John Braun: Those funding ‘no’ campaigns have the luxury of being able to pay more
Posted Friday, October 25, 2024
The campaign to preserve our state’s costly cap-and-tax law reportedly paid a single Seattle television station more than $138,000 to air a group of 30-second ads during one week in mid-September.
That’s more than the median annual income in King County, which has the highest wages in our state.
If you’ve spent any time near a screen lately, you know the “no” ads just keep coming. While most seem to be against Initiative 2117, the other three money-saving measures on the general-election ballot are under attack as well.
The major donors behind this barrage of negative ads are people who can afford the added costs of the policies that would be repealed by the initiatives.
Their wealth gives them the luxury of believing the cap-and-tax law, the long-term care payroll tax and the other laws targeted by the initiatives are exactly what our state needs — no matter how much financial hardship they cause regular working Washingtonians.
Among those holding these “luxury beliefs” are Steve Ballmer and Nick Hanauer, two of the deep pockets behind the “no” effort.
A decade ago, Ballmer stepped down from Microsoft after 34 years and bought the Los Angeles Clippers pro-basketball team for $2 billion. News reports have him paying around $2 billion more to build the most expensive arena in the National Basketball Association.
Ballmer and his wife own multiple homes in Washington. A few months ago a published “billionaire’s index” put his wealth at a whopping $158 billion.
Hanauer is a partner in a Seattle venture-capital firm and founder of an organization called “Civic Ventures.”
He denies being a billionaire but has described himself as filthy rich, and obscenely wealthy – as in multiple homes, his own airplane, and a “very large yacht.”
Good for them. These people have been successful in life, and they should be free to spend their money as they choose.
That includes the freedom to quietly write big checks to the state treasury, to help fund programs and services they view as important.
Instead, by bankrolling the effort to defeat the initiatives, the multi-billionaire and mega-millionaire are basically trying to force the poorest Washingtonians into paying to support their luxury beliefs.
It doesn't matter that middle- and lower-income residents of our state don't share their ability to pay the higher costs that go with holding those opinions.
For instance, the affluent backers of the "no" campaign don’t have to care that the cap-and-tax law — the Democrats' Climate Commitment Act, which would be repealed by I-2117 — has jacked up the cost of gas and home heating.
They know the CCA won't infringe on the "insulated world of the super-rich," as Hanauer once put it.
Similarly, people with this kind of wealth don’t have to worry about the new law that is aimed at restricting energy choice by putting our state on a path to a natural-gas ban.
They can throw money behind the effort to defeat Initiative 2066, knowing they can easily pay to retrofit their homes with electric appliances.
They don't have to care about how forced electrification could cost a homeowner up to $70,000.
The well-off donors also can afford the very best in long-term care for the rest of their lives.
They don’t have to think about how the Democrats’ long-term care tax is taking hundreds of dollars from Washington workers’ take-home pay each year.
That tax wouldn't be repealed by Initiative 2124, but it would become optional, and end what amounts to a state-government monopoly.
Finally, billionaires and mega-millionaires can hire experts to shield their assets from the capital-gains income tax, which Initiative 2109 would repeal.
Or, they can follow the example of former Seattleite Jeff Bezos and relocate to a state that is more tax-friendly. The Amazon founder saved $600 million by moving.
Among the outrageous claims from the well-funded opponents are assertions that the initiatives are deceptive and benefit the wealthy at the expense of middle- and lower-income families.
Do they hear themselves?
Middle- and lower-income families throughout our state know exactly what the initiatives will do. There’s no deception.
They can figure out that repealing a mandatory payroll tax and a hidden gas tax will let them keep more of their own money.
They know the initiatives would stop legislative Democrats who are already looking to expand the capital-gains tax, in support of their ultimate goal of a universal state income tax, and trying to dictate about something as basic as home heating and cooking.
I’ll also bet these hard-working families can sense there’s something weird about wealthy people spending a ton of money to oppose voter initiatives on the grounds that they would benefit… the wealthy.
In fact, the elitism just oozes from the "no" campaign. Here’s what I mean.
A student from a family of four with an annual household income of less than $58,000 qualifies for reduced-price lunch in our public schools.
In the Lake Washington School District, which encompasses what could be called Microsoft country — meaning most of Redmond, Kirkland and surroundings — just 13% of students qualify for free or reduced-price lunch.
In the Centralia School District, which I am privileged to serve, 76% of students are eligible.
Families struggling just to afford the essentials can’t afford to hold luxury beliefs, which explains why I have found overwhelming support for the initiatives not only in Centralia but throughout southwest Washington.
The billionaires and mega-millionaires who have chosen to signal their virtue by supporting the opposition to the initiatives seem completely oblivious to the economic disparities in our state.
They don’t seem to understand — and don’t have to care — that regressive policies like the CCA and the payroll tax cut deeper into the incomes of the regular working Washingtonians outside of Microsoft country and other exclusive communities.
The propaganda they’re buying isn’t honest when it claims that passing the initiatives will shift costs to middle- and lower-income residents of our state.
The truth is, the cost shift has already occurred. Middle- and lower-income families began feeling the pain as soon as the CCA and other new policies took effect.
Approving the initiatives will simply give some relief to those families while forcing legislators to prioritize more than they’ve had to do since Olympia fell back under one-party rule several years ago.
We can and must do better than impose policies that are easy for an Amazon team member to afford but put a single mom in the unbearable position of choosing between food for her kids, gas for the car or falling behind on the heating bill.
It really comes down to this: On one side are the people who, in unprecedented numbers, put four measures on the ballot to help lower their cost of living and protect themselves against future cost increases.
Republicans are standing with those voters — especially those in poverty, and working people just trying to keep their heads above water — as they exercise their constitutional right to push back against a Democrat-controlled legislature that has gone too far.
On the other side are the elitists, with their luxury beliefs, and groups that seek to enrich themselves at the taxpayers’ expense.
They seem to view regular working Washingtonians as peasants who don’t know what’s best for them.
Along with the Democrats, they are betting their money can pump enough misinformation into the airwaves to preserve costly partisan policies that should not have become law in the first place.
The voting period is open through Nov. 5, but there’s no need to delay getting your ballot in. The other side isn’t waiting.
Let’s go, Washington. Vote yes, pay less.
•••
Sen. John Braun of Centralia serves the 20th Legislative District, which spans parts of four counties from Yelm to Vancouver. He became Senate Republican leader in 2020.