They're Coming for Prop. 13
You know it would happen. They’re coming for Prop. 13, the 1978 tax-cut measure.
Having overspent for decades, the California government of parasites has run up a $28 billion deficit. Jerry Brown’s new budget is expected to include inadequate cuts and tax increases. But it still won’t be enough.
So it’s not surprising that the Toilet Paper of Record, as Gerald Celente calls the New York Times, is butting into California business with an article plumping for getting rid of Prop. 13:
As much as Proposition 13 signaled a national revolt against taxes that reverberates to this day, its actual legacy in California — not just the proposition itself, but the way Mr. Brown and the Legislature responded to it — has emerged as a major obstacle to the new governor as he confronts what is probably the worst fiscal crisis in this state’s history.
And there’s a quote from L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has mismanaged his city’s finances into near bankruptcy:
The Proposition 13 debate needs to happen; we’ve just got to be honest. At a time of a financial crisis as great as any the state has faced in modern times, the time is now to address the inequity of Prop 13 that allows large corporate interests to get a windfall meant for homeowners. We are not funding government. We are just decimating government and the services it provides.
He’s talking about the so-called “split roll,” in which Prop. 13 would remain for housing, but not for commercial real estate, which would see its taxes rise sharply. But other states that have done that have ended up with complex property tax codes filled with special-interest loopholes that only make sense to expensive tax lawyers.
The fight to defend Prop. 13 must begin now.
Here’s a TV news item from 1978, just before the election, featuring Howard Jarvis, who spearheaded Prop. 13:
Jan. 9, 2011
5 commentsWrite a comment
John Seiler: Writing on Bloomberg, our colleague Steven Greenhut dissected President Obama’s State of the Union speech. You can read
Gov. Jerry Brown’s skepticism about state assistance for local school districts’ construction projects appears to be primarily based on an