Our View: Taxpayers, hold onto your wallets

Editor's Note: This editorial, written by Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, appeared in the Orange County Register on Friday.

To cover their posteriors after running up enormous budget deficits, Sacramento politicians have placed Propositions 1A-1F on the May 19 special-election ballot.

Five measures, 1B-1F, are of little consequence to taxpayers and amount to little more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Prop. 1B is an $8 billion extortion payment to the teachers union; others simply shift money from one state account to another, while Prop. 1C mortgages future state lottery revenue.

Prop. 1A, is a $16 billion tax increase. The governor and Legislature want this additional revenue so badly they are deceptively marketing it as budget reform and a cap on state spending.

So desperate are lawmakers to get their hands on more taxpayer cash that when they wrote the ballot title and summary they deliberately avoided any mention of additional taxes. And because Prop. 1A originated in the Legislature, leaders were able to assign to tax-and-spend liberals the duty of writing the opposition argument which, unsurprisingly, also fails to mention the tax increases.

Although the budget reform contained in Proposition 1A, a spending cap, is in name only — the limit is increased every time taxes are increased — the tax increase is real, and Californians are beginning to catch on. Recent surveys show that when voters are told of the tax increase contained in 1A, the measure goes down in flames.

To counter the momentum against Prop. 1A, its chief cheerleader, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, has been raising millions of dollars for campaign advertising. At a recent count, committees committed to passing 1A had raised nearly $12 million. One of the major contributors is the California Teachers Association, which is a strong indication that Prop. 1A will do little or nothing to put the brakes on spending. This public employee union recognizes that while the spending limit may be phony, the $16 billion in new tax revenue is very real.

Since the public is starting to understand what Prop. 1A is all about, some promoters have changed tactics. Assembly Speaker Karen Bass said, "If these initiatives do not pass, we are looking at cutting $14 billion in programs." If they can't sell the ballot measures, and 1A in particular, as budget reform, then they will try to scare voters into submission.

However, this threat flies in the face of recent statements by the governor's foremost expert on the state budget, Director of Finance Mike Genest.

During the March 10 meeting of the Commission on the 21st Century Economy (created to study California's tax structure), the following exchange took place between Genest and Commissioner (and Anaheim Mayor) Curt Pringle:

Pringle: But could you tell me, under 1A and 1B, if those did not pass, what the economic impact would be in the next two years?

Genest: Under 1A and 1B?

Pringle: Yes, in the next two years.

Genest: There wouldn't be.

Pringle: OK.

Genest: In the next two years, neither one of those has an effect directly in the next two years.

Pringle: OK, that's what I had thought. We understand the elements of the trigger in 1A or the trigger in the tax increases that would come about under the passage of 1A. But under 1A and 1B, you don't see any immediate shortage from the general fund?

Genest: Not a shortage.

OK, so there we have it. The state does not need the $16 billion tax increase contained in Prop. 1A. The politicians want the $16 billion tax increase contained in Prop. 1A.

Taxpayers, hold onto your wallets. More scare tactics from Prop. 1A promoters are sure to be included in their advertising blitz.