participate.

The three measures to be considered are Initiative 2111 (total ban on income taxes in our state), Initiative 2113 (restore the ability of police to conduct vehicle pursuits) and Initiative 2081 (parental rights regarding their children’s education).

I-2081 builds on the parents’ bill of rights legislation I have sponsored since 2021. It will come before the Senate Early Learning and K-12 Education Committee, on which I serve, and I am working with others on the committee to make sure the hearing covers the most important aspects during the one hour (!) allotted.

Unfortunately, the majority is still refusing to hold hearings on the initiatives to repeal laws that are about taking money and giving it to the state: I-2117, I-2109 and I-2124. Washington’s constitution does not say to give precedence to half the initiatives and ignore the rest. The people are the sponsors of these initiatives, and they deserve to be heard on all six!

To support the initiatives next week sign in as PRO, using the links below. Be sure the button next to the initiative number under “select agenda item” is checked, to display your options — which include submitting written testimony or testifying “live” in person or remotely:

For more detail about the six initiatives click here. I want to hear from you about all of them. Please take a few minutes to click on the link or the QR code and complete my survey!
survey QR code

Take my online survey about the six voter initiatives submitted to the Legislature this session!

Scan the QR code or click here to begin

initiative box

Local projects supported in budgets adopted, proposed this week

State government runs on a two-year budget cycle, with new budgets developed and adopted in odd-numbered years. This is why we alternate between 105-day sessions and 60-day sessions; in this year’s “short” session we are reopening the budgets approved in 2023 to make adjustments that are intended to carry through the remainder of the budget cycle (until June 2025). Those changes are captured in “supplemental” budgets.

This week the Senate adopted supplemental versions of the 2023-25 operating budget and capital budget. A high-level summary of the supplemental operating budget is here; before the final vote I worked with the budget leaders from both parties to make two adjustments of interest to our area.

One adds a $501,000 appropriation to help with the cleanup of gasoline contamination in downtown Walla Walla; the second creates a fourth tier in an agricultural-fuel reimbursement I discovered in the budget after it became public Monday. For those who purchase 10,000 gallons or more of farm diesel annually, the payment would go to $4,500, up from $3,400 (which remains the third-tier payment).

While I appreciate the majority’s support for my amendment, this approach still does not — as I stated publicly this week — truly reimburse those stuck paying a surcharge on farm fuel due to the state’s cap-and-trade law. The best solution is to do away with cap-and-trade completely, which is the purpose of Initiative 2117. It will save money for anyone who buys any kind of motor fuel or uses natural gas for any purpose, residential or commercial.

The capital budget adopted by the Senate appropriates another $6.6 million toward projects in our 16th Legislative District. I’m happy that includes another $1.5 million for the Columbia Valley Center for Recovery (it’s still listed as Three Rivers Behavioral Health Center, as the name changed after the underlying budget was adopted in 2023). Even better, in its way, is the $300,000 for a trio of local projects: resurfacing and revitalizing the public swimming pool in Prescott, funding a childcare center for Waitsburg and support for the Prosser Clubhouse, run by the Boys and Girls Clubs of Benton and Franklin counties.

From here, the leaders for the operating and capital budgets from the Senate and House will get together and hammer out the differences between their respective spending plans, then come back with a compromise for another vote.

I also have an important appropriation in the Senate’s proposed supplemental transportation budget, for the State Route 224/Red Mountain project in the Benton County part of our district. Click here for my news release on it, from earlier this week. That budget will come up for a vote from the full Senate this next week, then it will go through the same compromise process.

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. If you don’t already, also consider following me on Facebook. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

dozier signature

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

E-News: Property-tax threat goes away, but threat to rural health care remains

 

I was happy to welcome members of Teamsters 117, which represents Department of Corrections employees, when they came over from Walla Walla to visit the Capitol earlier this month. In response to the question “Who has been assaulted on the job?” probably half raised their hands. Feedback like this often inspires legislation, and I will be following up with them on this and other concerns in the spring.

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from the state Capitol!

