Sacto: Raise Taxes or CA "Doomsday"

Written by CA Political News on April 02, 2009, 12:23 PM

Editorial: Sacramento readies doomsday scenarios
Voters will be warned of dire consequences if tax hikes fail May 19.


Orange County Register editorial, 4/2/09


Democratic state Senate Leader Darrell Steinberg says he doesn't intend to scare people into voting for more taxes on May 19. But he doesn't mind raising the specter of "doomsday scenarios" that could result if voters reject tax increases.

It's entirely in character for Sacramento legislative leaders to pander to base fears to panic taxpayers into accepting being further fleeced.

In one sense Mr. Steinberg may have a point. A doomsday of sorts could be ahead for state government. A day of judgment. An end to the way things have been. We're tempted to shout, "Hallelujah!"

State government has grown beyond reason. The overall budget increased from $99 billion in 2000-01 to $144 billion in 2008-09. While increasing numbers of Californians are losing their jobs, state government added 2,000 full-time bureaucrats just from June 2008 to February 2009. The government now educates, medicates, houses, feeds, subsidizes, transports and regulates more Californians than ever, certainly more than is healthy for an ostensibly free society.

If anything, doomsday for such an overinflated, out-of-control system is overdue.

We know Sacramento well enough to realize that those in control, who thrive on other peoples' money, intentionally will make the fallout as painful as possible should May's propositions fail. We are unsurprised when Mr. Steinberg portrays the consequences as scary. Notice that he described it as "doomsday," and not as "a long overdue reining in of runaway government spending."

Among alleged doomsday scenarios under consideration in Sacramento, according to a Los Angeles Times story, are "deeper budget cuts." But considering government's growth, deeper cuts appear prudent, not apocalyptic. Other doomsday options could mean health and welfare programs cut further. College spending, which has no guaranteed funding levels, could be reduced, but so, too, could K-12 public schools, even though that funding is protected by voter-approved minimums, The Times reported.

"Budget officials have privately been discussing establishing a series of triggers that, if the ballot measures fail, would reduce funding to certain programs depending on the depths of fiscal fallout," the newspaper reported.

The truth is that if lawmakers had been acting responsibly, there would be no need for automatically triggered cuts to reduce their overspending. Polls show that Proposition 1A, a two-year extension of income, sales and vehicle tax increases approved in February by the Legislature, is trailing significantly. Prop. 1C, a gimmicky "borrowing" of billions from hoped-for increases in state lottery revenue, trails, too.

If Californians finally have reached their tax saturation point, it may mean that Sacramento's business as usual, indeed, is doomed. It's about time.