Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tax the Rich [California budget crisis]
San Gabriel Valley Tribune ^ | June 18, 2002 | Chris Rizo

Posted on 06/19/2002 2:52:51 AM PDT by snopercod

Groups call for tax hike on top earners

To help preserve human service programs in next year's state budget, a broad coalition called upon lawmakers

Monday to embrace legislation that would increase state income taxes collected from the most wealthy

Californians.

In a Capitol press conference with more than 100 in attendance including union representatives and advocates

for the poor participants stood behind a controversial proposal by Senate President Pro Tem John Burton of

San Francisco that would temporarily increase personal income taxes on the top 2 percent of California wage

earners.

Aimed at partially bridging the state's $23.6 billion shortfall, the proposal by Burton, a Democrat, could

generate an estimated $3.1 billion, offsetting some of the $7.6 billion in proposed cuts to health, education

and a host of other "vital" programs in the 2002-03 state budget, which takes effect July 1.

Scott Anderson, executive director of the California Council of Churches, said his and the other 125 groups

that gathered at Monday's press conference are opposed to balancing the state's $98.9 billion budget on the

backs of working families, seniors, children and people living with disabilities.

"Why can't the people who can afford it the most share in the solution?" Anderson asked. "The budget

should not be balanced at the expense of the most vulnerable Californians."

Reinstating the top income tax brackets would help "maintain the progress made in recent years toward

improving our schools and ensuring children and their families have adequate health care," said Jan Harp

Domene, president of the California State Parent Teacher Association.

Burton's proposal Senate Bill 1255 is similar to tax increases imposed on the rich under former

Republican Govs. Ronald Reagan in 1967 and 1971, and Pete Wilson again in 1991.

"We've all been through this before. We call upon the legislature and the governor to follow (Reagan's and

Wilson's) lead in balancing this year's budget so we have the resources needed to maintain our investment in

the future," Harp Domene said.

Specifically, SB 1255 would reinstate the 10- and 11-percent personal income tax brackets, which affect

married filers with taxable incomes over $260,000 and single taxpayers with incomes over $130,000.

Restoring the top-tier tax brackets to their 1995 levels, as Burton's proposal seeks, would affect 2.4

percent of taxpayers, supporters say. Taxpayers, they say, could deduct any increase on their federal tax

filings.

The average tax increase, minus the federal tax deduction, would be approximately $7,674, according to

estimates provided by the California Budget Project, which lobbies for the poor.

"A tax on higher-income families is better than spending reductions in many cases," said the group's

executive director, Jean Ross, adding that increasing taxes on the rich would be "the least potentially

harmful tax increase on the economy."

To help plug the state's historically large budget shortfall, Davis has already proposed $3.5 billion in

tax increases, including a 50-cent per-pack increase on cigarettes and a roll-back of Vehicle Licensing Fee

rebates, which could double car registration fees.

Those and Burton's proposal have garnered stiff opposition from Republicans who warn that they will not

support a budget plan that contains tax increases, potentially putting Democrats, who control both houses of

the Legislature, in a precarious position this election year.

Senate Republican Leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga said the state's recession-wracked budget should be

balanced with a combination of spending cuts and delays in planned program expansions, adding that his caucus

will not support a soak-the-rich tax.

"We don't need to raise taxes because that will not stop the problem," Brulte said. "We need to stop

spending at these historically high rates."

-- Chris Rizo can be reached at (916) 449-9006.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: aarp; calbudgetcrisis; californiaseniors; childrennow; consumersunion; councilofchurches; labor; n; nursesassociation; pta; publichospitals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-74 next last
Gee, this is a surprise!

(Sorry for the funky formatting. The focus software seems to have changed somehow)

1 posted on 06/19/2002 2:52:51 AM PDT by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Did any of the "big" California papers carry this?
2 posted on 06/19/2002 2:53:52 AM PDT by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
The only thing they haven't taxed yet are the dead.
3 posted on 06/19/2002 2:55:01 AM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
Ahh, this is wonderful, they should pass confiscatory taxes on all those Hollywood moguls so they can't later contribute to commie candidates and invest in crappy motion pictures that are not even fit to be seen by retarded pigs.

Probably too much to hope for anyway. They probably will tax only registered Republicans. I bet democrats already have loopholes in place for the "artistes" of WoolyHood.
4 posted on 06/19/2002 3:03:44 AM PDT by Cacique
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
The only thing they haven't taxed yet are the dead.

Doesn't California have a punative estate tax?

