« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Calif. Proposition 25; The Unlimited Tax Increases and One-Party Rule Forever Act

We’re headed down the last lap toward the November elections, and covering all the conservative candidates we can find, even supporting “moderately” conservatives ones to stop the patently leftist ones from taking or keeping office. Unfortunately, times are desperate for California and the nation because we conservatives snoozed for far too long and it’s boiling down to November 2010; mistakes we make here in this election could spell doom for our state and country for years…we seriously may never recover.

Take Proposition 25 as an example, the “Passing the Budget On Time Act”. Democrats and unions know we’re sick of seeing California slide with no budget because “they just don’t seem to be able to get along in Sacramento”, and played on that with a fuzzy little title that will get voters thinking; “Oh, this is just what we need! Now they’ll have to pass a budget on time!”

Well, lets look at that for a minute; the reason the budget doesn’t get passed on time is the Democrats in of the legislature control want to throw as much money into whatever projects they can that will make the unions happy and get them re-elected. The GOP is too weak in numbers to stop any of this if it goes to a 51% vote scheme, and if Jerry Brown somehow gets the best of Meg Whitman in November, the door will be open to unlimited tax and spend, and the coffin lid over California may be nailed shut forever. Call it “fear mongering” if you want, but what hope will we have when the libs in California drive the tax paying population out to other states or countries? Think it’s not happening already? Read this and come back then, but we need to get the sad truth out there for our friends and family to understand, we are really on the brink here.

Getting back to Prop 25, Dan Walters at Sacbee writes Prop 25 is;

Backed by unions and Democratic politicians, the measure would eliminate the decades-old requirement in the California Constitution for a two-thirds legislative vote on the state budget.

Its advocates contend, with good cause, that the two-thirds vote has usually meant weeks of delay each year in passing a budget, capped by some sort of expedient get-out-of-town deal that leaves underlying problems unresolved. Typically, votes are acquired one by one with special favors.

Proposition 25′s practical effect would be to eliminate Republican leverage on the budget, which is why GOP lawmakers and their business allies intensely dislike the measure.

What we don’t know is whether Proposition 25, if enacted, would actually improve the Capitol’s abysmal record on governance, especially in fiscal matters, and – more importantly – whether its passage would have hidden consequences, intended or unintended.

Supposedly, the measure would not affect another section of the constitution, enacted by voters as part of Proposition 13 in 1978, that requires two-thirds votes “for the purpose of increasing revenues.” But the California Chamber of Commerce and other opponents contend that Proposition 25′s precise language opens the door to new taxes without super-majority votes. [My emphasis]
More-

There’s no way anyone can convince me that if the Democrats have the ability to raise taxes at will to cover their massive spending schemes that they won’t do it. Kick the can down the road to our great-grand kids just so they themselves can say “They DID something” and get themselves re-elected. One party rule is a non-starter anywhere it’s tried, ask the Iraqis how well that worked.

I don’t know about the rest of you, but after seeing the monster 2,000 plus page bills filled with hidden union paybacks and crony loopholes handed down by the US Congress I’m not ready to trust anything the Democrats pass anywhere, period.

I’m not only voting “No” on Prop 25, but “He** NO!!” if I can find that box to fill in on my ballot.

Crossposted

COMMENTS

  • IJB

    Voters in CA have been insulated from the consequences of voting Dem-dominated state legislatures for too long. Instituting 50+1 voting for budgets is the way to finally remove that crutch, and force CA voters to live with the consequences of their actions.

    In fact, under the current system, there is *no* incentive for CA voters to kick out the Dems and elect a majority GOP state legislature, and so they never do as a result.

    In general, I’m not a fan of super-majority requirements for anything but tax increases (and in CA, those can still be still overruled by referenda, if Prop. 25 does in fact weaken the 2/3 requirement for tax increases). In fact, CA is either the only state, or one of only two, that requires a 2/3 vote for passing a budget. It’s a totally unnatural handover from the ‘progressive era’ that needs to go.

    And the Governor will still be able to veto budget bills, so it’s not like the majority will be able to run totally amuck.

    So, this is one union-backed prop that I may actually be voting for (though the last few paragraphs of Walters’ piece do give me pause).

    Still, in the end I’ll likely vote for Prop. 25, and then turn right around and vote for Prop. 26 (which makes tax increases harder…).

    (P.S. I wouldn’t worry though: while I’ll be voting for it, I’d bet hard cash that Prop. 25 will go down to defeat: CA voters will never remove their crutch that allows them to vote for Democrats while still having the insurance that some legislative Republicans will save them from their own irresponsibility…)

    • http://erickbrockway.wordpress.com/ Erick Brockway

      Assuming he wins. I don’t know, this smells like the Open Primary type of trap.

      • eastbaylarry

        There’s always the future to consider when making things ‘easier’ becomes a freeway onramp for progressive destruction. It’s supposed to be ‘hard’ to pass a budget that raises taxes.
        When the democrats are forced to only approve programs that fit our currect revenue, then things will get better here.

      • IJB

        I’m thinking longer-term.

        Bottom line: I don’t think super-majority budgets are a good idea no matter what.

        And the way they’ve worked in CA, they’ve simply served to undermine GOP unity and promote division and RINOism. I’d rather the Dems “own” CA’s budget for the next decade – I don’t imagine the political situation will remain as it is now, once that happens…

        • http://erickbrockway.wordpress.com/ Erick Brockway

          Not after a decade of them getting their way on spending AND taxes. Is California “too big to fail”? I bet we find out in the next two years if nothing changes…

  • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C

    I’ve always been a fan of it. When all else fails, reasoning, cajolery, and so on, it’s time to go to the fail safe.

    California is not too big to fail. Nowhere is too big to fail.

    Like any other addict, drugs, alcohol, or whatever, governments addicted to taxes and spending have to be allowed to hit rock bottom.

  • ZZMike

    Prop 25 would make it much easier to raise taxes. For some unaccountable reason, it’s titled “On-Time Budget Act of 2010″.

    It would never occur to them in a million years that they should balance the budget by cutting spending. (And no, the only way to cut spending is NOT to cut education and protection. Eliminate the Coastal Commission, for starters.)

    The legislature sees us as a bottomless well of money for their ever-increasing social programs.

    The housing market is in bad shape now. Does any sane person really think that higher property taxes will cause a boom in sales? Or is it more likely to be the straw that sends people to Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, …

    IJB: I think you’re too trusting of our government.
    “… if Prop. 25 does in fact weaken the 2/3 requirement for tax increases…”

    That’s exactly what it does, It amends the California Constitution, Article IV, Section 12: subsection (e):

    “… a majority of the membership concurring …”

    “And the Governor will still be able to veto budget bills…”
    Do you really think Jerry Brown would do that?

    “… vote for Prop. 26…”
    “Sierra Club California joins the League of Women Voters, American Lung Association, California Nurses Association, local governments, Peace Officers Research Association of California, California Federation of Teachers, Consumer Federation of California and many others in opposing Prop 26. ”

    OK, I’m all for it.

    “The proposed initiative would require a two-thirds supermajority vote in the California State Legislature to pass many fees, levies, charges and tax revenue allocations that under existing rules can be enacted by a simple majority vote.”

    Prop 26 promotes many fees into taxes, which currently require a 2/3 majority, but Prop 25 makes a simple majority able to pass new taxes.

    If they both pass, you get not only a simple majority able to raise taxes, but lots of fees and levies changed into taxes.

    The best plan is 25, No; 26, Yes.

    Otherwise, forget about Prop 13, forget about buying a house in California, forever.