CA: Tech players play politics - Deep pockets aimed at education, energy

Mercury News ^ | 7/29/06 | Mary Anne Ostrom

[NormsRevenge]

In California politics, Silicon Valley executives used to be considered newbies, nerds or simply multimillionaires with too much time and money on their hands.

No longer.

Emboldened over the past decade by some success passing ballot propositions, a handful of the valley's most influential power brokers are once again aiming to use the initiative process to put their stamp on public policy in California.

Two of the boldest electoral initiatives yet to emerge from valley interests will be on November's ballot: NetFlix founder Reed Hastings and Kleiner Perkins venture capitalist John Doerr are backing Proposition 88, an unprecedented statewide real estate parcel tax to benefit education; and Vinod Khosla, another Kleiner partner, is behind Proposition 87, a first-ever royalty on oil pumped from California to fund alternative energy ventures.

--snip--

``John Burton once said, `When you deal with people who weigh their money instead of count it, you probably ought to listen,' '' said Kevin Gordon, an education lobbyist ...

--snip--

Current initiatives

For this November's ballot, Hastings and Doerr have committed $7 million to Proposition 88, which would impose a statewide $50 annual tax on every real estate parcel and earmark it for education. Khosla, along with Hollywood producer Stephen Bing, is pushing Proposition 87, which calls for the state to collect royalties on oil extracted from California and spend the money on clean-energy research and ventures. The tax would range from 1.5 percent to 6 percent, depending on oil's price per barrel. Other states and the federal government levy similar assessments.

Anti-tax opponents are labeling the parcel tax a direct assault on Proposition 13, the landmark 1978 measure that limits increases in California's property taxes. The alternative fuels measure has prompted the oil industry to raise more than $12 million to combat it.

[NormsRevenge]

Hastings, who formerly chaired the state Board of Education, calls the parcel tax ``a modest step'' to raise per-student spending in the state.

--

hmmm, Has the GUb weighed in on this "modest step" yet?

[NormsRevenge]

Tom McClintock says:

Prop. 87 Oil Tax: NO! Just when you thought gasoline taxes were high enough, along comes this gem to increase them more. Another economics lesson: When you tax something, you get less of it and the price goes up.


Prop. 88 Parcel Tax: NO! Here’s yet another way to get into your pocket: add an extra $50 to your annual property tax bill for still more money for schools. What makes anyone think this money will get any closer to the classroom than the $11,000+ per student we already pump in?

---

McClintock Reviews the November Ballot Propositions
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1674107/posts

[goldstategop]

California's venture capitalists are wealthy tax and spend liberals. If they tax us, it means a big tax break for them.

(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)

[goldstategop]

Half our state's budget goes to education and for Hastings and his crowd, that's not enough. Every property owner in this state would have to pay a flat $50 tax on his parcel, regardless of whether he's a millionaire with a mansion or a retiree living in a bungalow. Its a tax that isn't linked to ability to pay and the poison pill in Proposition 88 is its automatic tax increase clause - the parcel tax can be increased $50 every four years without a vote of the people. That's why I'm getting out of California. I'm looking at close to $800 a year in property taxes on my home and if Prop. 88 becomes law, sky's the limit on one's property tax bill.

(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)

[goldstategop]

Vinod Khosala and Steven Bing want to make you pay more to fill up your car every time you replenish its gas tank. Sure, their intiative says oil companies are prohibited from paying the costs of the tax onto consumers but the clause is unconstitutional in that prevents a business from making a profit. To pass Proposition 87, they're counting on popular apathy of Big Oil and economic illiteracy on the part of the voters. The money raised is supposed to go to funding the research and development of "alternative fuels and to promote energy conservation." Yeah, right. We've voted to dedicate money to transportation and our infrastructure is still crumbling. We'll feel the pain but won't see the benefits of the assault on the oil industry.

(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)