ELECTION 2025: Another levy vote this year – Democracy Voucher levy renewal/increase proposed for August ballot

Another property-tax levy renewal is proposed for a vote this year. Mayor Bruce Harrell announced that he wants to renew the levy for the Democracy Voucher program, originally approved by voters in 2015 and launched with 2017 city elections. From the announcement:

… The program is administered by the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission (SEEC) which sends four $25 democracy vouchers to eligible residents during municipal election cycles. Residents then donate their vouchers to qualifying campaigns, which are redeemed for the assigned value.

Since the program’s inception, Seattle has had among the highest rates of people contributing to candidates in the country. More than 106,000 residents have contributed vouchers to candidates, distributing over $10 million to local campaigns through 2024.

The program is also popular with candidates running for city office and has led to more competitive races. Between 2017-2024, 76% of candidates who appeared on the primary election ballot and 89% of candidates on the general election ballot participated in the program.

Mayor Harrell’s proposal would renew the program by levying a $45 million property tax over 10 years, costing the median assessed value Seattle homeowner about $12.20 a year. The proposal has been transmitted to the City Council for consideration and referral to voters for the August primary.

If voters approve the ballot measure, the Mayor, City Council, and SEEC will convene a workgroup in early 2026 to make recommendations on program improvements to reach more residents in diverse communities and empower local campaigns by addressing the role of Political Action Committee (PACs) in municipal elections.

The initiative that created the program was approved by 63 percent of city voters a decade ago. At the time, it was described as costing “the average homeowner about $8 a year.” raising about $30 million over 10 years.

thomas March 10, 2025 (3:03 pm)

HELL NO STOP TAXING US

Nolan March 10, 2025 (11:45 pm)

Reply

The Caps Lock is on your left.

Jake March 10, 2025 (3:38 pm)

If we do this, can we also decrease the amount you’re given from Big Biz donors who meddle with our elections? Need to keep Amazon, Starbucks, etc. execs and people like Tim Burgess out of our elections.

Bradley March 10, 2025 (7:01 pm)

Reply

Why the hate on Tim Burgess specifically?

Hannah March 10, 2025 (4:07 pm)

So excited to see this program hopefully be renewed! For anyone curious about the program, more information is available on these pages.
https://www.seattle.gov/democracyvoucher
https://www.peoplepoweredelections.org/dvp-impact-analysis

WSB March 10, 2025 (5:53 pm)

Reply

The first link is already in the story. The second one appears to be from an advocacy group?
WS Resident March 11, 2025 (7:43 pm)

Reply

Curious why you think this is good? Taxing people to force them to contribute to a political campaign is ridiculous. I can’t wait for this tax to (hopefully) die.

anonyme March 10, 2025 (4:51 pm)

While I agree that big biz donors need to be restricted/offset somehow, I don’t think democracy vouchers achieve that, nor have I seen evidence that vouchers have directly helped elect a candidate who would not have won without them. Nor do we need yet another initiative that raises property taxes.

Mike March 10, 2025 (5:57 pm)

Reply

I have never understood giving tax dollars (democracy vouchers) to fund people who decide I need pay more taxes so they can get more democracy vouchers to decide I need to pay more taxes to….rinse, repeat. Is there a requirement that any unused funds from the democracy vouchers goes back into the pool to fund democracy vouchers or is reallocated to other things tax payers are paying for? I’d hate to think some people running collect the democracy voucher money and then drop out and keep it.
- Bbron March 10, 2025 (8:26 pm)
  
  Reply
  
  The link answering those questions is in the post. It’d help alleviate you of that unfounded thinking you hate.

Robert m March 10, 2025 (5:04 pm)

I think we have had enough increases this year

WSEA March 10, 2025 (6:06 pm)

I’ll get a ton of hate for this but I just dont get the program. I’ve briefly read a couple articles but there is so much information and i’m not sure what I’m suppose to do. Everytime I get them, i worry that I’m throwing away funds by tossing them. I just focus my time on the candidates and what they stand for.

