[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers
Daily Email Summary


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics
Event Calendar
November 2009
(view month)
S M T W R F S
01 02 03 04 05 06 07
08 09 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally

MBA Member

Blue CA Ad Network
Join Our eMail List
Email:

Photobucket

LA Times Reinforces Right-Wing Tax Frames

by: Robert Cruickshank

Sun Mar 01, 2009 at 08:59:26 AM PST


Today's LA Times contains a "news analysis" by Evan Halper that seeks to explain why taxpayers seem to be getting less for their tax dollars. But the most obvious point goes almost totally ignored - that tax cuts have reduced the ability of government to provide for basic services. Since that isn't part of this article, the effect is to mislead readers into thinking government is misusing tax dollars, and thus winds up reinforcing right-wing frames.

Reporting from Sacramento -- Middle-class Californians have long griped about paying more taxes than they might pay elsewhere, but for decades this state could boast that it gave them quite a bit in return. Now that contract is in doubt.

A modern freeway system, easy access to superior universities and progressive health programs used to be part of the compact. Even local schools plagued with financial problems continued to offer small classes, innovative after-school programs and advanced arts and music curricula.

These opening paragraphs set the tone for a flawed article. That "social compact" has not really functioned as Halper suggests since 1978. Our freeway system was largely in place by that time. Additional freeways were mostly paid for by higher taxes - even Orange County has voted to tax itself twice since 1990 to build and expand freeways. The "innovative after-school programs" were created by ballot-box budgeting. Advanced arts and music curricula have been absent from most districts in the state since the 1980s.

In short, Halper starts from a flawed premise.

But at a time when taxes are about to rise substantially, the services that have long set this state apart are deteriorating. The latest budget cuts hit public programs prized by California's middle class particularly hard -- in some cases at the expense of preserving a tattered safety net for the poor -- following years of what analysts characterize as under-investment....

"Twenty years ago, you could go to Texas, where they had very low taxes, and you would see the difference between there and California," said Joel Kotkin, a presidential fellow in urban futures at Chapman University in Orange. "Today, you go to Texas, the roads are no worse, the public schools are not great but are better than or equal to ours, and their universities are good. The bargain between California's government and the middle class is constantly being renegotiated to the disadvantage of the middle class."

And here you see the right-wing framing - in some cases made explicit, that programs benefiting the middle-class have been cut to "preserve a tattered safety net for the poor." Kotkin, a high-profile conservative think tank figure who has blamed "greens" for the state's current crisis is never going to explain how tax cuts have caused California to fall behind in maintaining its once-great systems of education and health care.

The closest Halper gets to acknowledging the true nature of the problem is here:

The reasons are varied. The cost of services continues to outpace inflation. Programs are being squeezed out by things the government was not providing in the halcyon 1950s and early 1960s, including Medi-Cal and some welfare programs. And the state has been reluctant to embrace new ways of funding services while holding back state money to plug other holes in the budget.

In fact Medi-Cal's earliest origins lie in the 1959 legislative session, as do some welfare programs. Halper gingerly discusses a state "reluctant to embrace new ways of funding services" but this is the closest his article will ever get to the truth, which is that the conservative veto has prevented California from raising taxes to keep the services flowing to the middle class. Even Ronald Reagan did this in 1967 but you would never know it from Halper's article.

Nor does Halper explain, anywhere, the billions in tax cuts that have been made since 1978 - a structural revenue shortfall that costs California at least $12 billion a year. Halper does a good job of showing how our basic services are underfunded but totally fails to explain the reasons why. As a result he closes his article with comments from conservatives like Mitt Romney and Joel Kotkin that not only go unanswered by any progressive voices, but go unanswered by reality:

Former presidential candidate Mitt Romney spoke to the frustrations of many California parents during a speech at last weekend's state GOP convention in Sacramento. Pointing out all the taxes Californians are now paying, he asked, according to the Sacramento Bee: "With all that money, how are your schools?"

The simple answer is: Not what they used to be. And now the state is cutting billions more out of them, including money set aside to keep classes small and to fund arts and music electives.

"The social compact is: I pay taxes and good things happen," Kotkin said. "But I pay a lot of taxes and can't send my kid to our local public schools because they are terrible."

Conservatives broke that social compact by telling Californians "you can pay less taxes and good things will happen." It's wrong for conservatives to turn around and say "oh gee the system's screwed up" when they are responsible for the mess.

And it's inexcusable for the LA Times to reinforce such right-wing sentiments with such an article that refuses to point out what actually went wrong, and who is responsible for it.

