logo
Who are the real killjoys in Olympia? Democrats for taxing fun or Republicans for cutting programs that spread joy?

Who are the real killjoys in Olympia? Democrats for taxing fun or Republicans for cutting programs that spread joy?

Yahoo26-03-2025

Mar. 25—OLYMPIA — While taxes on some of Washington's largest businesses and wealthiest residents have grabbed the most attention in recent days, Republican lawmakers said Tuesday that the revenue plan released by Democrats would impact the everyday lives — and overall happiness levels — of citizens throughout the state.
"Democrats are raising billions of dollars in taxes on businesses, but not content with that, are also nickel -and -diming Washingtonians out of every last joy they can find in life," House Minority Leader Drew Stokesbary, R-Auburn, said Tuesday.
Stokesbary pointed to several tax proposals introduced in the Legislature, including an increase to the cost of the state's Discover Pass and a new fee on tickets to large events, as examples of ways Democrats have proposed making everyday life just a little more expensive. Discover Passes are what's required to use Washington state parks.
In response, Rep. April Berg, D-Mill Creek, said she took "umbrage" with the characterization of the proposals, noting that many of the proposed taxes and fees fund needed public services.
"The joy that is had by Washingtonians is the prosperity," Berg said. "And what we're trying to bring back through a series of modest and careful and fair taxes, we are trying to bring back that hope and joy to Washingtonians that frankly, have been living under a very regressive tax structure."
As lawmakers continue to fine tune their revenue packages and budgets ahead of formal passage, here's a look at some of the new taxes and fees that could be coming to the state in the coming months:
Discover Pass
A bill that could increase the price of Discover Passes has cleared the Senate and is currently under consideration in the House of Representatives. Introduced in 2011, the pass provides access to millions of acres of state-managed land, including state parks, natural areas, wildlife areas and nearly 2,000 miles of trails.
While the cost of the annual pass has remained consistent at $30 since its inception, the legislation states that "the costs to maintain recreational access have steadily increased" in the last 14 years. If adopted, the bill would increase the annual fee to $45, though the price of a family pass would remain $50. A single-use day pass would continue to be available for $10.
A fiscal note for the proposal shows that it could bring in $15.3 million between 2025 and 2027.
Berg noted that residents can check out a Discover Pass at public libraries, something "we'll continue to have in our state."
"We are raising the price, potentially, so that we can continue to have well-funded state parks," Berg said. "Those state parks bring joy."
Ticket tax
A $1 surcharge for spectators at "large events" that would help fund projects in the state was included in a bipartisan Senate Transportation package unveiled by Senate Transportation Chair Sen. Marko Liias, D-Edmonds, and Ranking Member Sen. Curtis King, R-Yakima.
The fee would only be applicable at venues with more than 20,000 seats and would not be assessed at area fairs, county fairs, community fairs, or youth shows and fairs. The new fee would not take effect until Jan. 1. While event holders would be required to collect the fee, they would be allowed to disclose the new fee on a ticket or receipt.
Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, said that the transportation package, and fee, were sponsored by both King and Liias.
Liias added that there were tax proposals in the transportation budget "that were not my first choice."
"But the result of a bipartisan conversation is that there are things that I'm not thrilled of, and there are items that Senator King's not thrilled of, but we found consensus and agreement on the core issue, which is that our transportation system is dramatically underfunded," Liias said.
Studying liquor tax
The Legislature may also direct the nonpartisan Washington State Institute for Public Policy to study the state's liquor taxes and fees, though that study wouldn't affect the price of drink for more than a year. So far, the bill has cleared the Senate and is under consideration in the House Finance Committee.
If passed, the bill would direct the Institute to study the "current system of alcohol taxation and fees" and submit a report by June 30, 2026.
The study would include, among other topics, the estimated tax rates for spirits, beer, and wine "that would have to be applied to maintain a revenue-neutral tax system in the state, if tax rates were based solely on the alcohol content of products." The study would also consider the potential economic impact on breweries, wineries, and distilleries if the new tax structure took effect.
Increased hunting fees
Hunters' next outings could cost just a little bit more. A bill in the Senate Rules Committee could increase the cost of most recreational hunting and fishing licenses by 38%, though certain discounts would continue. For example, the cost of a permit for hunting big game could increase from $85 to $117.30, but seniors still would receive a roughly 66% discount.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Colorado Congressman Joe Neguse pushes back against plan to sell millions of acres of public land
Colorado Congressman Joe Neguse pushes back against plan to sell millions of acres of public land

