Posted by BOE Member George Runner at 6:14 am on May 17, 2011 1 Comment
Treasurer Bill Lockyer caused waves last month when he suggested
that given Republican lawmakers’ opposition to higher taxes, their
districts should bear the brunt of spending cuts. He said, “The
people who want less government ought to be at the front of that
line to get less government.”
Senate Democrat Leader Darrell Steinberg expressed openness to
the idea, saying, “You don’t want to pay for government, well then,
you get less of it.” He added that any district-targeted cuts
should not hurt “kids or the vulnerable” but instead be limited to
“convenience services that affect adults.”
Outrage to the proposal—appropriately so—came fast and
furious.
Senate Vice-Chair Bob Huff said the proposal was “just
nuts.”
Jon Coupal of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Foundation compared
the idea to the strong arm tactics of an organized crime protection
racket. He also suggested it might violate the equal protection
guarantees found in both our state and federal constitutions.
Even the Los Angeles Times called the plan “ham-fisted
and wrong.”
Mr.… Read More