Arnold nixes Buffett advice over Prop. 13

Contra Costa Times ^ | Aug 16, 2003 | George Avalos

[FairOpinion]

The Oracle of Omaha may need a new crystal ball after Arnold Schwarzenegger on Friday rejected comments by his adviser Warren Buffett that California property taxes should be increased.

Indeed, within hours of Costa's suggestion, top aides to Schwarzenegger moved to distance the actor from Buffett's comments.

Mr. Buffett doesn't speak for Mr. Schwarzenegger," said Rob Stutzman, spokesman for Schwarzenegger's campaign. "Arnold Schwarzenegger has supported Prop. 13 for 25 years. ... Arnold is an admirer of Howard Jarvis and has referred to him as the original tax terminator." Jarvis and Paul Gann were the prime movers behind Prop. 13, the tax-slashing initiative approved overwhelmingly in 1978.

Ironically, it was in June that Schwarzenegger was the keynote speaker at a 25th anniversary celebration of Prop. 13. Schwarzenegger praised the measure, which sharply curtails yearly increases in property taxes.

[FairOpinion]

Ironically, it was in June that Schwarzenegger was the keynote speaker at a 25th anniversary celebration of Prop. 13. Schwarzenegger praised the measure, which sharply curtails yearly increases in property taxes.

This shows Arnold always supported Prop 13.

[FairOpinion]

Considering the media attention Buffett's original comment caused, I thought this deserves to be Front Page News

[So Cal Rocket]

Mr. Buffett doesn't speak for Mr. Schwarzenegger," said Rob Stutzman,

Ok... then who does speak for Arnold? I haven't heard anything from him in a week. What DOES he stand for? What IS his platform? He's dropped from 48% to 22% in a week by keeping his mouth shut... it's time to lay out your plan, Arnie.

[SandRat]

Even more intersting is that I just had the Tube on and all the alpoMedia Talking-Heads were talking about was Buffet's statement on how this was the third-rail of CA politics after PROP 13 passed.

NOT ONE of them even mentioned that Ah-Nold had re-buffed Buffet. All they could seem to talk about was that fact that this was diminishing his chances to win and that Bust-the-Money was ahead in the latest polls 28% to Ah-Nold's 21%.

[nickcarraway]

Can you say ``trial ballon?'' He can wait until after the election to bring this one out again.

[The Other Harry]

I have to agree with George Will's recent column. I hope everyone who is involved in the California recall comes out a loser. All of them.

[nickcarraway]

why?

[LS]

Look, I don't agree with Buffett, but if he volunteered to be MY PERSONAL financial advisor, do you think I'd say no?

Sometimes it is useful to have conflicting voices so that you know that opponents will say, and what potholes to avoid. If all you have are "yes men," you have no seriously-thought-out program.

That said, Buffett is a mini-marxist, and he would not have been my choice for an "inside critic."

[FairOpinion]

That was NOT a "trial balloon". It was an egomaniac socialist shooting off his mouth.

Didn'tyou see this:

"Schwarzenegger was the keynote speaker at a 25th anniversary celebration of Prop. 13. Schwarzenegger praised the measure, which sharply curtails yearly increases in property taxes."

Obviously Arnold is in favor of Prop 13.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

calgov2002:

Gray Must Pay
Cruz Must Lose

calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. 

Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register

[concentric circles]

Arnold nixes Buffett advice over Prop. 13
By George Avalos
CONTRA COSTA TIMES

The Oracle of Omaha may need a new crystal ball after Arnold Schwarzenegger on Friday rejected comments by his adviser Warren Buffett that California property taxes should be increased.

The suggestions from billionaire Buffett that Proposition 13 may need to be scrapped unleashed a political firestorm, since the initiative is revered by California voters. Buffett provided Schwarzenegger's opponents with political ammunition, raised questions about the actor's solutions for California's financial disasters, and forced Schwarzenegger's campaign into damage control mode. The comments also opened the door for a renewed debate on the role property taxes should play in the state's revenues.

Backers of Prop. 13, including the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and People's Advocate, lambasted the suggestions from Buffett, the nation's second-richest person and the chairman of conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway Inc.

"Buffett and Schwarzenegger need a new script," said Ted Costa, chief executive officer of People's Advocate. "This is not going to play very well in California. I suspect they will make a complete retraction before long."

Indeed, within hours of Costa's suggestion, top aides to Schwarzenegger moved to distance the actor from Buffett's comments. Buffett was named earlier this week to be Schwarzenegger's financial adviser for his campaign to replace Gray Davis if the governor is recalled in October.

"Mr. Buffett doesn't speak for Mr. Schwarzenegger," said Rob Stutzman, spokesman for Schwarzenegger's campaign. "Arnold Schwarzenegger has supported Prop. 13 for 25 years. ... Arnold is an admirer of Howard Jarvis and has referred to him as the original tax terminator." Jarvis and Paul Gann were the prime movers behind Prop. 13, the tax-slashing initiative approved overwhelmingly in 1978.

Ironically, it was in June that Schwarzenegger was the keynote speaker at a 25th anniversary celebration of Prop. 13. Schwarzenegger praised the measure, which sharply curtails yearly increases in property taxes.

"Arnold gave a wonderful talk on Proposition 13, and his own life," said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. "He has never made any comments in the past that worry us about his stance on Prop. 13."

Buffett, in a Wall Street Journal interview, noted that the property taxes on his Laguna Beach home in Southern California are far lower than the taxes he pays on his residence in Omaha, Neb. Buffett said his California home is worth $4 million, but its property taxes are only $2,264. His Nebraska house is worth $500,000, with a property tax bill of about $14,000. And Buffett's Nebraska property taxes jumped $1,900, compared with an increase of $23 on the California home.