CBS News

time31 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Colorado Congressman Joe Neguse pushes back against plan to sell millions of acres of public land

Republicans in the U.S. Senate have introduced a proposal to sell millions of acres of federal land in eleven western states, including Colorado. The proposal is part of President Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" and would require the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service to auction off 2.2 - 3.3 million acres of land. Colorado has more than 24 million acres of federal land, which is about 36% of the state's total area. The BLM manages 8.3 million acres, and the Forest Service manages 16 million acres. Under the proposal, the two federal agencies would publish a list of parcels for sale every sixty days. They would give priority to land identified by state or local governments that is near existing development and infrastructure. National parks, monuments and recreation or wilderness areas would be excluded, and the land could only be used to develop housing. Colorado Democratic Congressman Joe Neguse managed to kill a similar proposal in the House. The Senate version is far more expansive, and he says it should concern anyone who cares about public lands, "In my view, this is a five-alarm fire for hunters, for ranchers, for fishermen, for recreationists, for conservationists," said Neguse. Secretary of Interior Doug Burgum says the federal government owns about 640 million acres and the proposal would leave 99% of the land untouched. "This is not about our most sacred and beautiful places. This is often about barren land next to highways with existing billboards that have no recreational value," Burgum said. Burgum says the public will be allowed to weigh in on the sales, but the final decision on what land is privatized will be up to the federal agencies. Neguse says public lands belong to everyone and should be held in trust for future generations, "Some of my most meaningful memories as a kid growing up in Colorado, camping with my parents, hiking with my dad. And to think that we may not be able to make the same commitment and promise to our children, our children's children, if these same lands are ultimately auctioned off, I think it should deeply concern every Coloradan." Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert supports the proposal, saying, "It promotes coordination, respects state and local priorities, and reflects a more sustainable approach to land management. The outrage from the far left is not only unwarranted, it's out of touch with the real challenges facing rural America." Colorado's other Republican members of Congress, Gabe Evans, Jeff Hurd and Jeff Crank, haven't said where they stand on the Senate proposal. Hurd opposed the House version. All of Colorado's Democratic members of Congress oppose the plan, saying it will also hurt Colorado's $17 billion outdoor recreation industry. The land sales are expected to generate $5 - $10 billion over the next ten years, with most of the money going to reduce the deficit.

Wyoming lawmakers seek to eliminate SIPA, again, in effort to simplify budget process
Wyoming lawmakers seek to eliminate SIPA, again, in effort to simplify budget process

Yahoo

time41 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Wyoming lawmakers seek to eliminate SIPA, again, in effort to simplify budget process

