Jerry Doesn’t Need Positions on All Nine Ballot Measures
Meg Whitman’s campaign has been issuing a steady stream of press releases demanding that Jerry Brown take positions on all nine measures, Props 19-27, on the November statewide ballot.
One wonders why she bothers.
Brown isn’t going to take a position on each measure because she asks him to. Nor should he. A candidate is under no obligation to wade into measures. In fact, the political culture in some countries with direct democracy is that candidates and elected officials should stay out of such matters, which are decisions left for the people.
Bill Signings Send Conflicting Signals To California’s Struggling Manufacturing Community
California’s bill signing deadline passed last week and the outcomes of
a few specific bills send conflicting signals to manufacturers and
private sector job creators about the state’s interest in their ability
to compete and grow jobs.
Here’s a look at the result of four of the most important bills
affecting the state’s manufacturing job base and competitiveness:
Bad signal #1
Prop. 25: New Front in Long War Against Prop. 13
Proposition 25 is the latest weapon against Proposition 13, but backers don’t want voters to know it.
Statewide polls taken in recent years consistently show Proposition 13
to be as popular as it was 32 years ago when it passed with nearly
two-thirds of the vote. While the general public supports the landmark
measure with its limitation on property tax increases and requirement
of a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to increase state taxes,
politicians and government employee union leaders continue to see
Proposition 13 as a barrier to their draining every dime from taxpayers.
Writing about the campaign to pass Proposition 13, the measure’s
author, Howard Jarvis, wrote, "Virtually all of the howlers against
Proposition 13 had their noses buried deeply in the public trough. They
were on a gravy train provided by the taxpayers, and they wanted to
ride that train at the taxpayers’ expense until they reached the
promised land of exorbitant pensions for the rest of their lives."
Missing the Point on Jobs: The “More Transit – More Jobs” Report
Cross-posted on NewGeography.com
The Transit Equity Network has just published a study called More Transit – More Jobs
in which it suggests switching 50% of highway funding to transit in 20
metropolitan areas to create an additional 180,000 jobs over the next
five years. Their basic thesis is that each kajillion in spending can
produce more jobs in transit than in highways. We don’t comment on
that, because, frankly, the purpose of transportation spending is
neither to create transit jobs nor highway jobs.
We spend on transit and highways because of benefits that extend beyond
any direct employment. And, the extent of those benefits cannot be
compared between the two modes. At current rates of spending each
billion dollars spent on highways supports about 25 times as much
personal mobility as one spent on transit. Beyond that, highway
spending supports the movement of more than 1.25 billion ton miles of
truck freight, which keeps product prices low and supports our affluent
life style.
Transit carries 0.0 ton miles of freight. Researchers such
as Prud’homme & Chang-Wong and Hartgen & Fields
have shown that the type of ubiquitous mobility provided by road
systems produce greater economic growth. Moving money out of roads
would increase traffic congestion, destroy jobs and increase product
prices by slowing down trucks.