Ballot Proposition 30

Proposition 30 is currently ahead in the polls – could spell disaster for California’s economy if it passes. The yea side is outspending the nay side by a margin of 30 to 1. Unions make up bulk of the support money.

Increases personal income tax on annual earnings over $250,000 for seven years.

Increases sales and use tax by cent for four years.

Allocates temporary tax revenues 89% to K-12 schools and 11% to community colleges.

Bars use of funds for administrative costs, but provides local school governing boards discretion to decide, in open meetings and subject to annual audit, how funds are to be spent.

Guarantees funding for public safety services realigned from state to local governments.

Arguments against:

The arguments in opposition to Proposition 30 presented in the state’s official voter guide include:

There is no guarantee in the way it is written that the money would be used for schools. Thus, opponents say, it is a “$50 million shell game.” To buttress this argument, opponents quote the California School Boards Association, which in May 2012 said, “the Governor’s initiative does not provide new funding for schools.”

“Nothing in Prop 30 reforms our education system to cut waste, eliminate bureaucracy or cut administrative overhead.”

Instead of supporting education, the new tax money raised by Proposition 30 will really go to “backfill the insolvent teacher’s pension fund.”

“The Governor, politicians and special interests behind Proposition 30 threaten voters. They say ‘vote for our massive tax increase or we’ll take it out on schools,’ but at the same time, they refuse to reform the education or pension systems to save money.”

“Politicians would rather raise taxes instead of streamlining thousands of state-funded programs…look at what they just did: politicians authorized nearly $5 billion in California bonds for the ‘bullet train to nowhere’, costing taxpayers $380 million a year. Let’s use those dollars for schools! Instead, the politicians gave us a false choice — raise sales taxes by $1 billion per year and raise income taxes on small businesses OR cut schools.”

Other arguments that have been made against Proposition 30 include:

The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association conducted a “Don’t Sign the Petition” campaign, urging people to decline to sign the petition. On their website devoted to encouraging people not to sign the petition, they said, “Petition gatherers may tell you their measure is to increase school funding. But simply put, It’s a Tax Increase!

California is already a poorly managed state. We have a $15 billion budget deficit – a result of overspending – $500 billion in unfunded pension liabilities, a tax and regulatory climate that drives businesses away, wasteful and ineffective use of our tax dollars and a political system unduly influenced by special interests. We do NOT need higher taxes. Join us by telling everyone you know not to sign Jerry Brown’s tax initiative.”

The income tax will be retroactive back to the first of the year (2012), a fundamentally unfair ploy that would not be tolerated if it happened to you as an individual.

California is already a very high tax state. We already have the 2nd highest state income tax rate, as well as THE highest state sales tax rate.

If approved, CA will be by far #1 in income tax rates. We will be 21% higher than the 2nd highest state (Hawaii), 34% higher than the 3rd highest state (Oregon), and FAR higher than all the rest – including seven states with zero state income tax.

Proposition 30 is opposed by columnist Debra Saunders, who says, “I fear [it will] drive golden geese out of the state. Sure, most families earning $500,000 or more aren’t going to move over a lousy $5,000, but moguls who make 20 times that and own multiple homes just might decide to migrate. And there go all their tax dollars.”

Some people who generally support tax increases in California say that they have problems with the specifics of Proposition 30. An example of this is Molly Munger, who says, “You sort of hope that the Democrats are the party that stand up for investment in children and in education. Those are two bedrock principles of the Democratic Party. It is a little bit ironic that so many elements of the Democratic Party are, you know, supporting an initiative that does not invest in the main engine we have for social mobility and opportunity in our society, which is our K-12 schools.”

Another example is columnist George Skelton, who says, “Brown wants voters to believe that all the billions raised by his tax hike would go to K-12 schools and community colleges. They won’t. And he knows that as well as anyone.”