This week the state Senate wrapped up its work on bills introduced by senators, with the exception of updates to the three state budgets. The “cutoff” for approving Senate bills arrived at the end of Tuesday; we then went back to meeting as committees to take up the House legislation passed over to us (and the House committees are doing the same with Senate legislation).

The six voter initiatives submitted to the Legislature this session continue to get attention one way or the other. I and other Republicans have called for public hearings on these measures, in line with a requirement in our state constitution; the majority Democrats finally made commitments about three this past week. I’d like to know what you think about how the Legislature should handle these, and invite you to take a quick online survey. Details are below.

Dozier bills move to House for consideration

Early this week the state Senate unanimously passed my Senate Bill 6238, to update a property-tax exemption that benefits the widows and widowers of honorably discharged veterans. It was created in 2005 but has not kept pace with similar exemptions since then. SB 6238 was referred to the House Finance Committee for consideration; being a fiscal committee, it has until Feb. 26 to move my bill forward.

Also getting unanimous approval was SB 5801, a bill that has to do with the banking industry. I introduced it at the request of our state’s Uniform Law Commission, and the bill is a good example of just how narrowly focused and non-partisan a piece of legislation can be. That’s probably why it is moving so quickly through the House, with  a public hearing Wednesday and a “yes” vote from the House Committee on Consumer Protection and Business yesterday morning, well ahead of next Wednesday’s deadline for policy committees to act on legislation.

Property-tax proposal pulled due to public pressure

Sometimes it’s more important to keep a bad piece of legislation from becoming law, which is why I’m happy about the demise of SB 5770. It would have opened the door to tripling the growth of local property taxes…without voter approval!

Since 2001, and the passage of Initiative 747, the annual growth rate of property taxes has been limited to 1% annually, unless voters agree to a larger increase. This shouldn’t be a partisan issue, as that cap was confirmed in 2007 by a Democratic-controlled Legislature at the request of a Democratic governor.

Still, a group of Democrats from Puget Sound pushed SB 5770 through the Senate Ways and Means Committee and onto the Senate voting calendar. That’s when the public rose up in protest, and we held a news conference that resulted in a lot of media attention. The prime sponsor of the bill then announced he would stop trying to get it through the Senate, which was the right decision – but the excuses he gave in this news report are concerning.

One is that “supporters need to work on better explaining the needs of cities and counties…and helping the public better understand the mechanics of property taxes.” Having been a county commissioner for eight years, I have a good sense of what local governments need, versus what they might want. Also, to be clear, the 1% cap has never prevented local governments from asking voters for more than 1%. If a majority of voters in King County (where the prime sponsor is from) approve a 10% increase in their property taxes, for whatever purpose, they are free to tax themselves more.

I wonder if the supporters of this property-tax proposal understand the “mechanics” families must go through to contend with all the costs being layered upon them in recent years, through a variety of government policy decisions. A great example is the cap-and-trade law that was passed in 2021 and took full effect in 2023, which has raised the cost of just about everything, starting with gas at the pump and natural-gas heat (which the majority is now trying to ban through HB 1589, which was passed by a Senate committee yesterday). Don’t get me started on what cap-and-trade means for our agricultural sector, and how promises made in the cap-and-trade law aren’t being honored by Governor Inslee’s administration.

The real purpose of SB 5770 is to allow a higher annual increase in the tax rate without going to the voters. That sounds like the opposite of “democracy” to me. Besides, the housing shortage in our region and our state as a whole is challenging enough without allowing tax hikes that would hit not just property owners but also renters.

I was pleased that none of the counties I serve in the 16th District came to me asking for this bill. They realize they can ask their voters to go above the 1% limit, and I appreciate that our area commissioners are living within the means provided by the taxpayers, even if it makes budgeting more challenging.

I’m glad the proposal has been dropped for this year, but unfortunately, we should expect to see it again.

 

Proposed hospital-merger restrictions could be very harmful to rural Washington

With the majority’s proposed property-tax increase off the table, Senate Bill 5241 becomes the worst bill of the session so far – at least from the Senate side.

