I urge you to vote NO on 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, and 1E and vote YES on 1F. Here is why…
Before you even consider how you are going to vote on Taxifornia’s Propositions, know that your taxes have already been increased by Taxramento’s politicians without any of them consulting you.
In February 2009, as part of the state’s 2008-09 and 2009-10 budgets, both the legislature and the Taxinator voted into law to raise the Sales & Use Tax by one cent for every dollar. That means for every dollar you spend that is sales-taxable, you are now sending Taxramento another penny. Add up all the dollars you spend in a year, and that is a lot of money.
The new budgets also increased the Vehicle Licensing Fee (VLF) from 0.65% of your car’s value to 1.15% of its value. That means if you paid $65 last year, this year you are going to pay $115. The new budgets also raised the Personal Income Tax (PIT) by 0.25% for every tax bracket. So, if you paid 9% last year, this year you are going to pay 9.25%.
What the very politicians that passed these tax increases are hoping you don't figure out is that Proposition 1A further increases taxes. With the passage of the 2008-09 and 2009-10 budgets, these tax increases will occur for two fiscal years. Proposition 1A extends these tax increases for additional years. Taxramento increased those taxes in the emergency that was created by the current economic conditions, but they cannot extend those increases into future budgets without our approval. That is why we are having the special election tomorrow. They are hoping that in our panic, we will grant these tax increases for budgets that haven’t even been drawn up – extend these tax increases for years in which we do not know if we will be booming or busting.
Taxifornia’s politicians are hoping that you will you get out and vote on their propositions tomorrow. The majority of them want you to vote yes and the minority of them want you to vote no. What none of them want you to do is to actually read the damned things. They read worse than stereo instructions and will lull you to sleep, but I have trudged through them over the course of the past weekend and I am none too pleased.
They are being sold under the guise that passage of these propositions will somehow magically rein in Taxramento’s spending and balance the budget once and for all so that we never have to go through this again. The only way we are never going to have to go through this again is if we fundamentally change our definition of capitalism, our definition of government, and if our politicians go though some miracle make-over. You and I both know that is never going to happen. So, despite how we vote on these propositions, without a fundamental change to how we allow Taxramento to operate, we will find ourselves in this same spot again someday. These propositions do not change the system, they simply put a band-aid on the perpetually-leaking dam.
Make no mistake, my friends…Taxramento has already spoken for you. They have already done what they have done. These propositions are simply our approval of the extension of the taxes they have already levied against us and just pull a smoke-and-mirrors trick on how they are budgeting and spending. The propositions release restrictions on where voter-approved tax revenue is being spent, move some spending limits around, change from where they are borrowing, and change how they are paying the borrowed funds back, but what these propositions do not do is fix an entirely broken system of over-spending which leads to the over-taxation of all of us.
Let’s take a look at Prop 1A – the anchor of all of these propositions. The Yes on 1A folks are going to talk to you about controlled spending, a balanced budget, and above all, spending limitations, but one thing they are never going to mention is that 1A further increases taxes by extending the emergency tax increases by either one or two years. Prop 1A supporters say that they are going to finally be able to put a spending limit in place on the legislature and the governor. Guess what? There are already two major spending limitations on the books, just like this one, and those two are ignored every time a budget passes. Why are Taxramento’s politicians going to magically abide by this, the third spending limit? 1A increases the size of rainy day funds – forcing Taxramento to put aside more emergency money for the future, but we are banking on the fact that once the emergency hits, the politicians are going to be responsible with these rainy day funds.
What the Yes on 1A people are hoping you do not read is that it increases taxes across the board for everyone, regardless of income level. Take out your Voter Guide and read the argument for 1A and read their rebuttal to the argument against 1A and you will see no mention – not a single word – about the fact that the proposition extends those taxes. The Yes on 1A folks don’t want you to know about that part.
Please read directly from the independently-prepared portion of the Official Voter Information Guide: “If Proposition 1A passes, the tax increases included in the February 2009 budget package would be extended for one or two additional years. (The extensions of the tax increases are included in a part of a law that will only go into effect if Proposition 1A passes.) The SUT [Sales & Use Tax] increase of 1 cent would be extended for one year through 2011-12. The VLF [Vehicle Licensing Fee] tax increase would be extended for two years through 2012-13. The PIT [Personal Income Tax] increases would also be extended for two more years, through the 2012 tax year.”
So, what about the other propositions? Proposition 1B makes a change in how we fund education. Right now, thanks to the passage of Proposition 98 in 1990, the Taxifornia state budget has a mandatory percentage-based amount of overall General State Fund spending that must go to K-14 education (yes, 14, which includes community colleges). Taking into account that there may be budget shortfalls from time to time, Proposition 98 allows for the state to under-pay this percentage in times of need with the unpaid portion being due to education when things get better.
Proposition 1B throws this system out and replaces it with a mandatory $9.3 billion annual payment to K-14 education, regardless of how the state is doing financially. This is great if you are a teacher, or if you work for the school district, but really sucks if you are a taxpayer. When the state does not have the money to make those mandatory $9.3 billion payments, where is that money going to come from? Same place it is coming from now – further tax increases. Our current educational financing system is not perfect, but this is not a better alternative. Why are we fighting so hard to preserve an educational system that ranks 48th out of 50 states? Seems to me when your educational systems is nearly the absolute worst in the union, that is the time to make drastic changes, not maintain the status quo.
