CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, OCTOBER 30, 2012, OR THEREAFTER
FOR RELEASE: TUESDAY, OCTOBER 30, 2012, OR THEREAFTER
BY
THOMAS D. ELIAS
“TAX PROPOSITION BATTLE RAISES ECHOES OF
1978”
If some voters feel a sense of déjà vu
as the fall election nears, one reason may be the battle between the
tax-raising Propositions 30 and 38, a fight with strong and ironic echoes of
the historic June 1978 clash between two property tax-cutting measures,
Propositions 8 and 13.
Both 8 and 13 passed in that long-ago
election, but because they covered much the same subject matter and Proposition
13 won by a larger margin, the Howard Jarvis-backed property tax cuts became
law. Efforts to alter it have been a political third rail ever since.
Should both Gov. Jerry Brown’s Prop.
30 and billionaire activist Molly Munger’s Prop. 38 pass this time, most
analysts believe the one getting the most votes would cancel out the other. But
legal battles would likely ensue.
Historic parallels and ironies abound
here: Brown as governor during both fights has been intimately involved in
each. He essentially owns Prop. 30, which would raise taxes by about $6.5
billion yearly. He fought Prop. 13 and backed Prop. 8, which would have lowered
property taxes on owner-occupied homes and buildings, creating essentially what
is now called a “split roll.” Had Prop. 8 passed, taxes for most residential
property could be lower today, but levies on commercial and industrial lands and
buildings would be higher.
After Prop. 13 won, Brown became a
vocal convert, implementing it enthusiastically, especially helping state
government take control over property tax revenues away from local agencies.
One irony today sees sometime tax cutter
Brown wanting to raise taxes – even though the sums to be raised would simply
make up for cuts in the vehicle license tax by ex-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
during his first days in office. This has amounted to about $6.5 billion per
year since late 2003; without it there would likely be no state budget deficit
and no plausible argument for either Prop. 30 or 38.
But there is that deficit, and Brown
says past history may be largely irrelevant. “In the world I live in now,” he
said in one recent talk, “there isn’t much past, there isn’t much memory. It’s
all about the news.”
The news is that funding for education
has been cut severely over the last few years. Tens of thousands of teachers
have been laid off, billions of dollars cut from university and community
college budgets, plus enrollment cuts and tuition increases.
“Snake oil,” anti-tax fighter Jon
Coupal labels arguments for both Props. 30 and 38. The head of the Howard
Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. says the fact state parks officials hid about $50 million
while parks were closing somehow means billions more lurk in Sacramento bank
accounts no one has found.
The implication, of course, is that
Brown, Schwarzenegger and everyone else who has cut education, highway, prison
and other state funding threw those programs under the bus just to get these
propositions passed. Not likely, no matter how loudly and persistently anyone
makes the implication.
Critics also say Brown’s determination
to sell voter-approved bonds for high speed rail means he could avoid the
additional cuts he and the Legislature have ready to take effect automatically
if Prop. 30 fails. Also incorrect.
And there’s the charge that Prop. 30
doesn’t set aside any money for education. This ignores the 1988 Proposition
98, guaranteeing a large percentage of state spending for schools. Yes, the
state under both Schwarzenegger and Brown has “borrowed” some of this money.
But, no, that wouldn’t make funds from Prop. 30 any more of a “slush fund” than
other state revenues.
“Sure, Prop. 30 would raise taxes,”
Brown said. “But the income tax increases affect no one who makes under
$250,000.” Its quarter-cent sales tax hike would affect everyone.
Brown adds that Prop. 38 “starts at a
much lower level (only the lowest tax bracket is exempt from increases) and its
money goes only to K-12 public schools. It would take five years before it
brings in as much as Prop. 30 and it doesn’t start until next year – not soon
enough.”
While Brown notes that school have
serious financial problems – “We’ve been cutting too many teachers…and
counselors,” he said – he adds that giving money to schools alone, a la 38,
won’t solve the deficit. “The general fund is where the deficit is,” he said,
noting it also covers other essentials like prisons and water management and
Medi-Cal.
Opponents call the cuts set to trigger
if Prop. 30 loses a form of “blackmail,” especially since most are to
education. “That’s where the money is,” Brown said. “We couldn’t find any other
places to cut.”
Ballot propositions are always
important in California, but the 30 vs. 38 vs. no-on-both battle is one of the
most vital yet. That’s why it may help that California’s votes in the
presidential and U.S. senate elections on the same ballot seem to be foregone
conclusions: lack of suspense about them ought to allow voters to concentrate
on this critical fight.
-30-
Email
Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough:
The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch
It," is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias
columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
No comments:
Post a Comment