More data from LA Times/USC poll
by Brian Leubitz
Last week I mentioned the LA Times/USC poll done by Greenberg Quinlan Research in the context of the Amazon referendum, but the poll itself had quite a variety of meat on the bones. One interesting question regards a proposal raised by Sen. Steinberg to allow municipalities raise taxes on their own on a new litany of items. According to the poll, it has some strong support:
Californians would let local officials put new taxes on cigarettes, sugary drinks, liquor and oil pumped from the ground if voters in their communities said it was OK, a new poll shows.
Local governments cannot tax such products in California now. But a proposal being vigorously debated in the Capitol would allow cities, counties and more than 1,000 school boards to add their own levies and give local voters final say. Nearly 60% of those polled supported such a change.
*** **** ***
After voters in the survey were presented with both sides’ arguments, support for new local tax powers dipped only slightly, from 58% to 55%. Nearly two-thirds of Democrats, 64%, approved; 42% of Republicans did. (LA Times)
Of course, the full poll has a few more interesting items, but in many ways the results are all over the map. It seems that many voters want one cake, will eat another, and are happy to let the cake at the end of the table burn to the ground.
For example, prison spending is really, really not popular. However, as you may have heard, we are required under some federal litigation to improve the situation there. Despite our recent voting patterns on initiative after initiative, this poll indicates that voters would rather we start an early release program or do pretty much anything else before spending additional money on the system.
A whopping 69% would release non-violent offenders early, 62% would alter the three strikes system. On the other hand, only 23% would raise taxes to pay for prisons, and only 12% would cut other services to pay for them. These are interesting numbers that legislators would be wise to heed, perhaps in a more comprehensive sentencing reform package than the little tweaks around the edges of the past few years.
The public, rather unsurprisingly, is still looking for (and in need of) more information on the budget. But, even if we can succeed on an information perspective, there is still a lot of work to be done.
If the local taxing authority is passed, I would not be surprised to see a rash of sales taxes on alcohol in some areas, possibly set at prohibitive levels. We are already seeing this in the South Bay area of Los Angeles – there is a measure that was put on the ballot in Hermosa Beach by an anti-alcohol crusader that seeks to raise the tax on local nightspots serving alcohol from a flat $2,268 per year to a figure of up to $640,000 per year, depending on square footage and proximity to another establishment serving alcohol. If the local taxing authority is extended to alcohol and cigarettes, I wouldn’t be surprised to see the same guy trying to get a 500% tax on a six-pack of beer. The puritans will jump at the chance to tax whatever they don’t like.
The ‘Red’ counties levy the longest prison terms, the coastal ‘Blue’ counties the lowest, and by very large margins. Make the local bastards pay for the costs they are now able to breezily impose upon the rest of us. Let’s then see how they react to those goodie two shoes liberal programs like rehabilitation, education and prevention.