Proposition 1C is called the “Lottery Modernization Act”. Do you remember when the state government first sold the idea of the California State Lottery? What was the main factor that they were selling it on? That it would benefit our kids and our schools. Proceeds from the California State Lottery are mandated to be put into education. Well, if Proposition 1B passes, then the required $9.3 billion payment, in effect, makes it so that the educational system no longer needs that California State Lottery money, so 1C makes it so that the California State Lottery money no longer goes to the schools. It gets to go into the General Fund to be spent as the Taxramento politicians see fit. That, my friends, is not “modernization”, but in fact, a very major change to the California State Lottery system that has remained unchanged since it went into effect in 1984. Want proof that these politicians have no intention on curbing their spending at all? 1C will make it so they can borrow against future lottery profits and then spend that borrowed money (that the taxpayers are responsible for paying back) however the hell they wish.
How about Proposition 1D? It deals with Proposition 10, which was passed in 1998. Proposition 10 created what we know as the First 5 program for children. You may have seen the television commercials encouraging parents to put their kids in preschool as part of this program. The First 5 program is funded by taxes of tobacco products. Proposition 10 has a number of checks and balances to ensure that this tobacco tax money is actually spent on the First 5 program. If Proposition 1D passes, the restrictions on where this tobacco tax money goes are removed. The money can be used for other children’s programs, but it also may be borrowed by each County’s Controller in a time of need.
Do you see the pattern emerging here? It seems that a good deal of the laws on the books that require tax revenue to be used for the programs that it is collected for will be wiped off the books if these Propositions pass, giving the legislature and the governor free reign to borrow the funds that they want and to spend those funds on whatever they want. The “Yes On…” folks want you to believe that the Taxramento politicians will use this newly-given power to save for a rainy day and to balance the budget, but I just find that very hard to believe.
Proposition 1E is much like Proposition 1D, but instead of freeing up restrictions on First 5 money, it frees up the restrictions on Proposition 63 money. Proposition 63, the Mental Health Services Act, was passed in 2004. This provided state funding for certain new or expanded mental health programs by taxing an additional 1% of the income of the taxpayers who make over $1 million per year. California taxpayers approved this tax increase on this smaller group of taxpayers with the understanding that these funds would only be used for the Mental Health Services Act programs.
If Proposition 1E passes, these funds will no longer be subject to those restrictions and will be re-directed to pay for a federally mandated program (Early and Periodic Screen, Diagnosis, and Treatment, or EPSDT) that requires states to provide a broad range of screening, diagnosis, and medically necessary treatment services, including mental health services, to MediCal beneficiaries under the age of 21. EPSDT has been paid for out of the Taxifornia General Fund, but if 1E passes, EPSDT will be paid for with Proposition 63 funds, even though this was not the original intention of that additional tax. In a way, this one almost makes sense, but I most definitely do not like this pattern of these politicians taking previously-passed propositions and changing the nature of what the voters have approved.
Now for the only Proposition that I think you should get out there and vote yes on – 1F. Proposition 112, passed in 1990, created a California Citizens Compensation Commission. This commission sets the annual salaries, medical insurance, and other benefits of the Taxramento politicians. The commission meets and decides each year if the salaries should be increased, and what they should be increased to.
If Proposition 1F passes, the commission will not be allowed to raise salaries and benefits in a year where the Taxifornia General Fund is expected to end that year in a deficit. This is what the lawmakers have thrown in as their sacrifice to get you to pass all of the other propositions. They are throwing us this bone so that we feel that they are just like us and should not get raises during economic downturns.
The joke is on us, though, because in any given year, the lack of a salary increase will save the taxpayers a whopping $160,000 on average, possibly, even up to $500.000. Can you see how with the 2009-10 California State Budget spending $111,089,000,000 – yes, that is over $111 billion – even the highest savings of half of a million dollars is only 0.000005% of the total budget? That is equivalent to you being $200,000 in debt and the state government saving you $1 to put towards that. If you are still feeling sorry for any of these politicians, let me explain to you that the annual salaries in question range from $160,000 (state legislators) to $212,000 (the Taxinator) per year.
As usual, I have taken the time to read what Taxifornia’s over-sized government and her politicians have placed before me, and as usual, I am pretty pissed off. We need to cut spending, yet all we do is shuffle money around and raise taxes. The taxpayers impose spending limits, yet Taxramento always finds a loop-hole and gets around those spending limits. As with every election, the TV ads and the radio ads and the politicians are talking about the Propositions on the ballot, but they are only telling us a very small part of the story.
If you don’t mind paying ever-increasing taxes to a derelict, over-sized government, then, by all means, vote how you are going to vote…but if you want to send a clear message that you are already paying enough taxes and that you believe that the state should really fix what is wrong with the budget and its over-spending, I urge you to vote NO on 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, and 1E and vote YES on 1F.
No comments:
Post a Comment