Californians: Vote “No” on Props 1A-E Today:
Higher Taxes and Bigger Budgets Not Answer to Current Crisis
Higher Taxes and Bigger Budgets Not Answer to Current Crisis
As we Californians head to the polls today to vote on ballot propositions related to the state’s finances, Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore remind us how the Golden State lost its luster:
Is it coincidence that the two highest tax-rate states in the nation, California and New York, have the biggest fiscal holes to repair? No. Dozens of academic studies — old and new — have found clear and irrefutable statistical evidence that high state and local taxes repel jobs and businesses.
(Via Instapundit.)
Basically these economists argue–and have the data to prove it–that when a state increases taxes, particularly on the “rich,” the more those wealthy individuals flee the state for one with lower taxes, sometimes taking their businesses with them.
After Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected in the 2003 recall to reform a state government that had grown by leaps and bounds under then-Governor Gray Davis, the incumbent Governor did little to undo the damage that Democrat had done. Between 1999 when Davis took office and 2003 when citizens started organizing to recall him, the state had hired nearly 40,000 new full-time employees. The latest figures (from 2007) show only a modest decline in that number.
While friends who work for private companies across the state report receiving pay cuts, state employees have not experienced similar salary reductions. Because of their influence, the public employee unions have succeeded in preventing the state from treating them as would a normal enterprise facing decline revenues; they all but control the government in Sacramento.
Voting “Yes” on these propositions would do nothing to lessen their stranglehold on the California legislature.
We don’t need higher taxes to ensure essential services. We just need fewer bureaucrats to administer them. Indeed, these very bureaucrats, in administering the regulations passed by our nanny-state legislature, help stifle the innovation and entrepreneurial activity which once made California the envy of (and model for) the nation.
The more they regulate, the less productive are those who generate the revenues necessary to pay their salaries.
Higher taxes will only drive away those who have not already fled for states with a smaller tax burden.
By voting “No” on Measures 1A-E today, California voters will send a strong message to our elected officials in Sacramento. We don’t like the way they’ve been running this state. And we don’t want pay to fix their mistakes.
So, let’s see real budget reform instead. And let’s see state our bureaucrats face the same challenges as do their private sector counterparts. And our state legislators make the tough choices that families across the state have had to make in these tough economic times.
ADDENDUM: Mark Tapscott offers a more detailed explanation of why Prop. 1-A is such a bad thing.
15 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
And voters should reject Prop 1F as well! If it was not for the political whore, “Republican” state sen. Abel Maldonaldo, we may not be voting for these measures. Sen. Maldonaldo bought the sky-is-falling rhetoric bantied by Gov. Benedict Arnold and his Democrat buds. The Orange County Register said it best that it is nothing more than a feel good measure. VOTE NO ON ALL SIX TAX AND ROBBERY MEASURES!
Comment by Mark J. Goluskin — May 19, 2009 @ 2:15 am - May 19, 2009
And the same applies on the national level. Why in the hell would anybody think that higher taxes are the answer? Who looks across the country at the failed states with high taxes, and proposals to raise more, and say “That’s the answer!”?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 19, 2009 @ 4:10 am - May 19, 2009
To those who think that they can spend your money better and/or smarter than you can, it makes perfect sense. And many people vote for them. I wish that every time an incumbent stated that they brought projects or money “home” to their constituants, they were pressed on who they took it From.
Not gonna happen.
Comment by david t sanson — May 19, 2009 @ 8:08 am - May 19, 2009
In NYS the mis “Education’ Department after more than twenty years of ignoring yoga classes and yoga studios and not receiving a single complaint about them, suddenly determined that yoga teachers and classes needed ’state licensing’ as a ‘professional studio’ and immediately demanded all studios to close down until the ‘eight month process’ to license and ‘train’ and ‘approve’ each studio’s curriculum was done by the state, and the state receive five hundred dollars from each studio for receiving the beneficence of the state’s imprimatur. There has been some pushback against this overreaching, but to libtards in NYS government, the push for power and taxation even in the ‘worst recession’ since Herbert Hoover, goes on unabated.