CHEYENNE — Wyoming lawmakers will try again to eliminate the state's Strategic Investments and Projects Account (SIPA) in a continued effort to make the state's budget process more transparent for the public. Efforts have been made in past legislative sessions to eliminate Wyoming's many financial 'coffee cans.' In 2024, lawmakers successfully repealed the School Capital Construction Account and its related accounts. This year, the Legislature successfully eliminated the Budget Reserve Account (BRA) through Senate File 168 and nearly eliminated SIPA through the passage of SF 169. However, Gov. Mark Gordon line-item vetoed SF 169 and kept SIPA online. The governor maintained his long-term support of simplifying the state's budget process, but he disapproved of the Legislature's approach in SF 169. Gov. Mark Gordon Gov. Mark Gordon '(SIPA) was originally a compromise between a previous legislature and the then-serving governor,' Gordon wrote in his veto letter. He served as state treasurer in 2013, when SIPA was first created. 'The compromise recognized the value of the governor's authority to use some of the funds when making budget recommendations.' Gordon argued the original structure of the bill limited his ability to make budget recommendations. Currently, excess funds from the state's Permanent Mineral Trust Fund (PMTF) account are split evenly between SIPA and the state's main savings account (the Legislative Stabilization Reserve Account, or LSRA). SF 169 originally eliminated SIPA by July 2026 and transferred all excess funds into the LSRA. Wyoming statute prohibits the governor from proposing appropriations from LSRA in excess of the 5% statutory reserve account. In other words, he can't make budget recommendations from this account. 'It is a cagey strategy to undermine a long-standing compromise between the executive and legislative branches and breach the original intent of SIPA,' Gordon wrote. One effect of Gordon's veto removed the split of funds flowing into SIPA and LSRA; now, all excess funds go directly into SIPA, effective immediately. He reasoned this action is necessary, as he expects the state will see greater pressure to fund public schools with the passage of more tax cuts and diversions, along with falling oil and natural gas prices. 'The combined effects of these factors create substantial pressure on the general fund to cover any school funding deficit and still meet the ongoing costs of government,' Gordon wrote, 'as well as provide services to Wyoming families and businesses.' Impact of veto During the Legislature's Select Committee on Capital Finance meeting on Thursday, lawmakers moved to draft a bill similar to SF 169 and, in a sense, make it 'veto-proof.' Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs, who was the primary sponsor of SF 169, said Gordon's veto 'left … quite a dilemma here.' 'The net effect of this line-item veto, if we allow this to stay in statutes the way it currently is, it zeros out the reserve accounts,' Hicks said. Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs (2025) Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs Legislative budget and fiscal staff provided a comparison of the two versions of the bill and their long-term fiscal impacts, based on numbers from the January long-term forecast of the state's fiscal profile. The SIPA transfers 45% of what it retains to the School Foundation Program (SFP) account, the state's main spending account to fund public schools. If the SIPA is entirely repealed, the SFP loses that funding. Before SF 169 was signed into law, the LSRA and SFP were estimated to receive $124.1 million and $369.4 million, respectively, from SIPA over a six-year forecast period. Under the version passed by the Legislature, LSRA was estimated to receive $191.6 million in that same time period. The SFP would receive a total of $111.4 million in the first two fiscal years, and then not receive anything starting in fiscal year 2027 with the repeal of SIPA. Under Gordon's vetoes, the SFP is estimated to receive $470 million over the six-year forecast period, and the LSRA will receive no funding at all. 'But I want to point out that, starting in FY 28 the (PMTF) reserve account can't guarantee the full amount, and it falls short by about $60 million,' said LSO senior fiscal analyst Polly Scott. 'As Sen. Hicks did state … the estimate is that the reserve account is depleted somewhere in (fiscal year 2028).' Under the version adopted by the Legislature, the reserve account's life is extended beyond the six-year forecast, Scott added, because the state is relying on it less. Lawmakers respond State Treasurer Curt Meier noted that the PMTF reserve account is acting the way the LSRA should act. He suggested removing the 1.25% guarantee from the PMTF reserve account into SIPA so it can 'function (as) what it was supposed to do.' 'You're spending money you don't have and then you're trying to catch up … so you can spend it in this year's legislative session,' Meier said. 'Let the reserve account stand on itself, rather than putting more pressure on it than what it can afford to bear.' Then, the Legislature could move the unrealized capital gains into the LSRA, he said. The LSRA already provides $100 million to the school spending account once it drops below a certain threshold. Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne (2025) Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne Chairwoman Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne, suggested also discussing lifting this cap from the LSRA into the SFP at the committee's next meeting in September. For now, committee members voted to draft a bill that eliminates the SIPA, with a provision to remove the 1.25% flow guarantee from the PMTF reserve account, and discuss it at the next meeting. 'The elimination of the SIPA account is important, I think, to the Legislature as a whole, in order to simplify and provide transparency to the budget process,' Nethercott said. 'Because the SIPA account has been butchered. It's been tortured ... and no longer serves its intended purpose, creating a transparency issue.'

Secret Service Followed Protocol in Padilla Incident
Secret Service Followed Protocol in Padilla Incident

Yahoo

time41 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Secret Service Followed Protocol in Padilla Incident

