There could be as many as three tax initiatives on the
November ballot. The Field Poll just
released posed all three to registered voters and reported the results. One of the three is sponsored by Governor
Brown. Another is sponsored by the
California Federation of Teachers - CFT.
(CFT is the smaller of the two teacher unions in California.) A third is sponsored by Molly Munger, a
wealthy individual. The sponsors of all
three have the financial resources to get pay signature-gathering firms to get
their initiatives on the ballot.
Brown
is convinced from focus groups and polling that his initiative has the best
chance of winning. He is also convinced
that if there are two or more tax initiatives on the ballot, voters may reject
them. There have been efforts by the governor to persuade those sponsoring alternative measures to drop them. However, the Field Poll suggests
the CFT initiative is preferred. Brown’s
initiative comes in second; Munger’s comes in third.
(The ballot seems likely to be crowded with other
initiatives unrelated to taxes and folk wisdom has it that voters tend to vote
“no” on everything in such cases. I have
not seen evidence of that. California’s
most famous initiative is Prop 13 which tells you that there were at least 12
other initiatives on the ballot with it.
The most recent cases of general rejection occurred in special elections
– not regular elections as we will have in November 2012 – which featured packages
of interrelated initiatives linked to Governor Schwarzenegger in 2009 and 2004.)
Governor Brown’s initiative contains trigger cuts aimed at
schools. The thinking was that voters
like schools and that pointing a trigger at them would compel them to vote “yes.” But the Field Poll suggests that strategy may
backfire. Sixty-eight percent of voters
don’t like the trigger.
Note: Field did not identify the three initiatives by
governor, CFT, or Munger. Rather it read
the descriptions to respondents below in random order. However, the first one is the governor’s, the
second is Munger, and the third is CFT.
It is important to keep in mind that, except for the third initiative, the
descriptions are not necessarily what the ballot language would be. And they are not necessarily how pro and con
TV ads would depict the initiatives in an actual campaign.
(One) (Another)
proposition is called the “Temporary Taxes to Fund Education and Guarantee
Local Public Safety Funding” initiative.
It would increase state personal income taxes on earnings over 250
thousand dollars for five years and increase the sales tax by one-half cent for
four years. It allocates 89 percent of
the revenues to the k-12 schools and 11 percent to community colleges, and
guarantees funding for public safety services realigned from state to local
governments. Fiscal impact: Estimates of the revenue increases vary from
about 5 to 6.9 billion dollars each year on average for the next four years and
from 3.1 to 3.4 billion dollars in the fifth year. These revenues would be
available to pay for the state’s school and community college funding
requirements and address the state’s budgetary problem by paying for other
spending commitments. If the election were being held today, would you vote YES
or NO on this proposition?
(One) (Another)
proposition is called the “Tax to Benefit Public Schools, Social Services,
Public Safety and Road Maintenance Initiative.” It would add 3 percent to the
personal income tax rate on annual earnings over one million dollars and adds 5
percent for earnings over 2 million dollars. It allocates 36 percent of the new
revenues to the k-12 schools, 24 percent for public colleges and universities,
25 percent for services to children and senior citizens, 10 percent for public
safety and 5 percent for road and bridge maintenance. Fiscal impact: Increased
state personal tax revenues dedicated to public universities, school districts,
community college districts and other local public services. Estimates of the
revenue increases vary from 6 to 9.5 billion dollars in 2012-13 and from 4 to 6
billion dollars for 2013-14, and would tend to grow in later years. If the
election were being held today, would you vote YES or NO on this proposition?
(One) (Another)
proposition is called the “Tax to Fund Education, Preschools and Child Care
Initiative.” It would increase personal income tax rates for individuals
earning over 7,316 dollars with a sliding scale that increases the tax rate
from zero point four percent for the lowest earners to two point two percent
for individuals earning over 2.5 million dollars, and would end after 12
years. It allocates 85% to the k-12
schools and 15% to preschools and child care, and in years of stronger growth
would allocate several hundred million dollars to pay education debt services. Fiscal impact: Increased state personal income tax revenues
varying from 10 to 11 billion dollars per year initially, tending to increase
over time. If the election were being
held today, would you vote YES or NO on this proposition?
The full Field Poll is at
http://www.field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2404.pdf
Some folks can't do without Trigger but maybe Brown could:
Update: An analysis of why CTA (California Teachers Assn.) - the larger of the two major teacher unions in California - is supporting the governor's tax plan is at:
