It’s Time to take a Fresh Look at AB32
Let’s take the time to get it right. As we seek solutions to global climate change, California can’t afford to make the wrong decisions. That’s why I’m calling for a fresh look at AB 32, the state’s far-reaching law designed to regulate greenhouse gas emissions.
Our residents are struggling through the worst recession in decades. More than two million Californians cannot find a job. While I believe many of AB 32’s goals are important, we must carefully review which rules to pursue and make sure those rules spur innovation and help California regain its economic footing.
We cannot afford more rules and regulations that result in unintended consequences and cost us jobs and productivity.
The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page recently agreed that AB 32 needs more careful study: “The impact will make the state even less attractive to start or expand a business.”
Fiorina, DeVore Spin PPIC Senate Poll
The new PPIC poll numbers on the Senate race have Carly Fiorina and Chuck DeVore in full spin mode as they try to explain why it’s a really good thing to be running second and third in a three-person race.
The survey by the Public Policy Institute of California found Tom Campbell, the newcomer to the Senate race, with 27 percent support, followed by Fiorina at 16 percent and DeVore at 8 percent.
Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer beat each of the Republicans in head-to-head match-ups, leading by four percentage points against Campbell and eight over both Fiorina and DeVore.
But those numbers mean very different things to the different candidates.
High Speed Travesty
Obama’s decision to give California’s controversial High Speed Rail project a $2.25 billion boost could also be called Cash For Clunkers, Part Deux. Although barely a fraction of the $80 billion ultimately needed for completion it is unfortunate that the High Speed Rail Authority was given a wad of walking around money to fool around with. High on the list will be hiring more P.R. hacks to push the viability of the project in light of the embarrassingly inept "business plan" recently released and roundly criticized from just about every point on the political spectrum.
The truly bad news is that the Authority will undoubtedly use the funds to start digging holes up and down the state to get as much momentum as possible so that reversal of the decision to even build the project will be very difficult. Californians ought to be asking themselves a simple question. How many transportation projects that are actually needed could we have funded for $2.25 billion?
Liberal California Senators Pass Universal Health Care Legislation
Senate Bill 810 has unfortunately passed the Senate yesterday on a 22-14 party-line vote.
The measure would create a single-payer, government-controlled health care plan for Californians. The same government that has mismanaged your money now wants to control your health care.
Does anybody believe a state that bleeds red year-after-year could possibly control the costs of health care?
As I said on the Senate floor: This plan is to the Left and radical of ObamaCare. It’s this type of big-government idea that caused an earthquake of an election in Massachusetts in recent weeks. Yet, my liberal colleagues in Sacramento don’t seem to care about the needs or concerns of the people or the state of our economy.
Redistricting: Americans Flee High Tax States
Here at the summer meeting of the Republican National Committee, the 2010 election is seen with special importance because the governors and legislators elected this year will draw the congressional district lines that will form the playing field for control of the House of Representatives over the next decade.
While the 2010 census is not yet complete, population projections are now available, and with them we can see which states will gain, and lose representation.
The losers: high tax states in the Northeast and Midwest will lose representation in the House. Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Minnesota, Michigan and Illinois will each lose a seat. Ohio will lose two.
The winners: states in the South and the West (other than California), mainly low tax states, will gain seats. Southern states South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida will each gain a seat. In the West, Nevada, Arizona, Utah and Washington State will each gain a seat. Texas, a low tax state that has aggressively lured companies and people from around the nation, will gain an astonishing four seats in the House.
Look who’s behind the tree
By now you’ve heard that Oregon voters decided last Tuesday to tax themselves. If by “themselves” you mean “someone else.”
The election (actually, a referendum of legislated tax increases) decided the fate of two measures that were carefully targeted to maximize the ratio of voters to unpopular taxpayers. Measure 66 added two new brackets (10.8% on income over $125,000 for individuals/$250,000 for families; 11% on income over $250,000 for individuals/$500,000 for families) to Oregon’s basically flat income tax rate of 9%. Taxpayers in those brackets account for about two percent of Oregon’s income taxpayers, but is estimated to bring in $470 million a year. Measure 67 adds a new corporate tax rate (7.9%, from 6.6%), applying to business incomes over $250,000 and estimated to raise more than $250 million annually. The new top rates for the income and corporate taxes will partially sunset after four years.
Voters approved the Measure 66 by an eight point margin and Measure 67 by a six point margin. Typically, Oregon voters have rejected income tax increases by referendum, although none has been so carefully targeted as these. Oregon has no sales tax, and its property tax was limited by a vote of the people.
Small Business Gains from Supreme Court Decision
The United States Supreme Court decision which President Obama attacked during his State of the Union speech has changed the political landscape in this country.
Amidst the spin by those who say this will remove the shackles from big business and labor, and those who say this is a victory for free speech, there is one group that is overlooked who gained in this decision – small business.
Here’s what changed and didn’t change as a result of this decision.
Corporate contributions to federal candidates are still illegal. Corporate contributions to political party organizations are still governed by state law.
The Supreme Court decision lifted the ban on businesses being able to spend money directly on the support or defeat of individual candidates by name. These actions have to be ‘independent expenditures” that cannot be coordinated with the campaign, however the Court does not define what the threshold is for “independent” from the campaign.