My logic is actually pretty straight-forward, Ian: give us a plan. Don't levy this rather large tax at the last-minute and fail to simultaneously give us the details of what you're going to do with all that money.

And I'm not against taxes period. IF the state legislature and/or Governor Gregoire had said "look, this money's for the Viaduct/death trap and for the 520 bridge," then that would have been fine by me. IF specifics had been placed on the table, or IF programs had been specifically earmarked that would receive the money (and it is quite a lot, as 9 and 1/2 cents a gallon means about $5.5 billion dollars to "play" with!), then I would most assuredly have voted against I-912.

In fact, even if I-912 succeeds, I would urge my legislature to go through with another tax (maybe even another gas tax), as long as we know exactly where that money goes. Wouldn't it be a shame if it got chugged into the general fund and never saw the light of fresh, gooey asphalt?

So let's see some plans and some detailed projects. If I-912 is defeated and our money gets sunk into open-ended and fiscally irresponsible projects like Boston's Big Dig, it'll be our fault, and no one else's.

All I want is some accountability. Garrett, your thoughts?

As far as Sound Transit is concerned, all the more power to it. As a student, I'll probably be taking it to the UW next year.

-Will