The General Election is fast approaching. If you have received
your voters booklet for California and San Benito County you are
realizing the magnitude of the task ahead. There are two aspects to
voting in California: the propositions and the races.
The General Election is fast approaching. If you have received your voters booklet for California and San Benito County you are realizing the magnitude of the task ahead. There are two aspects to voting in California: the propositions and the races.
The important distinction between a delegate and a representative should be kept clearly in mind when deciding how and for whom to vote. We send delegates to political conversations. Delegates are required to vote as the sending group directs. There is no judgment involved by the delegate. A representative is someone elected by the voters, who is sent to Washington or Sacramento or to elected local office, for the purpose of representing us, because we trust that person’s judgment. He or she is not our delegate, but represents the citizens in making decisions. That said, it is important to allow our representatives to use their judgment. Constant lobbying with our elected representative runs counter to the intent of a representative government.
There are some 13 statewide propositions to be voted upon in the Nov. 7 election. In this column we will deal only with the 10 tax and borrow propositions. If you are a taxpayer in California these measures increase your chances of paying higher taxes. I will reference Senator Tom McClintock in many cases on revenue and taxing measures. His knowledge of the inner working of the State budget process is unequalled. I trust his judgment.
Proposition 1B, 1C, 1D, and 1E are the propositions put on the ballot by the Legislature. Proposition 84 is a bond proposition put on the ballot by the citizens. Together they authorize $42.7 billion in bond issuance by the State of California. Interest and principal repayment on all measures must be funded from the annual budget. Borrowing for a project such as this assures the State will pay approximately double in total dollars compared to paying from the general fund. The repayments made each year take a portion of the budget pie, reducing what is left. The effect is to create a pressure for the raising of our taxes in the future. With Democrat majorities in both chambers the chances of raised taxes are more likely in the future if any of these propositions pass.
Proposition 1B authorizes borrowing of $20 billion for highways, freeways, roads etc. Unfortunately, it also includes public transportation, car pool lanes (which always have the effect of slowing down overall traffic), and a promise of reduced air pollution. Sen. Denham voted yes, Assemblyman Salinas voted yes, Senator McClintock, my expert on budget matters voted no. Let our elected representatives make the spending tradeoff. NO.
Proposition 1C authorizes borrowing of $2.85 billion for Housing and Emergency Shelters. Senator Denham voted no; Assemblyman Salinas voted yes; Senator McClintock voted no. This proposal provides low-income housing. It does not specifically prohibit illegals from qualifying for this taxpayer funded benefit. NO.
Proposition 1D issues $10.4 billion in bonds for Kindergarten and University Public Education Facilities. Assemblyman Salinas voted yes; Senators Denham and McClintock voted no. K-12 education in California already gets close to 53 percent percentage of the annual budget. This decision should also come from our elected representatives. NO.
Proposition 1E authorizes $4.09 billion in bonds for Disaster Preparedness and levee building and maintenance. Senator Denham voted no; Assemblyman Salinas voted yes; Senator McClintock voted yes. Are we to believe our elected representatives will not be taking actions to avoid a New Orleans type disaster unless we the citizens approve this measure? Let our legislators do the job for which we elected them. Yes on our representatives fixing levees as part of the annual budget. NO on this proposition.
Proposition 84 authorizes $5.4 billion in bonds for flood control and water supply improvement. It seems to conflict in some ways with 1E. Let our representatives make the decision on what is most important. NO
1A is a no-brainer. The Legislature is proposing to amend the State Constitution so that the highway funds we approved with Proposition 42 in 2002 must be used for this purpose. Our legislators should have been doing this all along anyway. YES on 1A.
Propositions 86, 87, and 89 are propositions which propose to tax cigarettes (86), oil producers (87), and political campaigns (89). Each would represent an increase in your tax bill. NO, NO, and NO. Prop 89, which proposes to fund elections from the public treasury, is particularly odious. In addition to being a tax increase, this monstrosity also restricts our First Amendment right of free speech. Public funding of elections has never worked. This one will not either.
Al Kelsch is a Hollister resident who writes a weekly column for the Free Lance. He can be contacted at
oi**@ya***.com
