Opinion: Senate shenanigans – Income tax debate, double-standards

Elizabeth New says that if the Democratic-dominated House of Representatives goes along with the Senate, supporters and opponents in both Houses then expect a legal battle

Elizabeth New
Washington Policy Center

Watch Senate floor debate over the as-of-yet unconstitutional income tax that Washington state lawmakers have proposed in Senate Bill 6346. Spoiler alert: The Democratic-led Senate ended up passing the penalty on high-income workers  with just three Democrats voting “nay.” (See who voted how in the 27-22 vote here.) 

If the Democratic-dominated House of Representatives goes along with the Senate, supporters and opponents in both Houses then expect a legal battle.

That’s because the state Constitution allows for a uniform income tax, but this is not that. SB 6346 targets the income of individuals who earn above $1 million a year at a rate of 9.9%. Lawmakers did not propose a uniform income tax because it would not be politically popular. Taxing “the rich” often is. 

Litigation will be costly for taxpayers. If SB 6346 is upheld, it creates a precedent that can be expanded beyond today’s $1 million threshold — and lawmakers rejected amendments intended to lock in that limit. This also isn’t a tax swap: Washington would still lean on sales taxes, with only limited, targeted exemptions rather than a broader reduction.

One of the most interesting parts of the Senate floor debate was when bill sponsor and Senate Majority Leader Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, used the very same constitution he hopes to violate with SB 6346 to urge a “no” vote on an amendment that would have allowed the proposal to go before voters by way of a referendum. Pedersen told onlookers and colleagues to go “look it up” when talking about the part of the state Constitution that he’s into. 

Elizabeth New is a policy analyst and the director of the Centers for Health Care and Worker Rights at the Washington Policy Center. She is a Clark County resident.