"This property-tax illustration, that tells you, you can draw certain conclusions from that," Buffett said in the Journal interview. "In effect, it makes no sense." Buffett also noted that he was only providing advice.

One group used the comments as an opportunity to rekindle discussion about possibly raising property taxes.

"Property taxes in California are lower than the national average," said Kim Rueben, a research fellow with the Public Policy Institute.

About 22 percent of California's revenue comes from property taxes, compared with 29 percent in the country as a whole.

"We're more dependent in California on income taxes, which are volatile and go up and down with the economy," Rueben said. "If we substitute a more stable tax like property taxes, we could be more insulated from the economic cycle we're in."

The flap could ratchet up the pressure on Schwarzenegger to provide specifics about his economic program to extricate California from its budget mess, including spending, revenue and economic growth proposals. So far, besides supporting Prop. 13, Schwarzenegger has done no more than state he would repeal Davis' recent increase in vehicle license fees.

Two Republican rivals also running for governor demanded that Schwarzenegger take even stronger steps to disavow Buffett's comments.

"Arnold should sack Buffett immediately," said John Feliz, campaign director for Sen. Tom McClintock.

Bill Simon spokesman K.B. Forbes said Schwarzenegger should offer an unambiguous stance on taxes.

"Schwarzenegger should take a pledge that he will not raise taxes as governor, period," Forbes said. "He has to come out from behind the curtains and answer the tax question, yes or no."

Davis also pilloried Buffett's comments. "I could not disagree more," the governor said. "I'm very proud that property-tax levels in California are lower than the rest of the country."

One California political strategist, Arnold Steinberg, believes the Schwarzenegger campaign may be able to weather the fallout from Buffett's comments.

"Buffett has proved he's a real loose cannon with these comments, and in a regular campaign, this would be a real blunder," Steinberg said. "But with the recall, the opposing campaigns don't seem geared up to exploit these comments."

[ysoitanly]

To be fair, who HAS stated their policies? Besides Gary Coleman's admittance that he doesn't even know who the vice president is, Mary Carey's stance on making lap dances a tax deduction (not kidding - visit her website) and Arianna Huffington wanting tax loopholes closed for bigwigs (except she obviously uses them), Larry Flynt's 'death to Bill O'Reilly' web page, and Bill 'Lame" Simons's non-stance on anything except what you want him to say, coupled with the charisma of a teletubby - WHAT do you WANT? This is all going to come out soon - the debate is scheduled for September 17th. Wait before you condemn.

[So Cal Rocket]

It says that Arnold "has" been a supporter...

I would like Arnold to do more than just say that someone doesn't speak for him... I want him to come out and clearly state his position...

Arnold, if elected Governor, will you fight to maintain Proposition 13 as the law of the land?

[FairOpinion]

There also could be other reasons for Arnold picking Buffett. in the WSJ interview Buffett also talked about some deal that Davis offered to Berkshire Hathaway, to buy CA bonds. Buffett didn't take the deal, but maybe with Arnold at the helm he might, which would help CA.

Many times people don't see the big picture (through no fault of their own, just that there are a lot of things that could be and frequently are going on in the background), it's like the blind men and the elephant.

As I said before,I think Arnold is much smarter and more savvy and more conservative, than people give him credit for.

[So Cal Rocket]

>>> To be fair, who HAS stated their policies? <<<

Read this page thoroughly:

http://www.tommcclintock.com/tomsplan/index.cfm

If Arnold wants to win, he should state his case as clearly as Senator McClintock has.

[FairOpinion]

Oops, you better remove post #11 (to which I am replying), before we all get into trouble.

Normally I always post the full article, and wish that others did as well from sources which aren't restricted.

But in this case the FR "vigilant software" didn't allow it, it said that articles from this source must be excerpted. I am sure you, CC didn't know that, I didn't either until I tried posting the article.

You can post a different excerpt than what I posted, but I wouldn't want to get FR into trouble over posting full articles from sources we are not allowed to.

[ysoitanly]

I concede that point, and have stated over and over that I support this guy 100$. He's the best choice - it's just that he can't win in this state. No real clear-thinking conserative can. I will hold my nose and back Arnold to oust the fat-assed La Raza separatist Bustamante.

[Common Tator]

This shows Arnold always supported Prop 13.

What it shows is he is an amateur trying to play with the pros and is going to get his a$$ beat.

No one steps into politics and makes the grade with no experience and training. Arnie thinks he can just run and do ok. They are going to clean his clock. He will be constantly blindsided. Arnold is more of an amateur than Bill Simon. Arnie is doing his very best to make Bill Simon look like an effective candidate.

Announcing advisers IS DUMB. The voters go for a candidate who knows what he is doing. They will not vote for a candidate who needs advisers to tell him what to do. And a man who announces advisers is saying he needs someone to tell him what to do.

Arnold is too inexperienced to know that. He also is using handlers to distance himself from the advisors opinions. That says he is being run by handlers. Candidates who need advisers to tell them what to do and who speak to the media through handlers rarely get elected.

Arnold's actions are screaming that he does not know what he is doing.

[ysoitanly]

freudian slip - 100$ = 100%

[The Other Harry]

why?

It's too complicated for me to explain here. The bottom line is that I think everyone involved is an a--hole. Davis clearly needs to go, but Arnie is an idiot. Nobody deserves to win this one.

The job probably belongs to Diane Feinstein, but she ain't running.

If you are seriously curious why I think this way, go take a look at George Will's column. You can get to it off Matt Drudge's website.