I am stunned at the ignorance that passes as knowledge on the right.
In the Washington Post today, columnist Harold Meyerson blames 1978’s Proposition 13 for today’s budget mess in California. That claim is not supported by the data.
First note that California’s current fiscal crisis is in its state budget. Prop 13 puts restraints on local property taxes.
Several times in the past 15 years, the state gov't has had to borrow money from the cities to fund state operations. In other words, Prop 13 has forced the state to raid local coffers.
Second, the most recent Census data show that total state and local general revenues in California were $293 billion in fiscal 2006. Of that, $37 billion was property tax revenue, or just 13 percent of the total. Meyerson is arguing that that level of property taxes is too low, but it is hard to see how the recent crisis could have been caused by a three-decade old constraint on such a small fraction of overall state and local revenues.
Its a small percentage of total state revenue because many people are still paying taxes in 1980 dollars and the rest have a 1% cap on their tax rate both thanks to Prop 13. That is, in fact, the problem with Prop 13.......it has reduced property taxes to a level that is 'starving' the state and it also has made it almost impossible for the state to raise new taxes.
California is strangling to death because of some asshole wingers from the 1970s.........may they not rest in peace.
Third, on a per-capita basis, California is in the middle of the pack on property tax collections, thus even though property taxes were cut three decades ago, California governments still get a decent pound of flesh from property owners in the state.
As the largest state in the union with four major metro areas, several smaller metro areas, a disproportiante number of poor and illegals than the rest of the nation, its needs are very great......much greater than its revenue stream.
Fourth, Prop 13 placed a supermajority requirement on state tax increases, which Meyerson laments. But that restraint has certainly not led to undertaxation in California. After an initial dip in total state/local tax revenues as a share of income in the late-1970s, California’s tax take has been steady or rising. Estimates for 2008 put the state sixth highest with respect to state and local taxes as a percentage of state incomes.
Yes, incomes have grown over the past 30 years leading to higher income tax revenue, and there has been some increase in prop. taxes because the value of properties have increased dramatically in the 4 largest metro areas over the last 30 years.
HOWEVER, what growth in revenue that has occurred has not been able to keep up with the needs of the population.
The analysis done by this Chris Edwards is so lame and so self serving I am flabbergasted that you have the balls to post it on this thread. |
