Posted on 06/29/2009 11:49:27 AM PDT by Kaslin
As the end of Californias fiscal year approaches, the Governor and state legislators confront a $24 billion deficit. While Republicans and Democrats wrangle over how to address the gaping shortfall, some members of the press have started to look for a scapegoat for the fiscal train wreck. Many have blamed the California taxpayers only protection: Prop. 13, the 1978 measure capping state property taxes at 1% of a homes assessed value.
Perhaps the most egregious example of the finger-pointing is a recent piece from TIMEs Kevin OLeary, moaning that Before Prop 13, in the 1950s and '60s, California was a liberal showcase. He insists that at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, and concludes that in California, the conservative legacy lives on.
How ridiculous. Of all the problems contributing to the fiscal mess, state under-taxation is the least of them. Californias sales and gas taxes are the highest in the country and it has the highest vehicle license fees and the second-highest top-bracket income tax, too. Its corporate tax rates are the highest of all western states, and for the fourth year in a row, a survey of 543 CEOs found that Californias toxic combination of high taxes and intrusive regulations made it the worst place in the nation to do business.
In fact, at the real root of Californias fiscal misery is the profligacy of arrogant, big-spending, left-wing legislators, who have treated taxpayers as if they exist only to support the government. Their attitude was exemplified in a recent statement from state assemblywoman Noreen Evans (D-Santa Rosa), chairman of the state Budget Conference Committee, repudiating the governors call for the state to live within its means:
Well, there is this mantra out there live within our means and while that sounds really nice . . . and it sounds really responsible, its meaningless. Our means are completely within our control . . . We have just given away huge corporate subsidies in February; we have given away other tax reductions over many, many years; weve created tax loopholes; in good times, we routinely give away taxes, and then in lean times we never replace those tax deductions or close those loopholes. . . . So live within our means doesnt mean anything. The fact is, we have a state with a population that have [sic] needs that we have a moral obligation to provide.
Her assertions and the obnoxious sense of entitlement underlying them defy credulity. For politicians like Evans (and the legislature is full of them!), when the hardworking or productive keep more of what they have earned, its only because politicians have been giving away the tax revenues that purportedly belong to them. In this mindset, meeting the needs of a greedy, ever-expanding government is the only imperative; taxpayers are nothing more than cash cows, commanded to provide the fodder that allows Evans and those like her to meet their moral obligations with other peoples money.
Remarkably, even as they have driven California into the fiscal ditch (and demanded ever-higher taxes from its citizens), Evans and her colleagues remain the most highly compensated state legislators in the nation. Along with their six-figure salaries, taxpayers supply them with cars, gasoline and auto maintenance. As regular Californians budgets are stretched to the limit, many of the cuts the state Senate is debating for itself are laughable. They include whether to reduce the benefit that provides their staffers with two new pairs of glasses yearly (or sunglasses, for those who dont wear glasses). The change would limit workers to one new pair of course, courtesy of the taxpayers.
Ultimately, any honest assessment of Californias plight must assign responsibility for the states fiscal crisis not to the taxpayers who voted for Prop. 13 three decades ago but to the politicians who have subsequently exploited them without mercy. Indeed, if spending had simply reflected average population growth plus the average increase in the cost of living since 1991, there would now be a $15 billion surplus. After adjusting for inflation, the state now spends nearly 20% more per capita than it did 18 years ago; even as Californias tax revenues increased by 167% during that period, state spending exploded by 189%.
Left-wing legislators like Noreen Evans can demand more taxes and journalists like Kevin OLeary can bemoan the existence of Prop. 13 all they like. The people know better. And when voters overwhelmingly rejected further tax increases last month, they sent a clear message: Its time for the politicians to start working for Californians again, rather than the other way around.
In line with the ‘Card Check” philosophy, I propose that all Propositions that would increase State spending be henceforth ‘open’ and not subject to the secret ballot. Each person voting in favor of the increased spending will be subject to a ‘compliance fee’ (not a tax) calculated by a simple formula:
Increased $ spending/ Cal population
Revenues raised by the fee will be used to offset any levy by the State on the population if the Proposition passes.
ya know, Id like to see this whores tax returns...
I bet the skank didnt pay one friggin penny more than she was required to te state...IF, and thats a BIIIIG IF, she even paid that...
BUMP!
These people are so stupid that they assume that they are elected to "do pretty much whatever the spirit moves them to do," without regard to whether it's legal or even Constitutional.
Fiduciary responsibility is a a non-existent concept for them.
Although she will never read it, I have an earful for her!
It doesn't matter if she doesn't "represent" me; if it affects me our system of government presumes that she is representing the entire state and its citizens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.