5 posted on 06/19/2002 3:05:32 AM PDT by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
Nope. That was repealed in 1982 by a voter initiative.
6 posted on 06/19/2002 3:07:05 AM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
I can't write what I think of these guys here...

I'd get banned for life.
7 posted on 06/19/2002 3:23:25 AM PDT by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DB
Jim Robinson wants us to be civil towards domestic adversaries. On the other hand we don't have to regard their nutty ideas with esteem.
8 posted on 06/19/2002 3:24:53 AM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cacique
Taxpayers, they say, could deduct any increase on their federal tax filings.

Great, so no matter how they stick it to themselves in Kalifornia the rest of us get it in the end.
9 posted on 06/19/2002 3:34:58 AM PDT by RWG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
If you tax them, they will leave.
10 posted on 06/19/2002 3:43:45 AM PDT by Salman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
The filthy rich California liberals are not going to like this.
11 posted on 06/19/2002 3:56:31 AM PDT by chainsaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Actually, they do. It is called the estate tax or have you not heard.

During your lifetime, you pay about 40-50% of your income in taxes and then if you are successful, the state and federal governments want over half of the balance.

You are nothing but a chattel. A far cry from the English serfs who only had to put up with a 15% tax.

12 posted on 06/19/2002 4:04:42 AM PDT by rollin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rollin
Its payable to the Feds. We wiped it out in California some decades ago as I mentioned.
13 posted on 06/19/2002 4:06:04 AM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
Where's Willie Nelson when you need him? The Hollywood crowd should do a benefit--"CalBudgetCrisisAid" or should it be called "SaveDavis'sRearEndAid"?

C'mon, all you bleeding heart liberals--cough up some dough to help the poor, starving folks right in your own back yard. Babs, Steven, Rob Reiner, Whoopi, Rosie, put your money where your mouth is.

14 posted on 06/19/2002 4:09:01 AM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
"Why can't the people who can afford it the most share in the solution?"

Mostly because they didn't have a share in creating the problem. When California quits coddling and encouraging illegal aliens to avail themselves of the state's public benefits, then the people will know the state is serious about finding a solution to the budget crisis. Until then, no one should feel compelled to give another dime.

At some point, wealthy Californians will bolt the state (like Matt Drudge did) if they keep getting fleeced. Atlas will shrug.

15 posted on 06/19/2002 4:29:42 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
"A tax on higher-income families is better than spending reductions in many cases,"

Better for whom?

16 posted on 06/19/2002 4:32:34 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chainsaw
I am as against the idea of a graduated tax as anyone on FR, but let me offer another perspective.

If a punitive tax is levied on the California rich, much of the people effected will be in the entertainment industry. Since this is the core of the Clinton Democrats, a high tax might push them into the waiting arms of the libertarians.

Just a thought.

17 posted on 06/19/2002 4:57:20 AM PDT by tcostell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Salman
"If you tax them, they will leave."

Exactly.

My college room-mate lives in California. He told me that the seeds of the next depression are to be found here. When the capitalists leave, they take their capital and their businesses with them. The jobs follow the business. All that is left behind is the real estate and mountains of debt that will be liquidated at enormous losses. That is deflation in a nutshell.

It is going to start in Kalifornia and spread to the east coast, and then to the rest of America. Japan is already beginning to export it to Asia and to some extent to America as well. Look for GM and Ford to encounter falling sales and lower prices as the Japanese attempt to export themselves out of their existing predicament. It will spread from Japan and the US to the rest of the world.

Greenspan and the other G3 central bankers will print money galore in response. Governments will fall and be replaced. Ours will be among them. But out of the ashes, we should see the secessions of states that form smaller republics with Constitutions patterned after the one we currently ignore. Hopefully, some these will be freer and great places to live.

My advice to Californians, is get out now and avoid the rush and its aftermath.

18 posted on 06/19/2002 5:08:52 AM PDT by B. A. Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
IMHO, civility is a two-way street.

We owe our opposition no more civility than they have given us.

19 posted on 06/19/2002 5:30:15 AM PDT by hchutch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
"A tax on higher-income families is better than spending reductions in many cases," said the group's executive director, Jean Ross, adding that increasing taxes on the rich would be "the least potentially harmful tax increase on the economy."

ROTFLMAO. Another leftist moron who believes that the "rich" don't respond to economic incentives like lower taxes in neighboring states.

20 posted on 06/19/2002 6:01:46 AM PDT by FateAmenableToChange
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-74 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson