October 29, 2006
Proposition 1C
The “Prop 1” series are almost all bond issues. It is in my interest to make a principled stand against Bonds* that don’t go towards infrastructural improvements to the State. 1C is a Bond, and so gets a “No” vote from me...
This is a tough one, however. I really want to give money for all the things they’re gonna give money to. Ultimately, it comes down to this: I don’t see that the State ought to be spending US$2.8billion right away, and I don’t see that the need is so urgent that we ought to be spending US$6billion over 30 years to get that money right way. So no on 1C. Raise the taxes, spend US$204million that would have been spent on repayment on the program instead. We’ll be better off in the long run...
*Yeah, I made a fiscal pun. Sue me.
Posted by Andrew at 01:07 PM | Comments (0)
Proposition 1B
This is a Bond initiative. I usually vote against Bonds on principle (actually, on interest. But never mind that). This year, I’m changing thing just a bit: if the Bond is to fund an ongoing project, I’ll vote against it. If it’s for a capital/infrastructural improvement, I’ll vote for it. The principle is this: Taking out a loan for my phone bill is absurd. Taking out a loan to fix my roof may well be necessary...
On the surface, this Bond seems to meet my criterion. Port Security is a major issue, and something for which we can legitimately issue bonds. Yet looking at where the money will actually be spent: US$11.250billion on road improvement, US$4billion on public transit, etc. These are good and worthy things. Yet they are ongoing issues, not capital improvements. We ought to raise taxes for this stuff. Taking out a loan simply costs too much over the long haul...
Posted by Andrew at 12:04 PM | Comments (0)
October 27, 2006
Being Propositioned in Election 2006: Proposition 1A
Proposition 1A is a (state) constitutional amendment about which puts all gas-tax revenue into the Transportation fund, rather than putting it into the General fund. I can see both sides on this issue. On one wrist, taxes on Gas are a fairly direct tax on using a state-provided bit of infrastructure (roads). Thus it makes sense to make the people who use roads pay for them...
At the same time, it happens that the State’s general fund can be overdrawn and thus the legislature may want to raid it to pay for things like schools or prisons. Flexibility isn’t an unimportant thing...
Ultimately, I’m going to vote against this one. Sales taxes are sales taxes; there are some major pieces of infrastructure (I’m looking at you: schools and prisons) which benefit everyone and have almost no directly taxable inputs or outcomes. Since damned near everyone in the State drives, this is a fairly broad tax across the entire population. I’m not married to this opinion, though. If you have an argument in favor of this prop, let me know...
Posted by Andrew at 02:22 AM | Comments (0)