The Wall Street Journal Can't Handle the Truth About I-1098

You know what's easier than telling the truth? Distorting it to fit your own narrative. The Seattle Times demonstrated that last week when it disingenuously compared I-1098, the Bill Gates, Sr.–sponsored initiative that would introduce an income tax on the wealthy, to Oregon's much more censorious tax codes. And earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal entered the fact-fumbling fray with an editorial of its own.

The first sign that the Journal is playing fast and loose with the facts is when it cites opposition to I-1098 from the "liberal" Times, when in fact the denunciation came from the extremely unliberal wing of the Times known as its editorial board. The Journal article goes on to say that, by passing the initiative, "Washington would move overnight from one of the nine states with no income tax to having the eighth highest rate in the country."

That may be technically true. But the Journal failed to mention a rather important caveat. In most other states, the meter starts running after the first dollar is earned. I-1098 is different. Sure, it would impose an income tax, the state's first. But it wouldn't touch 98.2 percent of the state's population; in a departure from Washington's current regressive system, it would only affect those who already have ample cash on hand—kicking in at 5 percent for couples earning $400,000 or more; 9 percent on income earned above $1 million; and starting at half those figures for single folks.

Of course, highlighting that relatively unsubtle nuance might then make I-1098 seem kind of reasonable when compared to tax-bogeymen states like California and Oregon—as would pointing out the tax relief that the initiative proposes for both property owners and those who run small businesses. But if the Journal acknowledged all that, then what kind of argument would it have?