Widely Diverse Coalition Opposes Proposition 88 (5 Good Reasons To Oppose Tax Increase Scheme Alert)

If David and Goliath were alive today, they would likely take time out from their battle to cast a ballot against Proposition 88. So, too, would the feuding Hatfields and McCoys. Such is the diversity and unanimity of opposition to this ill-conceived tax increase.

Proposition 88 on the November ballot will raise property taxes. This tax would be imposed by the state and would be in addition to any fees, assessments, bonds and the local property tax regulated by Proposition 13 that homeowners already pay. Considering that 10 million property owners would face higher property taxes if Proposition 88 passes, it's easy to understand why the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Taxpayers Association and a score more taxpayer advocacy groups oppose Proposition 88.

Proposition 88 creates a whole new kind of statewide property tax. Currently all property taxes are collected locally and are used for local services, such as improving local schools, reducing traffic congestion, improving health care, and increasing fire fighting, paramedic and law enforcement capabilities. The Proposition 88 property parcel tax goes to the state. Maybe this is one of the reasons why the League of Women Voters recommends voting no.

The wealthy promoters of Proposition 88 claim it will help education, but the non-partisan state legislative analyst says only one percent of non-charter schools and one quarter of charter schools will be eligible to apply for facilities grants from the measure's proceeds. Proposition 88 would be administered by a costly new state bureaucracy for a program which forever bans facilities grants to more than 95 percent of our kid's schools. This helps explain why education interests like the State PTA, the California Federation of Teachers and the California School Boards Association oppose Proposition 88.

To start, Proposition 88 would impose a uniform $50 parcel tax on all parcels of property regardless of value or the owners' ability to pay. Additionally, Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell has already declared his support for doubling the tax in four years and adding another $50 dollars every four years after that. This helps explain why the California Labor Federation (AFL-CIO), the California Republican Party and the California Democratic Party say "No" to Proposition 88.

California is already a high-tax state. Proposition 88 would increase the burden on taxpayers and start a new California "Gold Rush" as tax-and-spend advocates charge forward with plans for new state property taxes for public safety, flood and levee repairs, transportation, public health care, pensions, you name it. These new taxes would not only injure taxpayers, but would make California businesses less competitive. This could fuel an exodus of jobs and taxpayers and severely damage the state economy and state tax revenue. California business is not taking this threat lightly. The California Chamber of Commerce, California Manufacturers and Technology Association, the Small Business Action Committee, and the California Business Properties Association are urging rejection of Proposition 88.

They say politics makes strange bedfellows, and when you have Democrats and Republicans, business and labor, education and taxpayers all opposing Proposition 88 it shows that these diverse interests do, in fact, share many common values. Just like all Californians they want better schools for our children, good value for taxes paid, and fairness in taxation. And on each count, Proposition 88 is an abysmal failure.

And those in favor of Proposition 88? In addition to Jack O'Connell, there are only two ultra-wealthy, elitist, Silicon Valley charter school advocates. Reed Hastings, whose company Netflix, rents DVDs over the internet, and John Doerr, a billionaire venture capitalist -- have put up $9 million to advance their effort to raise taxes that will fall disproportionately on homeowners of modest means. The added tax burden on the mansions of Hastings, Doerr and their wealthy friends will be no higher than that which will fall on a couple buying a starter home.

If Proposition 88 passes, it will compel Californians to pay to advance the public policy visions of these tax-raising dilettantes. While most property owners may be able to pay the $50 tax Proposition 88 will impose in the first year, will they want to open the door to all the new state property taxes that would follow? Promoters of Proposition 88 must think we're stupid.

I could afford $50. So could most of us. But once a statewide parcel tax were to be enacted in California, the door would be opened to a flood of similar parcel taxes on behalf of this or that special interest. For five good reasons, both liberals and conservatives have set aside their feud to oppose Proposition 88. 1) Its regressive, 2) Poorly written, 3) Creates an expensive new bureaucracy, 4) Helps less than 5% of our kids' schools and 5) Has no termination date. Add to that Jack O'Connell's declaration for doubling the tax ad infinitum and you can see why every one is hostile to it. If Reed Hastings and John Doerr want to use their own money to improve our schools - great. But they should keep their grubby hands off the wallets of average Californians. As for Proposition 88 - just vote NO! to this ill-conceived tax increase scheme.

(No more Olmert! No more Kadima! No more Oslo! )

Promoters of Proposition 88 must think we're stupid.

And, if you take a look at who California voters have sent to the State Legislature, it's not hard to see why.

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.