Initiative 1033 concerns state, county and city revenue, and according to the 2009 General Elections Voters’ Guide, “This measure would limit growth of certain state, county and city revenue to annual inflation and population growth, not including voter-approved revenue increases. Revenue collected above the limit would reduce property tax levies.”

However, while I-1033 may return money to property owners, the fiscal impact statement for the initiative is troubling.

“The initiative reduces state general fund revenues that support education; social, health and environmental services; and general government activities by an estimated $5.9 billion by 2015,” the voters’ guide reads.

Because funding for K-12 education is protected constitutionally, it is likely that higher education funding would be cut disproportionately to make up for the diminished state revenue. University officials have stated that should the UW face cuts like this in the future, a likely way to combat them would be to raise tuition rates.

UW students are already facing back-to-back years of 14-percent tuition increases. I-1033 threatens to extend rising tuition at an even faster rate.

At a presentation to the Greater University Chamber of Commerce, the initiative’s sponsor, Tim Eyman, described I-1033 as a way to hold the government accountable for their spending, noting that I-1033 would still allow the state to spend money for projects, but that approval from voters would have to be obtained first.

The voters guide reads: “The limit on revenue growth would not apply to revenue increases approved by the voters at an election, and money received from the federal government would not be included in the State’s revenue limit.”

However, The Daily’s editorial board feels that rather than having voters approve spending at every turn, constituents should elect officials whom they trust to spend money accordingly. Asking for voter approval for every increase in spending defeats the purpose of having elected officials act in our interest and adds mountains of red tape to state government projects.

The state has also noted in the voters guide that “the initiative also reduces general fund revenues that support public safety, infrastructure and general government activities by an estimated $694 million for counties and $2.1 billion for cities by 2015.”

This holds serious implications for the state’s economy as we attempt to recover from a recession. We should be stimulating industry, not starving it.

At the very least, even if one agrees that an initiative such as I-1033 is necessary to control state spending, now is simply not the time to enact such policies.

I-1033 would be locking the state’s spending into revenue levels based off of a recession-level budget and doesn’t factor in the detail that the state is operating at an economic-crisis level of spending. After the economy recovers, I-1033 will prevent funding for public services that have already been cut from returning to pre-recession levels.

The Daily’s editorial board feels that I-1033 is simply the wrong way to try to control state spending and that if passed, it will do more harm than good.

This is the opinion of The Daily’s editorial board: Editor-in-Chief Casey Smith, Production Director Colleen Kirsten, Opinion Editor Allen Wagner, News Editor Eric Staples, and Sports Editor Christian Caple. The Daily’s editorial board will be making one more recommendation concerning King County executive tomorrow.

The last day to send in or drop off your ballot is Nov. 3. Be sure to send it in to the proper authorities in time.