California Sen. Alex Padilla is getting plenty of mileage out of his scuffle with the Secret Service and federal authorities in Los Angeles Thursday. Padillas Senate and campaign accounts posted a total of seven outraged videos in the first 24 hours after the altercation. Viral videos of the incident show a Secret Service agent dragging a fuming Padilla out of a press conference with Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, and he identifies himself as a senator only as hes being pushed out the door. The agent then forces Padilla to the ground, while two agents handcuff him. Padilla, however, wasnt arrested. Within the hour, agents released him with no charges. Dozens of Democratic members of Congress then jumped to Padillas defense, denouncing the action while casting the Secret Service and FBI agents involved as an extension of what they labeled as President Trumps totalitarian police state. Sen. Schumer called the Secret Services use of force "cruel and unacceptable." "This was a deliberate attempt to intimidate an elected official whose only offense is standing up for the voiceless," Schumer said. "But its not just about Sen. Padilla, its about every person who dares to speak truth to power." Republicans and conservative commentators countered that it was all a big publicity stunt and noted that a Padilla staffer filmed the tussle and then quickly distributed it to the media in the room. "Sen. Padilla didnt want answers - he wanted airtime," Rep. Byron Donalds said on Fox News Thursday night. "Shoving past security for a viral moment is a stunt, not leadership. If he cared about solutions, hed have asked for a meeting. But like most Democrats, he just wants the spotlight." "Alex Padilla is an embarrassment to California," said Steve Hilton, who is running for governor in California as a Republican. "Hes a complete nonentity. Thats why they didnt recognize him … [he has] zero accomplishments and now this pathetic stunt as his only claim to fame." Yet, one Republican, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, an ardent Trump critic, condemned Padillas treatment as "shocking at every level" and "not the America I know." Secret Service experts argue nothing could be further from the truth - that the agent was simply following normal protocol. Padilla, they said, actually received preferential treatment by not being arrested and jailed for his menacing display. The Secret Service agent warned Padilla, whom agents did not recognize as a senator and who wasnt wearing his Senate pin, to back away from Noem and then forcibly removed him when he ignored their entreaties. "They can represent this however they want, but those agents made the right decision to get him out of the room," Charles Marino, a former Secret Service agent told RealClearPolitics. "He did not have a congressional pin on, he was yelling and closing distance very quickly to make it to the front of the room to confront Noem." "Look, hes not above the law. Anyone taking those actions would been treated far worse - they would have been arrested and been forced to spend some time in jail," Marino said. "Who was escalating the situation? When you look at Padillas action, taken in totality, the agents had no other choice." Instead of dragging him to a cell, federal agents released the senator after the incident. Then Noem met with Padilla for 15 minutes and gave him her cell phone number to discuss matters further. "We probably disagree on 90% of the topics, but we agreed to exchange phone numbers and continue to talk - that is the way it should be in this country," Noem told Fox News Thursday afternoon. The Homeland Security Department issued a statement Thursday defending the federal agents actions, arguing that Padilla chose "disrespectful political theater" over constructive congressional oversight. Padilla, the agency said, "interrupted a live press conference without identifying himself or having his Senate security pin on as he lunged toward Secretary Noem." "Mr. Padilla was told repeatedly to back away and did not comply with officers repeated commands," the department added. "@Secret Service thought he was an attacker and officers acted appropriately." Several other Secret Service sources backed up Marinos account. "Any sudden movement towards a protectee that feels threatening, especially when that person has not been identified, the policy is 100% to prevent further escalation or movement toward Noem," said a source in the Secret Service community. "We would have done the same thing for anyone threatening [former DHS Secretary] Mayorkas." Even though the situation escalated very quickly, the agent still followed the basic rules of engagement for law enforcement, the source asserted. Agents and officers first ask a person to move away from the protectee, then they tell them firmly to move away, and if those warnings arent abided, then they can use physical force to move the threatening person away. "Its a pretty common law enforcement way of relaying information and taking action, because emotions can get the best of people, and agents are forced to err on the side of protection," the source added. After the two assassination attempts against Trump, agents are highly attuned to aggressive behavior and working to ensure theyre not involved in any security lapses. "In this day and age, you can see what a split-second hesitate could result in," one former agent remarked. "Could you imagine if the agent didnt respond, and Padilla got on the stage and hit [Noem]?" The agency has been knocked around for months for the egregious security failures in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13 and then nearly two months later during another close call against Trump at his West Palm Beach golf course. And just because its Padilla who was attending a press conference doesnt mean assaults against a Cabinet secretary or president are unlikely to occur. During a December 2008 press conference in Iraq, an Iraqi journalist threw both of his shoes at former President George W. Bush in a pique of outrage. Secret Service agents with their zero-fail mission have to be poised to respond to all types of unexpected threats, which sometimes come with no warning at all. Back in 2005, during Bushs visit to the country of Georgia, a man attempted to assassinate Bush and then-Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili by throwing a hand grenade at both of them. "Listen, we dont always know who you are if youre not wearing your [congressional] pin," the source said. "Youre coming at [Noem] in an aggressive manner, and you didnt heed our warnings to stop. If you get into the buffer zone, we have to take you down. All public officials should know, and I would hope understand, that." Susan Crabtree is RealClearPolitics' national political correspondent.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store