Bradley March 10, 2025 (6:59 pm)

Excluding certain businesses from donating? Only if you include Unions too. And then what else is the criteria? Size? Number of employees employed in the region? Just the ones you don’t like their politics?

Nitro March 10, 2025 (10:07 pm)

No!! No! Please, no more tax increases. If I want to donate to a candidate, I will do so on my own. OR this tax should be reimbursed to the taxpayer if they opt not to donate to anyone.

Lincoln Park Eagle March 10, 2025 (11:12 pm)

Lighten up on the property taxes. We’re talking $12/yr. We’re living in a State with no income tax. Sheesh!

Bbron March 11, 2025 (12:04 am)

Reply

What also doesn’t make sense is that on average folks will be gaining $88 when it comes to fiscally participating in elections which could be argued as equally important to voting. Hard to understand why you’d be upset at such a successful program in getting more people to vote for a few pennies a day.
- Adam March 11, 2025 (12:48 pm)
  
  Reply
  
  Getting more people to vote? So there’s a number of folks out there that wouldn’t vote, unless the gov’t sends them two $25 vouchers to spend? Please tell me how you’ve come about this. No tangents, no explanation of anything other than why this actually would change even a single voter’s mind? The data isn’t in your argument’s favor, but I would like to hear your thought process.
  - Bbron March 11, 2025 (2:34 pm)
    
    Reply
    
    what data is there that isn’t in my favor? there’s been a couple studies that have seen a significant uptick in voter participation because of the program (1, 2). they hypothesize voters are more inclined to vote in systems they feel are more fair, and a predominant idea in the cultural zeitgeist is big money. helping it be that successful campaigns aren’t just the candidates who cater to big donors, but give a leg up for those candidates that focus on the voting masses. there’s plenty of possible scenarios, maybe a combo of, but nonetheless there’s data showing the voucher likely have an impact. using the more conservative estimate I found, for me 5% more voter participation (and growing) is worth the $12 a year.
    - Adam March 11, 2025 (5:18 pm)
      
      They did NOT find that this helped increase voter turnout. They found that voter turnout increased recently, which isn’t surprising given how politicized everything is. There’s the Trump campaigns 3 straight cycles, which invigorated many on both sides in the last 2 as a response to us sadly not taking his first candidacy seriously. There’s the BLM movement and George Floyd and things around gender issues. So, add all that up, and more, and you’re still going to say this was because of the vouchers? And plz don’t refer to the advocacy link posted in this thread. There’s serious bias and a ton of conjecture in that link that’s similar to what you’re posing as fact. Correlation doesn’t equal causation. So many reasons why more folks turned out in recent elections. Also, would be nice if they just used hard numbers, not metrics meant to confuse ppl into believing it a success. Tap the link. Look at what they are calling successes. Much of it meaningless without context. I went there to inform myself. It certainly did that.
    - Bbron March 11, 2025 (11:31 pm)
      
      @Adam did you just chose to ignore my sources and instead focused on some other person’s link to argue against? you know you can control for variables like the ones you brought up by comparing turnout in Seattle vs. neighboring and similar regions? just like you, they’re proposing a hypothesis with the difference being they put in the research instead of just feeling it out on vibes
- EVGuy March 11, 2025 (2:30 pm)
  
  Reply
  
  If they can’t be bothered to vote without being paid, why should we want them to vote?
  - Bbron March 11, 2025 (2:49 pm)
    
    Reply
    
    “getting paid” is a stretch, but ideally you’d want everyone to vote. if you have sects of people you don’t want to vote, you’re not really for democracy. other ideas, like making election day a holiday, can be stretched to “paying people to vote” because accessibility typically has a cost.
    - Bradley March 11, 2025 (4:43 pm)
      
      There’s a cap on the redemption of vouchers. It’s not an “all in” program. The cash out is $3 million per year at last look. KOMO reports about 106,000 voters have used the vouchers since 2015. In a city of 700,000+ it sounds like a failed program. Nice idea but people don’t seem to be buying it.
Sixbuck March 11, 2025 (12:30 am)

Reply

10.6% Sales Tax. Sheeesh!!
EVGuy March 11, 2025 (2:32 pm)

Reply

Why should we be taxed to pay for politicians to run? We already get taxed to pay for them.

