SAUNDERS: Designer prices, not designer government

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 10/8/6 | Debra J. Saunders

[SmithL]

CALIFORNIA voters should keep this news from the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office in mind when they vote in November: State operating budget shortfalls under the spending plan are expected to reach "nearly $4 billion in 2007-08 and nearly $5 billion in 2008-09." Then voters should reject Propositions 86, 87 and 88, because the three measures would raise taxes without fixing the structural shortfall.

Good-government types call measures such as these "ballot-box budgeting" -- special interests cook up initiatives designed to appeal to voters because they dedicate spending to a pet cause. Voters believe that in approving these measures, they ensure that tax dollars will go to their preferred areas of spending -- as if they can get Designer Government. Wrong. Because these pet initiatives do not curb the automatic growth in off-the-rack programs, the state's general fund spending will continue to grow as each Designer Program widens the gap between what the state takes in and what it spends.

To fix the problem, Sacramento has to cut state spending or raise taxes that can go into the general fund. Having failed for legal and political reasons to cut the state budget, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is crossing his fingers, in the apparent hope that economic growth or time will fill the hole in the state's finances. If there's a downturn, a big tax increase during hard economic times could be in California's future.

These three measures would only make things worse.

Proposition 86 would raise the state excise tax on cigarettes by $2.60 per pack. The California Legislative Analyst's Office estimates it will raise $2.1 billion in 2007-2008, with revenues declining thereafter. The measure would create a new Designer Fund, the Tobacco Tax of 2006 Trust Fund, to pay for emergency services, health care for children and anti-smoking campaigns.

[goldstategop]

Every liberal group wants its portioned-off share of the state pot. Problem is there is only a finite amount of money to go around and even in in good times, every one's not completely happy. Watch the fireworks go off when there's a recession. Its not a pretty sight.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

[NaughtiusMaximus]

Of course, these "novelty taxes" will produce decreasing returns over time but the programs they fund will persist like zombies after attatching themselves to the bureaucratic system.

Novelty taxes, over time, create persistent demands on the state's budget. The demands are quickly generalized in the budget and passed on to every taxpayer.

A vote for a "novelty tax" is a vote which eventually raises everyone's taxes across the board.

The process is accelerated by politicians' tendencies to spend $3.00 for every dollar collected.

[Iris7]

Democracy is and has always been like this. Eventually the government fails to be all things to all people and somewhat later cannot muster enough public support to survive.

We are at an earlier stage in which the populace increasingly over time becomes convinced that the government is inherently corrupt. You will find political organizations stridently claiming that "the greedy rich" are the cause of this situation, and that "the greedy rich" intend to rule with the lash when "the people" get "uppity".

Hmm, I have just described the Democrat Party, haven't I?

Oh, yes, how does this story end?

A leader comes forth to rescue the "people" from "the greedy rich". The ancient name for this inevitable "great leader" is "tyrant". You know, "Ein Folk, ein Reich, ein Führer!" Those greedy rich, so often Jews, don't you know.

[CGTRWK]

Eventually the government fails to be all things to all people and somewhat later cannot muster enough public support to survive.

Enough public support to survive democratically. About that time, it progresses from democracy to oligarchy or dictatorship.