Tuesday, October 05, 2004
Propostions 1A and 65
Propositions 1A and 65 have to do with how easily the state government can raid city and county governments for money. Note that proposition 65 is on the ballot as a technicality, but has no official proponents, as they have made a deal with the governor to support proposition 1A instead.
The punchline is that by passing 1A, it takes more effort (2/3 of both houses, governor approval) for the state government to shift money around at the local government level. While the proponents insist that this will not increase taxes by arguing that local taxes are set at a fixed level, it seems pretty clear to me that making local tax money less accessible to the state will force the state government to either increase taxes or cut back on programs whenever a fiscal difficulty arises. The opponents whine about accountability or something, as if the state does a better job or something.
Unsupported prop 65 goes further and forces any change to be passed by a voter initiative. Like this one. "Do you want money to go from the friendly, cuddly local level to the evil, menacing state level?"
Beetle the Idealistic Voter feels that the threat of raised taxes is not outweighed by the nominal benefit gained by the proposition. He feels that there is no reason to believe that local governments are better able to decide what to do with money than the state government, and local governments also act individually and without proper regard for statewide issues that will arise. Further, he considers the compromise made to generate 1A to be a legitimate reason to abandon any consideration for 65. Therefore, BIV endorses NO for both propositions 1A and 65.
Beetle the Pragmatic Voter shares BIV's concern for increased taxes, and also adds the concern of being subject to what passes for a local government here in Berkeley. The day BPV trusts the Berkeley government to do something useful with his money is the day that something very, very unlikely occurs. BPV also endorses NO for both propositions 1A and 65.
Beetle the Entertainer knows that local government antics are often far more interesting than statewide government antics. However, access to funds for the local government will make them more able to accomodate everyone's wishes, which will lead to a disappointing decrease in the creative whining the various interested parties in Berkeley will engage in. Therefore, BE endoreses NO for proposition 1A. However, BE feels that these disadvantages are outweighed by the short-term entertainment of California passing a proposition that has been abandoned, and the long-term entertainment of even more voter initiatives to make minor adjustments to local spending at the statewide level. Thus, BE endorses YES for proposition 65.
Beetle the Bitter Foe of All Humanity knows that local government efforts are often helpful for the disadvantaged at a more human level, while state government efforts can be woefully inadequate in this regard. BBFAH opposes any plan which may lead to better resources being available for people in difficult positions, and rejecting these propositions make it easier to doom these people to a lifetime of pain and suffering. As a result, BBFAH endorses NO for both propositions 1A and 65.
Whew, that's two propositions down and... holy crap, fourteen to go! It's going to be a long few weeks. Can't we just elect representatives to do this job for us?
. . .
|
. . .
|
