Will Two Competing Tax Initiatives Spell Loss at the Ballot Box for Both?

As most Californians who follow politics know by now, there are two measures on the November 2012 ballot, which, if passed, will increase taxes to fund public education.

The first is Proposition 30, Governor Brown's tax measure. This ballot measure would temporarily increase the sales tax by a quarter of a cent and increase income taxes on those making above $250,000. The increased revenue would go to fund public education. Last year's budget was passed assuming that Prop 30 will pass. If Prop 30 does not pass, so-called trigger cuts to education will go into effect.

Brown tried a number of times, to no avail, to get the needed two-thirds of both legislative houses to agree to his tax proposal. Finding no success in the legislature he is going directly to the people through the ballot initiative process.

But Governor Brown was not the only one with an idea to increase taxes to fund education. Attorney Molly Munger, the daughter of uber-wealthy Charles Munger, the vice-chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, had a proposal of her own. Munger paid to gather the signatures to get Proposition 38, the competing tax measure, on the ballot. Prop 38 would raise income taxes on almost everyone in California and would also put the increased revenue toward public education.

There are a number of differences between the two measures, and I do not purport to give anything here but a very high level overview of the two proposals.

I believe there should be something disturbing about Proposition 38. Even if you whole-heartedly agree with the substance of that proposal, its route to the ballot is an uneasy one -- at least for me. Prop 38, like so many other ballot initiatives, was put on the ballot by someone elected by no one, and arguably accountable to no one.

If Munger's purpose is a broad one -- of increasing taxes to fund education -- it may have behooved her to put the tens of millions she is putting into supporting Prop 38 (and opposing Prop 30) into supporting Prop 30.

Voters now face what may be a confusing choice between two competing measures purporting to do a similar thing through similar means. It seems to me that this was a missed opportunity for two individuals with comparable goals to use a terribly imperfect process to achieve a common aim. Instead Munger tread her own path, and with it, risks losing not only her personal battle, but what seems to be from a general perspective, her larger war.

Finish reading this post on KCET.org. 

Ballot Initiative Season Has Begun, and it's Not Exactly a Good Thing

Ready, set, go. Ballot initiative season is officially upon us. The 11 (yes, 11) ballot initiatives that we will be voting on in November now have numbers, which means the fundraising race will kick into high gear. Expect many advertisements via your television, radio, mailbox, and likely your computer screen as well.

We will be voting on tax increases (courtesy of Governor Jerry Brown, attorney Molly Munger, and billionaire Tom Steyer), changes to the budget process, how labor unions and corporations can spend money in elections, auto insurance rates, the death penalty,human trafficking, the three-strikes law, and the labeling of genetically modified food.

We are simply weighing in on too many decisions via a flawed process.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The ballot initiative process is riddled with problems. As it currently stands it does not provide citizens with a good process to make vitally important decisions about the laws that govern us.

The ballot initiative process asks voters to make crucially important decisions in isolation. Our government is too big and too complex to make decisions on a piecemeal basis.

In addition, it is entirely rational for each voter to vote in favor of more services and against revenue increases. The ballot initiative process does not require that voters weigh the consequence of their decisions. Further, voters are accountable only to themselves, not a group of constituents, so quite reasonably may make decisions for their benefit.

Finish reading this post on KCET.org.

This is a Terrible Way to Make Laws

As readers know, an epic ballot initiative battle is brewing. On one side of the ring we have the Chief Executive Officer of the most populous state in the nation, Governor Jerry Brown. On the other side we have a Pasadena-based, Harvard-educated attorney and daughter of billionaire Charles Munger, Molly Munger. Both are supporting ballot initiatives that would raise taxes.

Their proposals are different, but their overall goal of raising revenue is the same, and many fear that with two proposals on the ballot it is more likely that both measures will fail. Others worry that voters could be confused by the differences and/or similarities between the measures.

Thus Munger has been under enormous pressure to drop her proposal, something she has not done. In fact, she is now suing because of the placement that Brown's proposal is slated to get on the November 2012 ballot.

Brown recently signed a bill that means constitutional amendments, like his proposal, will be listed near the top of the ballot, pushing Munger's, a statute, down to a less desirable location.

The takeaway here should go beyond the seemingly endless struggle between Brown and Munger. The point is that as a state we should truly take another hard look at the ballot initiative process. Can this really be the best way to make laws?

Finish reading this post on KCET.org.