Spooled March 11, 2025 (7:31 am)

Big NO from this family. We’ve NEVER used the stupid vouchers. They go wasted every time just like the tax to support them. But, knowing freeattle voters this will pass easily, with increases.

TiredTaxPayer March 11, 2025 (7:49 am)

Absolutely not, please vote NO on this garbage. They go in the trash every time they come in the mail, this is such a dumb idea, it was when it was created in 2017. 12 bucks is 12 bucks; it is becoming death by a thousand paper cuts :::angry swearing face emoji:::

Bbron March 11, 2025 (9:52 am)

Reply

why is it a dumb idea?

Ryan H March 11, 2025 (8:38 am)

How about no more property tax increases. Every year property tax increases. Mine has gone up $1000 in 3 years and I have a very small, modest home. I feel like government thinks we are made of money. I bought my home in 2005, property tax was just over $2500, now it is well over $6000. I think property tax increases, just like rent control measures, should have a cap on year over year increases. Some modest percentage that cannot be exceeded. Government needs to learn how to control budgets just like every household does. And that is on every level. City, County, State and Federal. I like the idea behind the vouchers, but do not think they’re very effective.

PDiddy March 11, 2025 (3:25 pm)

Reply

You are lucky my taxes went from 3200 in 2010 to over 10000 in 2024. So almost triple for me.

Scarlett March 11, 2025 (10:34 am)

The word “democracy” has all lost all of its luster. It’s just a process to be bent, folded and mutilated to service an agenda. Bleh.

Bbron March 11, 2025 (2:38 pm)

Reply

so is this word pedantry or an actual criticism of the vouchers?

PDiddy March 11, 2025 (3:23 pm)

I have mixed feelings about this. I read today only about 30% are getting redeemed so where is all the other money? I will vote no.

Bradley March 11, 2025 (4:49 pm)

Reply

$3 million/ $100 = 30,000. If all 4 are used, it’s not reaching that many voters out of 400,000 registered voters.

Scarlett March 11, 2025 (7:05 pm)

And, what if I find no suitable individual to vote for, which is often? What if my vouchers go unused, into the recycling bin as seems to be case with the majority of people? This sounds like taxation without representation and a tremendous waste of money. The motivated will always find a candidate and support that candidate, with or without vouchers, and the unmotivated will not, despite having the vouchers to give away.

WSzombie March 11, 2025 (10:36 pm)

If only homeowners pay the tax to fund the vouchers, wouldn’t it be more fair if they were the ones to get vouchers? If my neighbor rents, and my political views differ, I’m LITERALLY paying to help them fund their candidate that I don’t want. And my neighbor pays nothing. They’re laughing in my face while using my money to donate to their candidate! Let that sink in and tell me it still makes sense.

WSB March 11, 2025 (10:41 pm)

Reply

Commenters who describe themselves as landlords frequently point out that they pass tax costs on to their renters, so yes, your renter neighbors are paying for it too.
- WSzombie March 12, 2025 (9:26 pm)
  
  Reply
  
  Does the voucher property tax apply to commercial buildings such as apartments as well? I don’t think it’s correct to infer that everybody pays whether you’re a homeowner or renter. Either way, taxes get passed that people very vocally don’t support. People must be saying one thing and checking the wrong boxes on the ballots.
  - WSB March 12, 2025 (9:55 pm)
    
    Reply
    
    Yes, it does, per the city website.

Scarlett March 12, 2025 (8:27 am)

Measures like vouchers are a superficial band-aid that won’t fix a society drowning in self-deception and self-interest. It’s only after we fix ourselves that a better democracy will naturally follow. And, yes, we’re all drowning in our own brand of self-deception and self-interest.