This bill has the meaningless title of “Concerning material changes to the operations and governance structure of participants in the health care marketplace.” That offers no clue about the true effect SB 5241 would have on our state. An accurate title would be something like “Allows a partisan state official to decide whether a hospital closes.” The trouble is, being that clear would alarm people across our state and keep this misguided proposal from flying under the radar.

The prime sponsor claims this is about preserving access to affordable health care, but as they say, the devil is in the details – she also acknowledges the intent is to ensure hospital mergers and acquisitions specifically don’t restrict access to “end-of-life, reproductive and gender-affirming care.”

Let’s suppose a small rural hospital is at risk of closing, and its only chance to continue operating is to be acquired by a larger hospital with a religious affiliation. SB 5241 would give the attorney general’s office the power to determine – over a 10-year oversight period – if such a transaction would affect access to end-of-life (assisted suicide), reproductive (including abortion) and gender-affirming care, which is defined in detail in the bill. That’s a very long time for a rural community to have a sword hanging over the head of its nearest health-care facility, should a merger be the only way to keep it open.

The version of the bill brought to the floor of the Senate was a 27-page rewrite that was made available for review only that day, while we were in the middle of debating and voting on a long list of other bills. I stood up during the 3-hour debate on SB 5241 and explained, using a recent trip to the Dayton General Hospital emergency department as an example, the danger this approach presents to health-care access in our area. It’s as though the supporters of this bill would rather see hospitals close than to have them remain open under an agreement that somehow involves religious affiliations.

SB 5241 is part of an agenda, which is why Republican amendments meant to protect consumers, involve the secretary of health, etc., were rejected, and why the bill is whizzing through the House – a vote in the House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee is scheduled Tuesday. Doesn’t it seem odd that a “health care marketplace” bill isn’t coming before a health-care committee in either chamber?

It was my privilege to sponsor Olivia Smasne as a Senate page this past week. She’s a 9th-grader at Prosser High and is the daughter of Brent and Jamie Smasne of Prosser. I know Olivia appreciated being able to see a side of the Senate and the lawmaking process that isn’t shown on the TVW network, and she was here at one of the most important times of any session. Thanks, Olivia!

Democrats agree to committee hearings on only three initiatives, despite constitutional requirement

Article II, Section I of Washington’s constitution is clear about how legislators should treat initiatives submitted to them: “Such initiative measures, whether certified or provisionally certified, shall take precedence over all other measures in the legislature except appropriation bills and shall be either enacted or rejected without change or amendment by the legislature before the end of such regular session.”

That part about “take precedence” means we are supposed to consider the initiatives ahead of every other bill except spending bills (like the budgets).  Yet here we are, two-thirds of the way through the session, and only now is the majority side responding.

Yesterday afternoon the top Democrats in the Senate and House announced there will be joint Senate/House hearings week after next on three initiatives: I-2113 (police pursuits), I-2111 (income-tax ban) and I-2081 (which would create a parental bill of rights concerning , similar to legislation I’ve introduced each of the past three years).

They confirmed there will not be hearings on I-2117, which would repeal the cap-and-trade law that is driving up everyone’s gasoline and natural-gas costs; I-2109, which would repeal the tax on income from capital gains, and I-2124, which would end the mandatory payroll tax tied to the state-run long-term care program.

The chair of the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee announced this past week that she intends to hold a work session on I-2124, but that is not the same as a hearing because the public is not allowed to testify.

I have no question the Democrats’ decision to have any hearings is due to the pressure Republicans have been applying all session long, but still, the bottom line is that they’ll let the people be heard on only half of the six initiatives.

I want to hear from you about all of them, however. Please take a few minutes to click on the link or the QR code and complete my survey!

Take my online survey about the six voter initiatives
submitted to the Legislature this session!

Scan the QR code or click here to begin

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. If you don’t already, also consider following me on Facebook. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

E-News — People to Legislature: Consider six policy changes…this session

 

Chief Rocky Eastman headed the delegation from Walla Walla Fire District #4 that came by this past week. If you expect to be anywhere near the state Capitol between now and the March 7 end of this year’s session, I hope you will contact my office and arrange to stop in!

