|
|
Publications |
|
|
|
News Flash: California Voters Become Policy Makers
Capital Ideas
By: K. Lloyd Billingsley
11.6.2006
SACRAMENTO, CA - When Californians go to the polls tomorrow they get a promotion. More than mere voters, they become key policymakers through their decisions on ballot measures.
On Proposition 86, for example, voters will make the call whether it is good policy to pursue health care reform through increased tobacco taxes. Though Proposition 86 guarantees hospitals a river of cash, PRI's John R. Graham notes, "It reduces their incentives to care for patients -- from whom they would earn less revenue -- and increases their dependency on tobacco money.''
The measure would also enroll more children in government-run healthcare and reduce families' health care choices. Voters will decide if that is the policy they want.
On Proposition 87, the California Clean Energy Initiative, voters can decide if slapping new levies on oil companies is the path to energy efficiency and a cleaner environment. On this measure, voters can also decide if they want to create a new government bureaucracy in which California already abounds. As Pepperdine economist Gary Galles notes, Proposition 87 "requires blind faith that future bureaucrats will somehow discover precisely what to do and will perform it well, despite all the common bureaucratic disincentives."
On Proposition 88, voters can decide if it is good policy to levy a $50 statewide parcel tax on every property owner in California. It would be the first such statewide property tax since 1910. The measure dumps the money from this tax into programs such as class-size reduction, which have already consumed some $16 billion but failed to improve student achievement.
As PRI's Lance Izumi notes, Proposition 88 reflects the timeworn credo of the education bureaucracy: increase
government spending and the system will improve. "There is little reason to believe Prop. 88 will improve student achievement," Izumi notes, "but it would succeed in punishing every property owner in the state and burdening local governments."
The voters who will make the call on that measure have also been getting a lot of campaign junk mail. They can now decide if they want to pay for such material, even if they disagree with it, through taxpayer financing of political campaigns. That's what Proposition 89 would do, plus limit contributions by business, already limited by Proposition 34. Proposition 89 would also increase already high taxes on corporations and financial institutions. Voters will decide if higher taxes and welfare for politicians constitute sound public policy for California.
Voters can also limit government's power to grab property without compensating the owners by approving Proposition 90. In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. The City of New London, Connecticut, these protections are needed more than ever. Proposition 90 would turn the tables on land-grabbing local governments, and secure homesteads and property against tax-hungry localities.
As California history shows, voters should be in no doubt about their power to set policy through the propositions process.
During the 1970s the state enjoyed a surplus but high property taxes were making it hard for some Californians to keep their homes. In 1978, voters passed new policy through Proposition 13, which limits property taxes.
In 1986, voters made English the official language of California through Proposition 63. In 1998, through Proposition 227, they virtually eliminated the bilingual education program that had been harming the prospects of students.
Ten years ago, in 1996, voters made it the policy of California to show no preference on race, ethnicity and gender in state education, employment and contracting. This was the first time voters anywhere in America had been able to establish policy on this issue, and they took full advantage of it. Tomorrow, voters should keep these cases in mind, along with an important principle:
Public policy on all issues, especially those that call for higher taxes and more government spending, is too important to be left to politicians and unelected bureaucrats.
K. Lloyd Billingsley is Editorial Director at the Pacific Research Institute. He can be reached via email at
lbillingsley@pacificresearch.org.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
