Despite Amazon’s Move, History Says We’re in for a Ballot Brawl
Amazon.com has put forth a plan to avert the referendum to
overturn a new tax law that is ready to qualify for the next election. The
proposal probably falls into the "too-little-too-late" category for Amazon’s
political opponents to avoid a ballot battle. History of a similar referendum
from many years ago indicates the ballot fight will be hugely expensive.
First, to the negotiations: Amazon has asked for a two-year
suspension of the tax law requiring online, out-of-state retailers to collect
sales tax while Congress works on a national solution to collect taxes across
state lines. The company also offered to set up distribution centers in
California, which could create up to 7,000 jobs.
The initial response to the proposal from opponents lead by
the California Retailers Association is that the deal is unacceptable.
President of the association, Bill Dombrowski, said, "We don’t think it’s a
serious compromise."
The Sun Will Come Out… Tomorrow?
It’s cloudy skies these days for the solar industry.
Especially for Solyndra, the California solar-panel maker who announced today they will file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and will lay off their remaining 1,100 employees.
Now, there’s nothing legally wrong nor in my view, morally wrong with declaring bankruptcy; it is a provision under the law for those who have experienced extreme circumstances. But when you are a business that has received hundreds of millions of dollars ($535 Million, to be exact) in so-called stimulus loan guarantees then files for bankruptcy, it should be “lights out” on the case for green jobs.
TheHill.com reports that the Obama Administration may not be learning from its failures. They report that the administration just approved another $852 Million loan guarantee last week to NextEra Energy, another California solar company. The Obama Administration’s solution seems to be if it fails, throw even more money at the problem!
Protect Main Street: Keep Proposition 13 Whole
Give
Governor Jerry Brown credit. He’s smart enough to recognize that imposing
massive property tax hikes on California’s struggling job creators will hurt,
not help, our state’s economy. And he’s willing to take heat from members of
his own party for his stand.
On August 16, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa gave a speech to the
Sacramento Press Club urging "progressives" to "start thinking and acting big
again" in order to "invest… in our economy." He challenged Governor Brown to
have "the courage" to "strengthen" Proposition 13, an important taxpayer
protection measure approved by voters in 1978.
Lest anyone be confused, let me translate: Mayor Villaraigosa has no intention
of "strengthening" the property tax protections in Proposition 13. Instead he
wants to strip away those protections for business owners, including Main
Street mom-and-pop businesses like hair salons, hardware stores and
restaurants.
According the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, an organization that exists
to defend Proposition 13, prior to that measure there were no limits on
property tax rates and assessments. Taxpayers’ properties could be reassessed
50% to 100% in a single year and see their bills jump accordingly. As a result
many taxpayers lost their homes and businesses.
A Pivot Point in American Opinion: The Debt Ceiling Negotiation and its Consequences
The Iranian hostage crisis, Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, Lehman Brother’s collapse and the recessions that defined the 1980, 1992 and the 2008 presidential campaigns … these are the signal events that changed and then defined the last 30 years of American politics.
They are joined now by another signal event: The debt ceiling negotiation and its consequences.
Consumer confidence has dropped 15.8 points in two months and is now at its fourth lowest level since the survey began in 1952.
BOTTOM LINE:
As August comes to a close, the debt ceiling negotiation and its aftermath can now be put into an emerging context.
Mercurial legislature ignores three years of hard work
Three years ago, California legislators did something politicians are seldom brave enough to do: they recognized their limitations and gave away some of their power.
In passing landmark green chemistry laws, lawmakers admitted that they were no match for scientists when it came to sorting through the data, analyzing alternatives and making a rational chemicals management policy. Under the new laws, that would be left to scientists and regulators at the Department of Toxic Substances Control.
It was a truly courageous move. If only they’d meant it.
As the DTSC nears the end of three years of public hearings, written comments, sub-committee meetings and reports, and is about to release proposed green chemistry regulations, the Legislature appears poised to step back into the business of making chemical policy on their own.