From the Washington State
Catholic Conference

The Washington State Catholic Conference (WSCC) represents the Catholic Bishops of Washington State: Archbishop Alex J. Brunett of the Archdiocese of Seattle, Bishop William S. Skylstad of the Diocese of Spokane, and Bishop Carlos A. Sevilla, S.J. of the Diocese of Yakima. The Bishops developed a position opposing Initiative 695 through reflection upon Scripture and Catholic social teaching, and in consultation within their dioceses. This position is not intended as a direction to parishioners on how to vote, but rather as a guide to help reflect on the issues of our day in light of Catholic social teaching and the signs of the times.

Initiative 695 (I-695) Ballot Title: “Shall voter approval be required for any tax increase, shall existing vehicle taxes be repealed and, shall license fees be limited to $30 per year for motor vehicles?”

Appearing on the November 2nd ballot, I-695 would repeal the state’s Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) and replace it with a flat $30 fee. The initiative would also require all state and local governments to submit all tax or fee increases to voters for approval.

Today, motor vehicle owners in Washington State pay an annual MVET along with other local fees in order to operate their vehicles. The cost of the MVET equals 2.2 percent of the value of each car, truck, motorcycle or other vehicle. The Washington State Office of Financial Management estimates that passage of I-695 would decrease MVET revenues by more than $1 billion in the state’s current budget. Currently, state law appropriates these revenues to transportation and local governments.

Opponents of I-695 argue that dramatic cuts in revenue would prevent improvements to our state transportation system and cripple many local governments. They also argue that requiring each tax or fee increase, however small, to go to the voters will prove burdensome for both voters and government alike. Supporters of I-695 argue that the people want taxes reduced and control over any future tax increases. They respond to concerns about cuts to services by maintaining that the State can fund these services by shifting resources from the state general fund and reserve accounts.

As taxpayers, it is natural to desire a reduction in the MVET. Nobody likes a large fee that bites into the family budget every year. Many of us wonder why the MVET is so large and why services like public health and law enforcement are funded by a car tax. The reason is that, unlike most states, Washington State has no income tax and must fund state and local government programs using property tax and a combination of other taxes and fees like the MVET.

One major concern is that, by cutting the MVET, I-695 would virtually eliminate a vital source of funding for essential programs without providing alternative funding. Unless the Legislature were to shift funds to replace revenue lost by local governments, passage of I-695 would cause many communities to experience dramatic losses in important local services, such as public transit, public health and law enforcement. Many rural and suburban communities without a large sales tax base rely upon funds from the MVET for as much as 40% of their operating budget. In practical terms, loss of MVET revenue in many communities like Granger in Yakima County and Shoreline in King County could translate into deferred inspections of water systems and reduced police protection. Catholic social teaching calls us to be in solidarity with the people of our communities who depend upon these services.

Even if the Legislature did shift funds from the general fund or the state reserve account to assist these communities, passage of I-695 could still deprive our state of critical services. The funds in the state reserve account could cover the revenue lost by I-695 for no more than one budget cycle. Soon the Legislature would have to use funds needed for critical state programs such as education, welfare and environmental protection to cover the lost revenue. Ultimately, passage of I-695 will force our State to either make severe cuts to important services or to replace lost revenues through new taxes.

As Catholics, the principles of our faith call us to a special concern for the poor and vulnerable. When we evaluate public policy proposals such as I-695, we must first consider their likely effect upon what the Gospel refers to as “the least among us.” Catholic social teaching also enjoins us to seek the common good and be in solidarity with those in need when we act as citizens.

Seen through the eyes of the poor, I-695 seems ominous. The State budget cannot accommodate the $1 billion the initiative eliminates without cutting services. As people of faith, we must be concerned about the potential of enormous cuts to services to people who cannot provide for themselves. We cannot evaluate I-695 only from the perspective of our own pocketbooks, we must also ask whether I-695 will serve the common good of our State.

Instead of seeking the common good, I-695 appeals to the self-interest of the taxpayer by offering reduced taxes and the opportunity to block future tax increases. By putting every tax increase to a public vote, I-695 could prevent our state from raising funds to serve those in need. In the future, voters may approve tax increases for education and law enforcement; however, voters are not likely to support new taxes to fund services for the poor, especially during hard times. Thus, I-695 would tempt taxpayers to ignore the common good and the needs of the most vulnerable among us.

Some consider the MVET tax to be unfair. If I-695 is defeated, we encourage our elected officials to explore a more equitable and appropriate Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET). However, major changes to our state’s tax structure should be done with great care to ensure that the poor do not suffer. Initiative 695 is a blunt instrument poorly suited for this task. In a representative democracy, we elect officials to understand the needs of the citizens and to make decisions to serve the common good. We must permit them to raise the revenue to fund the services upon which, all of us, especially the poor, depend.

Because I-695 will deprive our communities of services, we are compelled to speak against it. We ask Catholics to reflect on our teachings and the Gospel before voting on this initiative. Instead of approaching I-695 with the question, “what’s in it for me?”, we must ask ourselves, “How will I-695 affect the common good?” Most importantly we ask, “How will I-695 affect the ‘least among us’?”

(For more information, e-mail the Washington State Catholic Conference, or call (206) 301-0556.)

Home