I don't see much of a problem with the majority of those two reports (other than the Rob Lowe thing, and he might not have much influence anyway). Buffet, Schultz, and Wilson have some good ideas and a little baggage, but that is probably true of just about everybody.
The thing you have to remember is that there is a huge budget shortfall. Your government is taking in way less than it is spending. On the state level, this can't continue. The way out of the shortfall is either severe cuts in state spending or less severe cuts combined with .... yes, tax increases.
If I were California governor I would propose revamping the tax system completely. As I understand the way it works now it is not sensible and is way out of whack with what other states do. The income tax is high, particularly on high wage earners. The property tax is miniscule, which can have a big effect on the ability to spend locally to address local problems. If you can't spend locally, then everything has to be funneled through the state level, which is inevitably going to entail additional costs.
So I would argue that an income tax decrease, combined with a property tax increase and a temporary sales tax increase which ratchets downward as spending and deficit reduction targets are met might be the way to go. Spending cuts should also be part of the equation, but if you try to do it all that way you might end up with a state that loses some of the very things which make it attractive, like the top flight education system.
I also think that a governor who is not too closely identified with either party and its faithful will be more effective than a political regular from either side.
From what I've seen so far, the two candidates who best fit that description are Ueberroth and Ahnold. |
