November 2012 Targets – Part One: The Assembly
Should the new lines for the 80 assembly districts released
by the Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC) become final on August 15 –
meaning there are no successful legal challenges or referendum that could
require the state Supreme Court to draw the lines – following are my early
picks as to where the action will be in November 2012 (Part Two will cover
state senate and congressional races)
Those who were hoping that lines drawn by the CRC, rather
than politicians, would significantly boost the number of competitive races in
2012 will be sorely disappointed. It didn’t happen.
Here are the assembly districts that early handicappers are
currently looking at as being competitive, with the more likely targets being
listed first.
Racing to Tax the Rich
Who gets to tax the rich first – the federal government or
the California state government? Politicians and tax increase advocates on both
the federal and state level say the rich must pay more. In the end, neither may
pass a tax on high-end income taxpayers and there is no advocacy to raise taxes here. However, how successful the federal
government tax-the-rich supporters are on this issue will clearly affect the
fortunes of the state.
President Barack Obama says the United States must attack
its deficit problem in a "balanced" way, which includes both cuts and revenue
increases. He talks about taxing millionaires and billionaires but sets that
bar rather low, often citing the figure of $250,000 in income as a target for
tax increases.
California tax increase advocates think the rich start at a
higher point, if not quite millionaire territory. Assembly Member Nancy
Skinner’s income tax increase proposal, AB 1130, would levy an additional 1%
tax on taxable income of $500,000 and more.
California Job Training Updates: WIA, H-1B and Poizner/Lansing
Just a few years ago, California was flush with job training
money. The federal Stimulus of 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(ARRA), brought to California an additional $488 million in Workforce
Investment Act (WIA) funds-adult activity funds, dislocated worker funds and
youth funds. This $488 million was in addition to the $496 million in regular
program year 2009 WIA funding.
The ARRA funding has been near entirely spent and for the
2011-2012 year, the workforce community in California is facing a scaled back,
though still significant, WIA expenditure.
Mr. Michael Evashenk of the Employment Development Department’s
workforce division knows as much about WIA funding as anyone in our state. He
prepared the following chart showing the WIA funding for the upcoming year.
California drops from $460 million to $402 million, a
decrease of 12.7%. This is a larger decrease than the national decrease
of 9.8%– $3.198 billion in WIA funds in 2010/2011, $2.88 billion in 2011/2012.
(The high water mark for WIA funds in California was in 2000 when WIA funding reached
around $600 million.)
Protecting Taxpayers by Protecting Local Discretion
Co-authored by Jon Coupal, President of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Those familiar with Sacramento politics know that the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and the League of California Cities are often on opposing sides of major policy issues. Nonetheless, we have worked together on a number of issues where our interests overlap. One issue on which we have always agreed is firm opposition to unfunded mandates on local governments. Many in local government are unaware that it was a taxpayer advocate, Paul Gann, who placed in the California Constitution a prohibition against unfunded state mandates to local governments.
Today, we stand together again as state legislators attempt to inject paralysis and dysfunction into local budgets. Specifically, our organizations join in strong opposition to several bills attempting to restrict the ability of local governments to reduce costs, manage their budgets and spend tax dollars in the most efficient manner possible.
Costly State Regulations Threaten California Recreational Fishing and Jobs
Many
Californians are not aware of a very serious and looming threat to
recreational fishing. Fish farmers who stock California lakes and
grocery stores are threatened by a legal case quietly moving through the
courts as well as the costly regulations being drafted by the
California Department of Fish and Game.
As a result of a lawsuit
several years ago against the State of California’s fish hatcheries,
Department staff working in concert with environmental groups, drafted
an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) including private aquaculture in
its regulations, even though the lawsuit and ruling only applied to state facilities – and not privately held fish hatcheries and stocking ponds.
Given
that California grows some of the healthiest and safest fish in the
world under existing regulations, one can only assume that the State’s
actions were not motivated by a public need, but merely by a political
agenda, one that anglers know has led to significant limitations on
ocean fishing off the coast of California.