School for Scandal
Sacramento’s Latest String of Outrages Imperils Brown’s Tax Measure
Thursday, July 26, 2012
A small majority of Californians now supports Jerry Brown’s crucial tax initiative — but he and fellow Democrats are doing all they can to make voters change their minds.
That’s the apparent conclusion to be drawn from a weeklong series of scandals, embarrassments, and politically inept actions undercutting the governor’s argument on behalf of Proposition 30, his November ballot initiative for an $8-billion-a-year tax increase. At a time when Brown is arguing that Sacramento has done all it can to streamline and reduce the cost of government, he and his allies keep handing Republicans and tax foes evidence to the contrary.
Jerry Roberts
“There is definitely political schizophrenia taking place amongst Capitol Democrats,” said influential conservative blogger and former state GOP leader Jon Fleischman. “If you don’t even know where all of the money is that you do have, why should the voters give you more?”
Among the controversies:
• Parks: After several years of dire warnings that California’s fiscal woes would require closure of some state parks, which led to private fundraising efforts to keep them open, the administration suddenly announced last week it had “found” a $54-million hidden surplus in the Department of Parks and Recreation budget. Top department officials were swiftly sacked; however, parks donors were outraged, and the debacle sent a powerful message about Sacramento’s ability to manage taxpayers’ money.
• Raises: In a year when many state workers are suffering a 5-percent pay cut, newspapers revealed that nearly 1,000 employees of the Assembly and State Senate have received raises of up to 5 percent during the last year. The hypocrisy of the do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do move by the Legislature’s Democratic leaders was underscored when Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg promptly announced a pay freeze — to begin August 1.
• Rail: As two new polls showed nearly 60 percent of voters now oppose a $68-billion state high-speed rail system, Democrats in both houses blithely rammed through approval of billions of dollars in new state rail bonds. Although the action protects federal earmarks for the unpopular project, it also fuels opposition to Brown’s tax increase: One in three voters in a new Field Poll say financing the rail project will make them less likely to vote for his initiative — including one in five of those who now support the tax hike.
• Pensions: Amid the spectacle of San Bernardino becoming the third major California city to declare bankruptcy, the Legislature adjourned for its summer vacation without acting on a public-pension reform plan that has moldered in committee since January. San Bernardino, like Vallejo and Stockton before it, traces a significant part of its fiscal woes to escalating costs for pensions and other benefits for public employees; the move by city officials, coupled with a new report that the California Public Employees Retirement System earned only one percent on its investments last year — far below its 7.5-percent projected growth — further highlights the state’s failure to act.
In putting Prop. 30 before voters, Brown is the first California chief executive in memory to ask voters to raise their own taxes. The new Field Poll shows the governor’s plan ahead, 54 to 38 percent, with 8 percent undecided.
Beyond the new series of challenges to promoting his measure as the last, best way to protect public schools, Brown must also argue against Proposition 38, a rival tax-increase proposal. Prop. 38 would raise income taxes across the board, sending all the new revenue exclusively to public schools; Brown’s Prop. 30 would raise the state sales taxes and income rates on those making $250,000 and above, with most, but not all, of the money set aside for schools.
Dan Newman, a strategist for the Prop. 30 campaign, insisted that the multiple controversies would not detract voters from the arguments for the governor’s measure: “Prop. 30 is about schools and public safety funding,” he told the Sacramento Bee, “not high-speed rail or the price of tea in China or anything else.”
Opponents of the initiative are not so sure.
“The administration and those who advocate for higher taxes are giving us these issues on a silver platter, whether it’s high-speed rail, whether it’s the legislative pay increases,” said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, who is leading the no-on-Prop. 30 campaign.
“We’re seriously considering making Governor Brown, Darrell Steinberg, and [Speaker] John Perez as our surrogates for the ‘No’ campaign.”
Related Links
Comments
Last week in the LA Times editorial pages Harold Meyerson made a powerful and detailed critique of the claim that public pensions had big roles in Stockton's and San Bernardino's bankruptcies. Jerry, it just isn't true that "a significant part of its [their] fiscal woes [is due]to escalating costs for pensions and other benefits for public employees"!