Robert Cruickshank :: LA Times Reinforces Right-Wing Tax Frames
Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
13 prop--legacy (0.00 / 0)
Uh, prop 13.
anytime I hear a gooper or anyone else talk about the high tax burden in CA, I ask them what they pay in property tax.
our total tax burden is very much lower than any other large or industrial state.
where else can you own a home worth 800k and pay 2-3k in property taxes.
in most state, schools run on local property taxes. not here.


High Tax Burden (0.00 / 0)
Our total tax burden is very much lower than any other large or industrial state?  Really?  Can you direct me to a site that shows this?

So let's compare CA taxes with the next two largest states, Texas and New York.

Texas has no personal income tax or corporate tax, though they do have a gross receipts tax which is pretty low. Their property tax is much higher, but their property values are much lower, so the tax burden for a median priced home is lower.  Their sales tax rate is 6.25% compared to our new 8.25%.  Their gas tax is a little higher and their VLF is a little lower.

New York has a much lower personal and corporate income tax, sales tax and VLF.  Their gas tax is a little higher.  Their property tax is much higher, but again, their property values are nothing like California's so the impact is not as great as the rate indicates.  But under any interpretation, New York property tax is much higher than California's.  

I cannot directly say that the total tax burden for California is higher than New York or Texas, but it seems much higher.  Again, if you have some evidence that "our total tax burden is very much lower than any other large or industrial state" I would be very interested in seeing it.


[ Parent ]
ny property values (0.00 / 0)
NY property values are lower.
that is not correct at all unless you are talking rural nystate.

[ Parent ]
ny state property tax (0.00 / 0)
from the nystate website:

A.    A property's assessment is based on its market value. Market value is how much a property would sell for under normal conditions. Assessments are determined by the assessor, an elected or appointed local official who independently estimates the value of real property in an assessing unit. Assessing units follow municipal boundaries - county, city, town, or village.

B. what the property tax covers:
Counties, cities, towns, villages, school districts, and special districts each raise money through the real property tax. The money funds schools, pays for police and fire protection, maintains roads, and funds other municipal services enjoyed by residents.

What Determines the Amount of a Property Tax Bill?

   The amount of a particular property's tax bill is determined by two things: the property's taxable assessment and the tax rates of the taxing jurisdictions in which the property is located.

so you multiply the assessment by the tax rate for that community and you get the revenue to cover all of the things in B.

The reality is that in CA most of the cost for education, among other things, must come from income taxes, which are returned to localities by the state.

As a result, in CA we have high income taxes but very small (relatively) property taxes.
How many people do you know who are paying taxes near the value of their homes?
there is no way that a property worth 800k in NYState would be taxed 3k a year.

as to the comparison to Texas--you go live there.


[ Parent ]
taxes (0.00 / 0)
My source for property taxes is Money Magazine http://articles.moneycentral.m...

It shows that California is ranked 10th in the nation for property tax--I would not call that "very small".  At least not relative to the rest of the US.

And your point is well taken regarding Texas.  But I believe that you said in your original post that our total tax burden is "very much lower" than any other large or industrial state, so I took the next two largest states in the US to compare with California.  

I'll compare to other states if you wish, but I think the result would be about the same: the total tax burden is very much HIGHER than any other large or industial state.  

I'm not just talking about property tax--the total tax burden.


[ Parent ]
wrong take on the data (0.00 / 0)
Actually, your article proves my point and you cherry-picked the data.
the article says:
CA ranks 45th in taxes as a precentage of home value.
Our median property tax for a homeowner is slightly less than $2300, pretty much a bargain; as the article says the median value is almost half a million.
what you cited was the actual median tax paid, which puts CA 10th. That is not surprising considering home values, but we actually dont pay on the market value of the home, as they do in most other states, we get to pay on the artifact value of when the home was bought.  

[ Parent ]
apologies for the snappishness (0.00 / 0)
I didnt mean to imply you are trying to be inaccurate. I appreciate your providing the cite, which allows us all to see the data. there are many ways to slice this, but I think it is very wrong to imply that CA are overtaxed when you consider what a bargain we get on our property tax, and how business has taken than bargain and manipulated it further by "selling" companies that own the property rather than the property itself, thus grandfathering in the prop 13 values of decades ago.
that is the real problem.

[ Parent ]
I was surprised (0.00 / 0)
They didn't mention "welfare queens". It's just a variant on Reagan's racist message. Attacking the "safety net for the poor" is the modern message for hating brown and black people.

Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads

Support Calitics:

Advertisers

California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch
Blog Network:
Powered by: SoapBlox