Blockbuster Democracy - logo
 

A California Legislator Shows Leadership

Joe Mathews - 
December 17, 2008 - 5:12pm

The new Democratic leader in the state senate, Darrell Steinberg, appears to have concluded -- correctly, it says here -- that California's legislative Republicans will never back any tax hike, no matter the current budget crisis. Republicans had thought they could block a budget solution because of the state's requirement of a two-thirds vote to pass a budget or raise taxes. But now Steinberg and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass have constructed a proposal that mixes revenue cuts and tax hikes and is designed to avoid the two-thirds rule. The result is highly technical and convoluted. One piece involves moving around tax revenues between state and local pots, another involves reducing some taxes while establishing or raising others. (Details are here, via the Sacramento Bee).  but it should pass his chamber on a party-line vote. Here's hoping the Assembly then takes it up and sends it to the governor's desk.

At that point, Schwarzenegger might finally have some leverage with the Republicans. If he signs the bill, he'd be punching a hole in the two-thirds rule -- which provides the GOP with its role in the budget game. Perhaps Republicans would come to the table that point and deal on taxes. (UPDATE, LATER 12/17: Schwarzenegger aides indicate he opposes the Steinberg proposal -- they want more long-term cuts and budget savings -- so there goes any leverage. -JM). Or they could go to court and try to challenge this Steinberg legislation as unconstitutional. The Republicans could pay a high political price for doing that--they'd be using the courts to block a solution to the budget problem that the public desperately wants. The GOP would argue that they are fighting tax hikes, but I would be willing to wager that legislative Democrats and Schwarzenegger would win that public relations battle. And it's always possible they could lose in the courts, with judges establishing a new loophole in the two-thirds rule.

In any case, Steinberg, who is new in his job, is showing real leadership. His legislation is full of painful things -- cuts in programs and new taxes (in disguise) -- but it's necessary with California running so low on cash that infrastructure projects were halted today.

My only question: Why didn't somebody try this before?

 

 

Bookmark/Search this post with:
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Propeller
  • Reddit
  • Magnoliacom
  • Newsvine
  • Furl
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Icerocket
Tags:

Comments

Tax Hike is a Take Hike

Submitted by Raymond E. Foster (not verified) on December 19, 2008 - 4:06am.

I must have missed this course in graduate school - if you call something, something else, it becomes something else. The logic of a fee is that there is a transaction between the government and the individual - a licensing fee, etc. I get the license, the government gets the fee. Okay, the Gas Fee is pretty slick, yep, I get to drive on the government roads if I pay an additional fee, pay to play I suppose. Except, this has always been considered a tax. Indeed, not all gasonline is purchased for the purpose of driving on state highways. We do drive off road, private areas, city streets and occassionaly buy gasoline for the lawnmower. Moreover, the government doesn't own the gasoline. Unlike the building permit which the government has the right to issue and therefore has ownership, the gasoline is owned by a private party. This is a tax and calling it a fee doesn't change it.

In my opinion, a majority of our legislators have acted in concert to subvert the state constitution. If they were the Mob, we would sick Ricco on them.

What they should be doing is what every responsible adult is doing 1) looking for ways to cut back/delay expenses.