...to see what bad, bad things Davis has done... - CLICK HERE
calgov2002:
 calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register |
Posted on 10/15/2002 9:21:23 AM PDT by kellynla
There's an old saying in politics that you can't beat something with nothing. Unfortunately, in California's governor's race, the campaign of Republican challenger Bill Simon has been marked by a lot of nothing, unless you count missteps and miscalculations. The most recent Simon embarrassment involved his claim that a photo of incumbent governor Gray Davis receiving a political contribution was taken at Davis' government office (which would have been illegal). Simon's claim turned out to be inaccurate, and the photo flap made him look desperate.
There have been many instances of Simon mishandling issues and squandering opportunities during the past year, but more than anything he simply lacks the personal charisma and passion on the stump needed to make Californians sit up and listen.
Even with Simon lagging far behind Davis in the most recent polls, a new on-line survey by the left-wing San Francisco Chronicle speaks volumes. The question was "What's the most important aspect of Gov. Davis's first term in office?" The answers were: Enacted education reforms, 1%; Enacted tough gun control laws, 10%; Raised campaign cash, 6%; and…drum roll please…Mishandled the energy crisis, a whopping 72%. Early this year I predicted, with great (and foolish) optimism, that considering Davis' disastrous record of managing California's fiscal house, Simon couldn't lose.
Yet absent something dramatic, Davis will easily win re-election. But the lesson here isn't the one that so-called moderate Republicans are crowing about—that Simon will lose because he's "too conservative." "Two contentious issues—abortion and gun control—have so far played little role in the race," according to The Los Angeles Times. Simon will lose not because of his views but because he ran such a lackluster race. With Davis spending tens of millions of dollars on commercials slamming Simon's past business dealings, Simon needed to hit back hard, fast, and convincingly. He didn't, and California Republicans are frustrated beyond words. In a recent Los Angeles Times poll, more than half, 51% of registered voters, believe that the state is heading in the wrong direction, up from 40% in February. That should be terrible news for the Davis campaign, yet Simon never tapped into the voter dissatisfaction out there.
If Dick Riordan, the moderate/liberal Republican who lost to Simon in the primary, had run as bad a campaign as Simon did, he would be ten points behind too. Conservatives can win statewide in California, but not conservatives who are too timid to make the Republican case for winning and too hesitant to hammer the hypocrisy and poor track record of their liberal opponents.
Yes, I say that about every incumbent struggling in the 40s in polling.
Allard will easily win re-election.
Hutchinson will easily win re-election.
Carnahan will easily win re-election.
Wellstone will easily win re-election.
Johnson will easily win re-election.
Gee, that was easy. Maybe I'll start up my own opinion column.
...to see what bad, bad things Davis has done... - CLICK HERE
calgov2002:
|
calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register |
Since when did Ingraham become a hand wringing, weak kneed sister? I find it curious that so many interested onlookers have so little stomach for politics. Be strong, go for the jugular, beat back the barbarians!
The only people who know about are the escrow people so they can withhold this outrageous tax when the escrow is finished and titles exchange.
Simon/we need to focus on this slimey tax slipped in by the left wing maggots without a single word from the mediots who are Davis's Butt Boys in bed every night and during the daytime: ============================================================
CLTA News Express Bulletin 02/03-24 September 13, 2002
Withholding on Real Estate Becomes Law
Dispositions of California real estate interests that occur on or after January 1, 2003 will be subject to withholding. As part of the budget solutions proposed by members of the California Legislature, Assembly Bill 2065 (for the complete bill text, click on the link), requires all real estate transferees (buyers) to withhold 3 1/3% of the sales price of specified California real property. The amount withheld shall be held in trust for the State of California according to the law. The sales price is defined to mean the cash paid, plus the fair market value of property transferred plus any liability assumed. It does not subtract any expenses of the sale.
The law sets forth a notice to be supplied by the escrow agent to the transferee with the escrow agent handling various certifications and, if necessary, the withholding and transmittal of funds to the Franchise Tax Board in the form and manner and at the time specified by the Franchise Tax Board.
The provisions in AB 2065 are patterned after Cal-FIRPTA (Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act) which became effective in 1988, which was in turn patterned after the federal law first adopted in 1980. Cal-FIRPTA currently relates only to withholding of real estate proceeds of foreign, non-resident aliens. The law amends CAL-FIRPTA to set up withholding requirements relating to three classes of transferors:
a) Individuals;
b) Persons (but not certain partnerships, or an individual or a corporation) where the funds are to be distributed to a transferor outside the state or to the financial intermediary of the transferor;
c) Corporations.
Under the new law, 3 & ¨÷% of the sales price is required to be withheld unless:
1) The property sales price is less than $100,000; or
2) The property is the principal residence of an individual transferor based on a written certification signed under penalty of perjury; or
3) The property is transferred to a corporate beneficiary by a foreclosure or a deed in lieu; or
4) The property transferred by an individual and will be replaced in a like kind exchange, based on a written certification by the transferor or signed under penalty of perjury; or
5) The property is transferred by an individual as an involuntary conversion and the transferor certifies an intent to acquire replacement property eligible for deferral under Section 1033 of the Internal Revenue Code.
6) The transferor is an individual who certifies under penalty of perjury that the transaction will result in a loss for California income tax purposes.
7) The transferor is a corporation unless immediately after the transfer, the corporation has no permanent place of business in California. A corporation has no permanent place of business if all of the following apply:
a) It is not organized and existing under the laws of California.
b) It does not qualify with the office of the Secretary of State to transact business in California.
c) It does not maintain and staff a permanent office in California.
An escrow agent would: 1) Provide written notification of the withholding requirements to the parties;
2) Provide certification forms for the exemptions contained in the bill;
3) Provide instructions to be signed by the parties authorizing the withholding and remitting of the amount to the Franchise Tax Board along with any charge imposed for withholding and remitting, not to exceed $45.
It is unlawful for any escrow person to charge any customer for complying with the provisions of the law unless ¡°assistance¡± is provided. Assistance is not simply providing written notification of the requirements. Assistance can be:
a) Helping the parties clarify with the Franchise Tax Board the issue of whether withholding is required, or
b) Helping the parties request that the Franchise tax Board authorized a reduced amount or no amount to be withheld, or
c) Upon request of the parties withholding and remitting the funds.
The bill does allow transferors that are corporations or other entities to request a waiver from the Franchise Tax Board if documentation is provided showing that to substitute a reduced or no amount will not jeopardize collection of the tax. In such case, the withholding amount may be escrowed for 45 days to allow for a determination. The bill also allows an election for installment sales to have each installment subject to the withholding in a manner specified by the Franchise Tax Board. It also has provisions applicable to exchange accommodators regarding withholding where the exchange does not qualify for non-recognition.
CLTA News Express - September 13, 2002)
Go to this CLTA Link for this and more: (Withholding on Real Estate Becomes Law - Jan 03)
Simon's people and conservative talk radio need to get this word out 24/7.
That's just simply not true, and I'm an eyewitness.
I got this article in e-mail yesterday, and debated putting it up myself. I like(d) Laura Ingraham, but I don't know what prompted her to write this chunk of s***. Bad clams?
Typical liberals. They want the money NOW ... to spend on their pet projects ... but withholding doesn't mean the money is THEIRS, it means that they THINK you MAY owe the money in taxes, but if you don't, they have to pay it back. Will they have the money to do it? Davis has practically bankrupt the state of California. If the state were a business, they would have gone under already.
Davis will further destroy our state by increasing taxes SUBSTANTIALLY on everyone ... if he wins on November 5. We have to do everything in our power to DUMP DAVIS!
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.