Gov. Brown Ignores the Weak Fraud Argument, Vetoes SB 168
Governor Jerry Brown did the right thing yesterday when he vetoed SB 168 by Sen. Ellen Corbett. The bill would have changed payment for helping to gather signature petitions from a per signature basis to a flat hourly rate. The change in the process would have made it more expensive to pay for signature gatherers, something Brown recognized would favor the wealthiest interests.
More importantly, Brown noted that the bill offered “a dramatic change” in California’s long established democratic process of direct democracy, which the governor knows the people respect and defend.
Some have conjectured that Brown, himself, is looking to the initiative process to raise taxes that the legislative process denied him and if SB 168 became law it would be more expensive for him to succeed. Perhaps. However, Brown’s time serving as California Secretary of State long ago also may have helped create the foundation for this veto.
Disputed Radio Ad Reflects Changing Political Landscape
By now you probably have heard the deceitful radio
ad funded by a group called Californians Against Identity Theft that is
attempting to discourage people from signing initiative and referendum
petitions by scaring them into believing their signatures on the petitions
could lead to identity theft. The dishonesty of the pitch has brought
rebuke from across the political spectrum and by groups that battle
identity theft.
The goal of the Californians Against Identity
Theft is to limit the use of direct democracy. That can clearly be detected on
the group’s
website which highlights not problems with identity theft but accusations
against the initiative process.
At least one California public employee union
has admitted being behind the ad. The public unions are opposed to some
initiatives and referendums that are currently in circulation.
Texas versus California Job Creation Argument Keeps Popping Up
The Texas versus California job creation comparison continues
to make noise during these tough economic times, and while Texas takes its
lumps over state issues on occasion (see Greg Lucas’ recent piece
in Capitol Weekly) there seems little doubt that purely on a jobs creation
front Texas is doing much better.
Adding to that view were numbers on very small, non-employee
businesses released by the U.S. Census Bureau as described by Dan Walters in
the Sacramento Bee Capitol
Alert yesterday:
"The number of California’s non-employee businesses hit a
high mark of 2.76 million in 2007 but by 2009 had dropped by 82,878, the Census
Bureau report, based on Internal Revenue Service data, found. Business receipts
declined from $145 billion to $121 billion during the two-year period."
Meanwhile, the report noted Texas added
8,260 small firms between 2008 and 2009.
“Voluntary” LA Red-Light Ticket Fines should at least be Tax Deductable
The Los Angeles City Council voted yesterday to end the
red-light camera program, which apparently came with "voluntary" fines for traffic
violations. That’s right, "voluntary
fines."
It was revealed this week that violators do not have to pay
the tickets that arrived in the mail if a camera caught them making a traffic
light infraction. As the Los
Angeles Times put it:
"For a variety of reasons, including the way the law was
written, Los Angeles officials said the fines were essentially
"voluntary" and that there are virtually no tangible consequences for
those who refuse to pay."
Heck, you didn’t even need the services of the notorious
"Gold Card Desk," recently
revealed where politicians and others with connections at city hall could
get parking tickets dismissed quietly and cleanly.
Voters Should Reconsider High Speed Rail
California’s high speed rail program was in danger before
the debt ceiling debate in Washington. Given the desire to cut trillions of
dollars from federal spending that both sides of the debate advocate, seeing a
$20 billion payment to California’s questionable high speed rail system is
doubtful.
If the federal money fails to appear, private investors are
unlikely to kick in with their expected share of the project. That leaves
Californians on the hook. Voters authorized $10-billion dollars in bond revenue
for the project when they passed Proposition1A in 2008 (Disclosure: I was a
member of the No campaign.)
Since that time, reviews and studies on the proposed rail
system have criticized the project.
Projected ridership numbers that were attacked during the campaign have
been continually challenged many times since the measure passed. The lack of a
business plan has been cited. Costs
estimates have grown — no surprise there.
Proponents of the plan say, "Don’t worry," money is not
always lined up immediately for big infrastructure projects that have become a
reality. The plan is needed, they say, because California’s projected
population growth will demand alternative transportation systems.
Poll Question Reflects a Concern for Business
The USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll asked how voters
felt about giving more taxing authority to local governments. Curiously,
however, the question asked in the poll did not reflect the proposal being discussed
in Sacramento.
The question dealt with a
number of areas that local governments currently do not have the power to tax
that the state does: alcoholic beverages, sweetened beverages, tobacco products and oil
extraction.
The bill authored by Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg granting
new taxing authority to local governments casts a much wider net. The bill
would extend taxing authority over some very big items: transaction and use
tax, vehicle license tax, and personal income tax.
Do you suppose if the poll question included these items – especially
giving local government power to establish a personal income tax – the results
would be the same? Highly unlikely.
Amazon Ahead Even though the Score is Tied
The result of
the USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll on the Amazon tax issue
reminds me of the famous headline when Harvard’s undefeated football team made
an incredible comeback from a huge deficit in the final minute of a game to tie
arch rival and undefeated Yale. The Harvard
Crimson newspaper ran a headline: Harvard Beats Yale
29-29.
The poll has the pubic split at this point on the question whether online
retailers should collect sales tax as in-state retailers do. 46% support the
bill signed by the governor requiring the tax collection while 49% oppose it.
Like the two undefeated Ivy League teams of 1968, powerful opponents will
square off against each other over the referendum if it makes the ballot.
Deep-pocketed online retailers like Amazon will be battling big chain stores
like WalMart.
Measuring Political Donations
You have to wonder at the attention the American Lung
Association sponsored study
on tobacco company contributions to California politics got in the press. There
was no surprise that tobacco companies donate to protect their interests just
as unions do, just as Indian tribes do and just as other interests do. However,
only in rare cases in the stories was the tobacco spending put in perspective.
Tobacco is not the largest donor to California politics – not
by a long shot.
“Double Majority” Plan Designed to Make it Easier to Raise Taxes
Senator Loni Hancock has proposed an amendment to Proposition 13, SCA 15, that would allow an alternative method to raise state taxes. In a press release, the Senator calls the measure a "Double Majority" tax vote because it allows the legislature to put a tax on the ballot with a simple majority vote and then the people must pass the tax in a statewide election with a majority vote.
The press release states: "It does not make it easier to raise taxes by removing the two-thirds vote requirement. It simply creates a viable alternative to legislative gridlock."
Looking Back: From Stickers to WIN Buttons; and From Lockyer to Reagan
Who remembers the WIN Button from the Ford
Administration? The WIN button campaign came to mind in reading the new effort
devised by the California State Employees Association Retirees to place
stickers on checks that read: "Paid by State Retiree."
WIN stood for Whip Inflation Now. In attempting
to bring inflation under control, President Gerald Ford and his advisors came
up with a campaign of both mandatory and voluntary measures to encourage the
public to engage in disciplined spending habits and personal savings. A public
relations campaign featuring WIN buttons was created to accompany the effort.
The buttons did little to change economic
habits. They quickly became the object of ridicule and some people wore the
button upside down saying the acronym "NIM" stood for: "No Immediate Miracles."
The state retirees want you to know the value
their spending power has on California’s economy. The effort is built on the back of a CalPERS
sponsored study recently released that claims public employee pension payments
have a $26 billion effect on statewide economic activity.