Minority Obstruction Campaign Lies about Prop 25

This measure will not change the two-thirds vote requirement for the Legislature to raise taxes. – Proposition 25, Sec. 2 (2)

Whether progressives support this particular provision of Prop 25 is a matter for another discussion, but that sentence is written in the text of the initiative.  But today, the No on Prop 25 campaign, made the rather bold claim that what you see in front of your face, well, it’s not real.

Opponents of Proposition 25 are taking aim at the language of the initiative to lower the two-thirds legislative vote requirement for passing a budget, saying the measure is written in a way that could allow tax increases to be approved by a majority vote. … But opponents say the actual operative language of the measure, which you can read here, effectively permits raising taxes with a majority vote.

“This is not a check and balance on the Legislature, this is a carte blanche for more taxes,” Teresa Casazza, president of the California Taxpayers Association, said today at a roundtable with reporters (Sac Bee)

Now, I’d like to see some revenue language included somewhere, but the simple fact is that Prop 25 is only about the budget.  Sure, you can come up with some tortured logic that you can just add in a revenue measure to the budget to get a majority vote, but let’s be real here.  Any judge is going to take one look at the initiative, and toss that right out of court.  Games are fun, but in the real world, this measure is about revenue.

Now, of course, this puts us in the position of arguing against a real majority vote. Of course, we need real majority rule, with voters actually deciding the fate of the state without the ridiculous and anti-democratic (small d) pressures of a minority veto.  But, that, I suppose, is an argument for another day.

2 thoughts on “Minority Obstruction Campaign Lies about Prop 25”

  1. It seems that the people back then thought that the state of California had too much money as Governor Jerry Brown had slashed the budget of lots of waste creating a surplus and so the public thought that the surplus money was from Property Taxes, So they voted in Prop 13 in 1978, So what happened as a Result? It didn’t effect the state much, But Counties and Cities lost a major source of their funding as a result of Prop 13. So what happened to the surplus? Simple Governor Jerry Brown reallocated the money from the state to the Counties, Cities and School Districts and so for the 1st time We in California had a Deficit, All cause of a court case in the 70’s that said School Districts could not be funded by Property Taxes which led to a Republican sponsored Prop 13…

    Governor Jerry Brown rescued the entire state of California, He’s a Hero in the truest sense of the word…

    And eMeg? ex CEO of FTD(Meg got slapped by the FTC for anti competitive practices while CEO of FTD…), eBay and Goldman Sachs of Wallstreet fame, She likes deficits and even more budget cuts, She’d also like either a part time legislature or I suspect none at all.

    But then what is a CEO? a mini Dictator… a big fat Zero

    I’d rather have a Hero in charge, Instead of a Zero…

Comments are closed.