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from the state Capitol!

Every session, one of our opening-day tasks is to agree on deadlines for taking action on legislation. Considering nearly 540 bills have been introduced in the Senate alone for 2024, not counting legislation that is still eligible from this past year, this “cutoff” calendar does much to help committee and caucus leaders decide which measures continue on the path to becoming law, and which are put aside.

In my experience, the bills that survive our deadlines tend to fall into three categories: simple bills that make reasonable changes; bills that have potential but need more of the refining that is done through the amendment process; and bills that the majority side wants, which happen to also be majority-sponsored measures much more often than not.

We are nearly at the first cutoff for this year’s legislative session, which is for Senate policy committees to decide the fate of Senate bills referred to them. This is formally known as “executive action,” which I’ll explain below, as it has come up in recent questions and comments from constituents.

Next week brings the cutoff for the two Senate fiscal committees. One is the Ways and Means committee, which handles legislation affecting the operating and capital budgets. Transportation is the second. SB 6238, my bipartisan bill to close a loophole in the state’s list of property-tax exemptions, received a public hearing in Ways and Means this past week; now we just need a vote (although it’s possible this bill could end up being in the package of bills labeled “necessary to implement the budget,” which exempts it from the usual deadlines). My measure specifically concerns a property-tax exemption that was created in 2005 to benefit the widows and widowers of honorably discharged veterans, yet has not kept pace with similar exemptions since then.

A web page showing the legislation I am sponsoring is here. You may choose between bills I’m prime-sponsoring and those for which I am a co-sponsor. For more on my session priorities and legislation, and a shout-out to some former legislators from our 16th Legislative District, read my recent interview in Shift.

Farmworkers rally against ag-overtime law;
labor committee schedules another hearing on reform bill

This past week farmworkers descended on the Capitol to protest the ag-overtime law adopted in 2021 (see photo), basically saying it’s not working for them the way the supporters claimed.

If you want to get legislators’ attention, there’s nothing like holding a rally on the front steps of the Legislative Building and also going inside the Capitol Rotunda. I have no doubt that these very visible demonstrations had an effect on the majority side of the aisle, because the bipartisan ag-overtime reform bill introduced last year (SB 5476) suddenly was scheduled for a public hearing tomorrow before the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee.

This is a nice turn of events, on the surface, but I have to point out how the same committee held a public hearing on SB 5476 this past February, during the 2023 session, then let the bill die. I’m not seeing a committee vote scheduled for the bill this time around, so all sides in our agricultural sector will have to keep their expectations real. That said, if SB 5476 is allowed to die again, the majority has some explaining to do – especially to the farmworker community. I don’t think it could make its concerns any clearer.

For some of the news coverage of the rally, click here and here.

 

Voters to Legislature: Consider
these six policy changes… this session

Under our state constitution, the state’s legislative authority is “vested” in the Senate and House of Representatives. However, Article II, Section 1 continues with this: “the people reserve to themselves the power to propose bills, laws, and to enact or reject the same at the polls, independent of the legislature.”

This power is exercised through the initiative – either an initiative to the people, which if certified goes straight to the ballot, or an initiative to the Legislature. If certified, an initiative to the Legislature does just what the name implies. It comes to us as legislation which may be enacted, just like any other bill. If an initiative is not enacted, it must go to the ballot alone or to the ballot accompanied by an alternative from legislators, in which case the voters get to choose one.

Our constitution also makes it clear that the Legislature isn’t supposed to just sit on these measures and do nothing: Article II, Section 1 includes a sentence about how initiatives are to “take precedence over all other measures in the legislature except appropriation bills.”

A record six initiatives to the Legislature – twice the previous high, set all the way back in 1972 – have been certified to us by the secretary of state.

