Yesterday the House passed two bills suspending Initiative 728 and Initiative 732. These two "free" education measures adopted by the voters in 2000 have been repeatedly suspended in tight fiscal times leading some to say the Legislature pays selective attention to the will of the people. Supporters of I-728 and I-732 complain that rather than suspend these voter approved laws, lawmakers should instead suspend/repeal/alter I-1053 that requires a 2/3 vote of lawmakers to raise taxes.

Although all three laws were approved by the voters the track record of support is vastly different. While the voters have consistently approved/reaffirmed the 2/3 vote requirement each time they were provided the opportunity (1993, 1998, 2007 and 2010), their support for funding I-728 and I-732 has been more mixed. 

Consider the following from the 2000 voters’ guide:

Initiative 728 (K-12 and class size reduction)

• "Without raising taxes, I-728 lets schools reduce class sizes, expand learning opportunities, increase teacher training, invest in early childhood education, and build classrooms for K-12 and higher education."

• "We can afford to invest in our schools and our future without raising taxes or taking money away from other programs. I-728 is funded by lottery proceeds, surplus state revenues and by returning a portion of state property taxes to local school districts."

• "I-728 is both necessary and fiscally sound. It invests surplus revenues in education without hurting the state budget."

• "I-728 does not raise taxes. I-728 maintains ample reserves and funding for other state services."

Initiative 732 (automatic cost-of-living increases for teachers)

• "With a $1.1 billion surplus, let's use existing resources for more competitive salaries."

Statements opposing I-728 and I-732:

• "I-732 adds no state revenue – it only consumes more of existing resources."

• "I-728 would remove $2 billion from the state's general fund over the next six years."

• "The governor's budget office projects basic expenditure needs will exceed state revenues in the next biennium. I-728 takes a bad budget outlook and makes it much worse, requiring cuts in services or tax increases to meet basic needs."

Since funding was not identified for I-728/732 (other than surplus funds) when originally adopted and the measures were subsequently suspended during tough budget times, voters were asked in 2004 to approve I-884 and in 2010 to approve I-1098 to pay in-part for the policies of I-728 and I-732. Both measures were overwhelming rejected statewide.

Reading the tea leaves of I-728, 732, I-884 and I-1098, it appears the voters supported the policies of I-728 and I-732 when they were "free" and wouldn't hurt the budget or require tax increases but were against them when asked to raise taxes to pay for them.

As for the 4-time approval of the 2/3 vote requirement, however, voters have consistently said yes to imposing this restriction on lawmakers.