Comment by eaglewingz08 — May 19, 2009 @ 8:45 am - May 19, 2009
No on everything except 1F. Feel-good or not, I don’t want these lousy bastards voting themselves a raise when they aren’t doing their jobs. I haven’t had a raise in two years and I AM doing my job.
Comment by Robert — May 19, 2009 @ 9:17 am - May 19, 2009
It’s funny how Texas, Louisiana and Alaska are among the best States economically, right now. (What they have in common is relatively low-ish taxes & GOP governors.)
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — May 19, 2009 @ 10:09 am - May 19, 2009
@ILoveCapitalism: you forgot 1 other commonality that probably is why those states are doing as well as they are – they are have part-time legislatures.
California, Michigan, New York and Pennsylvania all have full-time legislatures and are in horrible shape.
It costs $200 dollars in California and 694,354 signatures to put a Constitutional Amendment on the ballot. I am actually thinking of forking that over myself just to get the ball rolling.
Comment by Robert — May 19, 2009 @ 10:30 am - May 19, 2009
#5&6 – Also, Texas has no state income tax, a governor with VERY limited enumerated constitutional powers, an elected state judiciary and increased power at the local levels.
No wonder liberals want to throw out the 1876 Texas Constitution and replace it with a more socialistic one!
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 19, 2009 @ 10:45 am - May 19, 2009
And from the other side: These ballot props will not raise taxes. They don’t even mention taxes. I noticed that you were careful in your post to never actually say that the props have anything to do with taxes. But if linking your anti-tax beliefs to the ballot props get you all to vote no, then by all means – preach it, brothers!
I’m voted no across the board, as they are just budget gimmickry and games, and do nothing to solve our budget problems. A host of progressive and conservative groups oppose these ballot props, so we’ll be united in this one. Here’s to seeing them go down in defeat.
Comment by torrentprime — May 19, 2009 @ 12:17 pm - May 19, 2009
@torrentprime – actually:
See the posted addendum. That isn’t just a budget gimmick.
Comment by Robert — May 19, 2009 @ 12:22 pm - May 19, 2009
Robert, I understand what you are saying, but sometimes doing their job is to not vote for a bad budget and 1F says they don’t get a raise if they don’t have a balance budget or they get a raise if they pass a balance budget, whether it’s a good budget or not. So 1F will penalize legislators that votes against a bad budget.
Comment by HCN — May 19, 2009 @ 1:01 pm - May 19, 2009
@HCN – so what? They all live or die together on the issue. Voters that vote against bad ballot initatives get penalized all the time by the ones that vote for them and they pass. I will sleep just fine at night putting a pox on all their houses.
Comment by Robert — May 19, 2009 @ 1:40 pm - May 19, 2009
I voted just as you suggested, GP! No on all but the last one. Starve those rotten liberal spendthrifts out of business!
Comment by Stogie — May 19, 2009 @ 3:19 pm - May 19, 2009
Hi robert – thanks for the correction; they do mention taxes. Mea culpa. So they keep current taxes at the current rate. Not exactly “higher taxes.”
Anyhoo – it looks like we all get we want, barring a miracle. Survey USA has 5 of the 6 props going down.
Comment by torrentprime — May 19, 2009 @ 3:53 pm - May 19, 2009
Here in NJ the (non-essential) state employees are being furloughed one day-a-month to save money…and they’re complaining and suing and picketting…AND they have the gall to try to claim “unemplyement compensation” from that State (meaning the NJ taxpayers) for that day’s furlough.
If it were me I’d just summarily fire 15% of the entire State civilian payroll and figure-out afterwards how to cope. That’s what families and small businesses due, cope with it.
Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — May 19, 2009 @ 5:08 pm - May 19, 2009