  • I-2109 would repeal the state tax on income from capital gains. When this came before the Senate for a vote during the 2021 session, I and other Republicans proposed putting the measure before the voters later that year. The majority side said no. We now know from public-records disclosures that supporters of the tax knew its constitutionality would be challenged and saw that lawsuit as a way for the state Supreme Court to open the door to a full-blown income tax, like Oregon has. That strategy failed but for some reason the justices did accept the nonsensical argument that this is not an income tax but rather an “excise” tax. As our Senate Republican budget leader put it in this statement, I-2109’s certification puts it on a path to a public vote… one way or another.
  • I-2111 would ban any local or state government in our state from imposing an income tax (Washington voters have in one form or another rejected 11 other attempts to impose an income tax, but I know legislators who have yet to get the message). Like I-2109, this measure has been referred to our Ways and Means Committee. The Senate and House Republican leaders issued this statement about their support for the initiative.
  • I-2124 targets the mandatory payroll tax that supports the state-run WA Cares long-term care program. It would not end the program but instead allow workers to opt out, which isn’t possible now. In the Senate, I-2124 has been referred to the Labor and Commerce committee.
  • I-2113 would end another mistake made by the majority in 2021 – the criminal-friendly restrictions put on vehicular pursuits by law enforcement. I realize pursuits can be risky, but I also know our officers are trained to minimize that risk. It’s no wonder auto thefts and other property crimes have jumped in our state since criminals learned they would no longer be pursued. I-2117 has been referred to our Law and Justice committee.
  • I-2117 would basically repeal the cap-and-trade law that has made gas in Washington far more expensive than in Oregon and Idaho. In doing so it would also settle the fuel-surcharge issue hurting our agricultural and maritime sectors, which neither the majority nor the Inslee administration has done. If cap-and-trade (officially, the “Climate Commitment Act”) goes away, then there’s no more promise of fairness for the state Department of Ecology to break. This has been referred to the Environment, Energy and Technology committee.
  • I-2081 would essentially create a bill of rights for parents who want more information about what their children are doing at school. It’s similar to but more detailed than the parental-rights proposal I’ve offered every session since becoming senator. As this initiative has been referred to the Senate committee on education, on which I serve, I have asked the chair to have a public hearing on the measure. Click here for the details.

As these initiatives will help lower the cost of living, make Washington safer and make our school system better, I intend to support them. That will either happen in the Senate or at the November general election.

What voting ‘without recommendation’ really means

A lot of rules govern our handling of legislation, and some of the words that go along with the process aren’t as clear as they could be. I was reminded of that recently in relation to a bill that has roots in our part of the state.

The Senate State Government and Elections Committee is one of my committees. On day two of this session the chair had us take public testimony on SB 5824, which has to do with changing the chapter of state law about public library districts.

SB 5824 stems from the effort this past year to dissolve the Columbia County Rural Library District, which became a ballot measure that ended up being blocked by a court from the November ballot. The bill was introduced by the committee chair, a senator from Olympia, at the request of the secretary of state, who is Washington’s chief elections officer.

It’s important to note the committee chair sets the agenda for her or his committee, meaning which bills receive hearings, which are brought up for votes, and when that happens. The chair scheduled SB 5824 for “executive action” three days after the public hearing.

When a committee takes executive action on a bill, members may choose between a “do pass” or “do not pass” recommendation or a third option, which is to vote “without recommendation” – essentially, a neutral vote that doesn’t hinder the bill’s progress.

After the hearing on SB 5824, I had questions about the scope of the change it would make, plus this: Legislation passed in 1947 made it so a rural county library district could be established or dissolved through a petition signed by 10% of the voters within that district. In the form in which it came before our committee, SB 5824 would have replaced 10% with 35% but only for the dissolution of such a district. Does it seem consistent or fair to you that dissolving a taxing district should be more than three times as difficult than creating one?

If a law needs to be clarified or updated, I am willing to listen. In this case I just wasn’t going to recommend for or against the bill’s passage by the full Senate without knowing more.

Because I could not get answers ahead of the committee vote, I chose to refer the bill “without recommendation.” While that was reported accurately here in the Walla Walla Union-Bulletin, some people inaccurately concluded I had opposed the bill. Once I explained how we vote in committee, and why I voted as I did on SB 5824, they understood.

