Posted on 05/25/2010 3:17:30 PM PDT by CounterCounterCulture
Carly Fiorina directly attacked a cornerstone of California's conservative movement -- and one of the few institutional protections California's property owners enjoy. In short, she attacked Proposition 13. And there's proof.
Below, I'm appending a rather interesting little op-ed from the March 2nd, 2000, San Jose Mercury-News. It's by one Carly Fiorina and John Doerr (then as now a venture capitalist and partner at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers), and it enthusiastically endorses California's Proposition 26 of 2000.
What was 2000's California Proposition 26? In brief, it was an attack on the provisions of California's historic 1978 Proposition 13, which capped property taxes at 1% of the value of a property. Under Proposition 13, local governments may enact special taxes exceeding the 1% limit with a two-thirds-majority vote of the populace. Proposition 26 in 2000 would have fatally weakened 1978's Proposition 13, by lowering the two-thirds requirement for local special taxes to a simple majority for education-related purposes.
In short, Proposition 26 would have ended Proposition 13 as a meaningful protection for California's over-taxed homeowners. That's why the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association, which has endorsed Chuck DeVore, fought successfully to defeat it at the polls.
And that's why Carly Fiorina -- an instinctive liberal in nearly every instance before the present election campaign -- supported it.
Carly Fiorina will have a tough time explaining why she joined in a fight to overturn Prop. 13 in the final two weeks of this campaign. But Republican voters must know that when the time came to defend one of the signal accomplishments of modern conservatism in California, she stood on the other side.
Oh, and the punchline to all this? She didn't even vote in that election.
All the best,
Joshua Treviño
Joshua S. Treviño
Communications Director
DeVore for California
Online: ChuckDeVore.com
San Jose Mercury News
Posted at 6:05 p.m. PST Wednesday, March 1, 2000
A yes on Prop. 26 is crucial for California schools
BY CARLY FIORINA AND JOHN DOERR
Most of the tremendous technological innovations leading us into the 21st century were born in California, right here in Silicon Valley. The economy and population of California is exploding, yet our school facilities are being left behind.
More than half of California's schools lack adequate electrical power for computers and communications technology. Our state ranks 42nd out of the 50 states in students per Internet-connected computer, and we rank dead last in students per instructional computer.
Silicon Valley executives are disturbed to find that a 19th century provision of our state Constitution is keeping us from bringing our schools into the 21st century, and that is why HP and other TechNet companies are supporting Proposition 26 on the March 7 ballot.
Though Santa Clara County is home to Silicon Valley, most of its schools were built at least 25 to 30 years ago. They are old and out of date. We must fix them. In Santa Clara County, 19 percent of school buildings are temporary. Compounding the situation is the enrollment growth of nearly 30,000 new incoming students annually. This enrollment will continue to grow in the coming years. It will require 50 to 60 new schools per year in this county alone.
Just up the road, the San Mateo Union High School District typifies the problems of districts around the state. Faced with serious modernization and classroom needs, the district has been attempting to win passage of a local school bond for the past two years.
The roofs are leaking at Aragon High School, fire alarms and other safety devices at Burlingame High School need to be replaced, old irrigation and drainage systems need to be renovated at Capuchino High School in San Bruno, and old heating, electrical and ventilation systems must be replaced at Mills High School in Millbrae.
The district has attempted to improve its schools with local bonds, but even though they received more than 66 percent support, the will of the majority of the voters was not enough to make much-needed improvements to these schools.
Districts in Santa Clara County have met a similar fate. Since 1986, 10 bond attempts have failed in Santa Clara County despite majority support.
The current two-thirds vote requirement carried over from the 19th-century has taken a serious toll on local schools, particularly in our poorest communities where the need is greatest. The answer to this crisis is Proposition 26. Prop. 26 makes it easier to invest in our children's education by reducing the unfair two-thirds vote requirement for passage of local school bonds to a simple majority. It also institutes strict new accountability standards to ensure that school facilities are finished on time and on budget. All local school bonds must include a list of specific projects that would be completed with the funds. In addition, an annual audit will be required for every project until all funds have been expended.
California is one of only four states to require a two-thirds vote to fix our schools. It is an unfair, 120-year-old law that prevents a majority of local voters from deciding the fate of their school's future and leaves our children and grandchildren in dilapidated, unsafe and severely overcrowded facilities.
Now is the time for California to join the vast majority of other states that make investing in their children's education a top priority. The coalition supporting Prop. 26 is one of the largest and most diverse in the history of California initiatives: Gov. Gray Davis, former Gov: Pete Wilson and more than 500 organizations.
The reason is simple: Investing in our children's schools is the key to preparing students for jobs in the 21st century to what we call e-inclusion (educational and electronic inclusion). It's the key to economic prosperity and safe communities. Put simply, it is the right thing to do. That is why we should all vote yes on Prop. 26 on March 7.
_________________________________________________________________
Carly Fiorina is president and chief executive officer of Hewlett-Packard. John Doerr is a general partner in Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.
Ask mentioned in today’s debate.
FRegards.
Who'd support this affirmative action hire?
Fiorina is a Big Government Statist!
I’m used to their bile and stupidity. The only question is: are they on the Carly payroll or not?
These people don’t think anyone will know what they have done over the years. Thanks for keeping this front and center.
Libtards are salivating to repeal Prop 13, they’re going to try to do it by increments.
They see the time as right—CA property values are dropping, so they may be able to convince voters that it won’t hurt.
I can’t imagine how many elderly homeowners we have who own their homes outright & have for 30 years or more. They would be reassessed at current values. Would be devastating to them economically.
The final nail in the CA coffin will be the elimination of Prop 13.
BTW: Calipornians are still fools for cutting off tax revenue while STILL demanding a high amount of services and high public employee salaries/benefits. Spending and borrowing is just as noxious as taxing and spending. "Ballot initiatives" and the "will of the sheeple" are not effective ways of managing revenue, as the great unwashed will always vote for more services, but lower taxes.
Why don't you attack the real liberal in the race or help DeVore get beyond 15% in the polls and $500,000 in contributions. You people spend your time attacking Carly when you should be out there helping DeVore.
And he’ll still get 3rd place in a 3 person race.
Carly is running for the U.S. Senate.
This is a state issue. Do you understand the difference between what a Senator does and what a Governor or state legislator does? How does this issue affect Carly's Senate campaign?
Yeah, we're so uninformed and delusional that we can clearly see the conservative candidate running for a year and still in last place and with no money or infrastructure to sustain a general election campaign.
Go take your freaking meds.
Just vote Chuck DeVore.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.