Sales taxes are regressive.  Transportation should be financed nationally and statewide, from a progressive tax system along the lines of Europe or at least the US in the 1950s and 60s.  Money should be allocated to regions according to need.  Economies of scale.  Transportation and infrastructure should be covered by those government entities with the power to impose income tax.

But since the late 70s and as consolidated in the early 80s national spending has been redirected towards the military and state spending in California has been greatly impacted by limitations on the ability to generate revenue.  Moreover, we passed term limitations which, as I’ve argued in the past, negatively impacts rural areas since nobody is in long enough to establish relationships to ensure money flows outside of the concentrations of voters needed to win statewide positions.  And in order to pass this tax proposal, we need two thirds of the vote – which is ridiculous.  We probably won’t get it.

So rural counties must fend for themselves.  Which means we’re forced to fund through sales taxes.  And we’re not taking in enough, apparently.  So if we need more, we need to impose sales tax increases.

Some of the objections:  No set structure on how the money will be spent.  No guarantees that local contractors will be hired.  Vagueness in the tax payer oversight committee function and structure.  Municipalities already have their own taxes.

Thing is, we elect people to allocate the money.  We entrust them with that.  If they fail, they lose elections, and if they don’t then that’s the voters’ choice.  A committee, regardless of specific function, will provide one added element of sunshine, though personally I think the idea is silly.  I would actually be happier if we were talking about an increased tax to go into the general fund to be used as needed according to priorities set by the body we elect to do so.

It seems we need the money.  So, yes on U.

And who is Ken Sawatsky?

Advertisements