When SB 5824 came before the full Senate this past week, the Republican leader on the state-government committee offered an amendment that would set the threshold for dissolving a library district at 25% — still far above what the law now requires but a compromise from 35%. The amendment was accepted, and the bill passed unanimously.

If you have a question about any vote I cast, by all means call or write. I want my constituents to have the facts.

The first student I sponsored as a Senate page this session was Alex Plourd, an 8th-grader at Highlands Middle School in Kennewick. Alex is the daughter of Brenden and Shauna Plourd of Kennewick. She did a wonderful job this past week, and was here when the Senate passed some important legislation!

***

I am working to make living in our state more affordable, make our communities safer, uphold our paramount duty to provide for schools, and hold state government accountable. I’ll work with anyone who shares those goals and wants to find solutions.

Please reach out to my office with your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. If you don’t already, also consider following me on Facebook. I am here to serve and look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

 

 

E-News: Affordability crisis deepens in WA, between gas prices and new tax on workers

On Tuesday morning I had the pleasure of taking part in a memorable ceremony for the B5 Community Learning Center in Kennewick. Often the shovels are put in the hands of the elected officials and others who have had roles in getting a project to the construction stage; this time the ground was literally broken by the immigrant children who will be served at the new B5 center!

Dear Neighbor,

Greetings from here at the ranch! It’s been almost two months since the Legislature adjourned for the second time this year… following a one-day “special” session to update our state’s drug-possession law. I’ve been busy catching up on ranch chores that couldn’t be done during our 105-day regular session, and some extra projects because we’re hosting a family gathering next month – many of you know how that is.

But I am your senator year-round, even when I am not at the state Capitol, which means attending meetings and community events, and continuing to listen to your concerns about government and the government policies that are affecting your life and family. I’m going to zero in on a couple of those in this newsletter. They unfortunately deepen the affordability crisis in our state, which has been a top concern for Senate Republicans for years.

‘Please do something to lower gas prices’

A constituent named Larry made a simple request in an email earlier this month.

“Please do something to lower gas prices. It is my understanding that Washington now has highest prices in the US. It is having an impact on me, and I can’t image the impact on those making minimum wages.”

He’s correct: Until about three weeks ago, California had the nation’s highest gas prices. Then Washington moved ahead – just in time for the extra driving many families do during summer vacation from school, as Senate Republican Leader John Braun noted in this public statement.

Another constituent, Michael, went more in-depth with his concern about gas prices.

“The state legislature needs to address this problem of rising gas prices immediately. Call a special session… Washington does not need the status of the state with the highest gasoline prices superseding California and Hawaii, let them reclaim this dubious distinction.   “THE TIME TO ACT IS NOW, NOT NEXT YEAR, NEXT LEGISLATIVE SESSION.”

Then there was this email from Helen, another constituent. Like Michael, she connected Washington’s high gas prices to a state law that was passed in 2021 but didn’t take full effect until 2023. It’s officially called the Climate Commitment Act (CCA) but known generically as “cap-and-invest,” “cap-and-trade” or “cap-and-tax,” depending on who is talking (to me it clearly functions as a tax):

“I am writing to urge you to act immediately to FIX Washington’s deeply flawed and enormously costly new cap-and-trade program that was launched earlier this year.

“Independent sources, such as Washington Policy Center and Washington Research Council (WRC) estimate that based on the May 31st auction price, the compliance costs for this program are adding 44 cents per gallon to the cost to manufacture gasoline and 55 cents per gallon to the cost to manufacture diesel.

“The Seattle Times reports that the Department of Ecology has collected almost $850 million in compliance costs so far this year. An independent analysis conducted by WRC also estimates the program could cost $1.5 billion by year-end. These costs are three times higher than originally estimated when the legislature voted cap-and-trade into law.

“I urge you to work with your legislative colleagues to fix this flawed program to make it work as intended in meeting our climate goals without placing enormous cost burdens on Washington families, small businesses, family farmers and working people across our state.”

The auction referred to in Helen’s message is how, under the cap-and-tax law, state government began selling carbon “allowances” this year. These “compliance costs” are passed on to us at the pump, which explains why Washington gas prices have continued upward all year while they’ve fallen in other states.