At the same time, I have written in the Independent that YES, we absolutely do have to make public pension reforms in California, although with over 86 different plans it is tough to generalize. I think that Mayor Schneider caved in to the unions etc. when she withdrew her good proposals recently, one of them was an important reform of SB City pensions. They all need to be capped -- eliminate all of them over $100,00 -- and the giveaways to the Police and Fire personnel have to be curbed, too. This is a volatile issue and neither local Democrats [where is your leadership here Hannah Beth and Das???] have shown any balls on this.
DrDan (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2012 at 8:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The article is just more evidence that better control of government spending (where is the oversight?) is needed before anyone even thinks of more taxes. Not to mention Brown's transparent attempt to buy the union vote with the completely ridiculous train project.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2012 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well this Jerry Roberts column seems to be a hit piece of a right wing blogger or conservative news network. I'd rather support Governor Browns proposal.
The 54 Million dollar parks surplus was the results of a 12 year accumulation of funds being in a contentious feudal stalemate with different factions; those who want off-road vehicles and those who don't want off-road vehicles ripping up California Parklands. It's the anti-environmentalists vs. the environmentalists. I'm with the later on this one.
Questions about pay raises need to go toward overpaid corporate CEOs, especially those in the banking industry. The State and Assembly employee raises I guess seem out of touch for those of us not getting raises during these difficult times. Social Security recipients got a raise this year and generally they aren't even working. It could be that employees in Sacramento are actually deserving of more compensation given the work provided in these tumultuous times. Even republican staffers must be busy fielding numerous calls in all their obfuscation.
CalPers has a long-term investment strategy. It is not near default and unless conservatives continue to obfuscate growth causing another financial meltdown CalPers will be fine. http://www.calpers.ca.gov/index.jsp?b...
The public sentiments have changed a bit after voting to approve the bonds funding High Speed Rail. But that is only because of the negative press and the slant from political opportunist conservatives who want to stick their head in the sand about the future.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2012 at 9:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Cap ALL pensions at $100,000.
Scooter (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 11:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
$100,000 cap seems reasonable
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 2, 2012 at 11:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)
HI JERRY! above I challenged your statement, "San Bernardino, like Vallejo and Stockton before it, traces a significant part of its fiscal woes to escalating costs for pensions and other benefits for public employees" --wanna respond to my point from Meyerson that your statement is INACCURATE?????
DrDan (anonymous profile)
August 4, 2012 at 1:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
California's per capita tax revenus is in the top third of all states, spending on education dead last.
It is not an issue of not enough money, it is an issue of how the State spends our money.
loneranger (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2012 at 8:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OK, so Calif's per capita tax revenues are in the top third of all states, but this only shows it's a wealthier state... it IS an ISSUE OF NOT ENOUGH MONEY as well as some of the stupid/wasteful ways Calif spends the money it does collect. We need to vote FOR PROP 30.
DrDan (anonymous profile)
August 16, 2012 at 4:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I do support capping pensions and we have been told that there will be a vote on it in a matter of 7-9 days.
das (anonymous profile)
August 22, 2012 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
can I have the Assembly bill number? will you be able to separate "social services" and "public education"? I hope you can use the Meyerson article to help refute the burden of public pensions, Jerry has waited almost a month and not responded to my challenge at post higher above...this article is almost a month old. Yes, pensions DO have to be capped. thanks.
DrDan (anonymous profile)
August 22, 2012 at 3:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am more inclined to vote for 38 than for 30, even though 30 wouldn't touch me and 38 would. We need more money for our schools. We don't need more money going to waste in Sacramento.
blackpoodles (anonymous profile)
August 22, 2012 at 11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If you are the real Dr.Dan (Secord), I'll call you and tell you the details. If you are not, call my ofice or email me your number and I'll still get you the details.
das (anonymous profile)
August 24, 2012 at 11:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
DrDan is a different kind of "doctor":
http://www.independent.com/staff/dan-...
EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 24, 2012 at 1:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
EB's right; and this is the genuine DrDan93101 as I've proudly stated several times earlier, not this Secord gentleman. I'll email the office, Das
DrDan (anonymous profile)
August 24, 2012 at 4:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)