The message from Michael also suggested legislators had failed to ask, back in 2021, whether the Climate Commitment Act would cause gas prices to rise. I can assure him that many of us didn’t ask whether the proposed law would affect gas prices – we predicted it would.

I’ll also point out that this bill didn’t get a lot of attention outside the Capitol because that legislative session was held remotely, greatly limiting the public’s ability to be heard. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that controversial “reform” bills about law enforcement were slid through that session, as was the state’s capital-gains income tax.

As I replied to constituent Larry, I am careful about sounding overly partisan, but when it comes to gas prices in our state and the subject of energy/fuel in general, there is no getting around how there is a great difference of opinion between Republicans and Democrats.

In each of the past two legislative sessions, Senate Republicans have proposed lowering gas prices through a temporary suspension of Washington’s 49.4-cent state gas tax (Senate Bill 5897 in 2022, and this year, SB 5756, which I sponsored). Democrats have shown zero interest – meaning they would not even agree to hold a public hearing on either bill and listen to the valid concerns you and many others have.

To Michael’s point, I would definitely support having a special legislative session to address gas prices. However, I doubt our Democratic colleagues feel the same way, as they and Governor Inslee are denying the Climate Commitment Act has anything to do with Washington having the highest gas prices in the U.S. The reality is, too many of the people who control our state government don’t seem to care if you are paying more for gas, and see higher gas prices as the way to force people into public transit and electric vehicles. But I will not give up, as this is too important to the people I serve.

The state Department of Ecology is on point within the executive branch of state government for implementing the Climate Commitment Act; it’s also the agency failing to deliver on the CCA exemptions promised to the agricultural and maritime industries (and the fuel surcharge rebates now owed them due to that failure) Just this week I was among more than 40 lawmakers signing a letter to Ecology which offers a plan for bringing gas prices down. Click here to read it.

The state Department of Ecology is on point within the executive branch of state government for implementing the Climate Commitment Act; it’s also the agency failing to deliver on the CCA exemptions promised to the agricultural and maritime industries (and the fuel surcharge rebates now owed them due to that failure) Just this week I was among more than 40 lawmakers signing a letter to Ecology which offers a plan for bringing gas prices down. Click here to read it.

New payroll tax adds to affordability crisis in our state

As of this month, any paycheck cut in Washington is subject to the new long-term care tax, unless the paycheck goes to someone who has obtained an exemption from state government.

The law that is now making Washington gasoline so expensive was created in 2021; the payroll tax goes back even farther, to 2019. The Democratic majority delayed the tax collection until 2022, which kept the whole thing under the public’s radar. But as word got out about the tax and the many flaws in the so-called “WA Cares” program it support (like how people who choose to retire out of state would give up access to the long-term benefits they’d paid for), people wanted an opportunity to exempt themselves.

That opportunity came late in 2021, for a limited time, but exemptions weren’t granted unless you could show you had purchased separate long-term care coverage. The resulting controversy led Democratic legislators to delay the collection of the tax until this month and add four very narrow exemptions that are ongoing but still exclude most Washington workers.

That was last year. I had hoped the majority would make further adjustments during our 2023 regular session, but nothing happened – and with the tax now coming out of the paychecks of those who could not or have not obtained an exemption, I am hearing from people again, wondering what’s going on and what can be done about it. They don’t like giving up an average of $24 in pay each month indefinitely for a benefit that might pay for only a few months in an assisted-living facility.

An answer came from some of my Senate Republican colleagues this week. Knowing that our colleagues in the Democratic majority won’t repeal WA Cares, they’re proposing that Washington workers again be given the choice to opt out, this time with no time limit and no strings attached (meaning no need to show proof of purchasing a separate policy). You can see the latest draft of the proposal here and read the thinking behind it here.

***

Please remember I am here to serve you. Although we may not always be able to meet face to face, I encourage you to reach out to my office and to share your thoughts, ideas and concerns on matters of importance to you. Please, if you don’t already, follow me on Facebook. I look forward to hearing from you.

Perry Dozier
State Senator
16th Legislative District

.

.