Governor Gavin Newsom’s attorneys argued before the California Supreme Court this week against the right of Californians to vote on a proposed statewide initiative that has already qualified for the ballot in November. The move is shockingly at odds with the governor’s bogus warnings on his Campaign for Democracy fundraising website that “extremist Republicans” are “undermining the most basic tenet of our democracy, the right to vote.”
So why have the governor, state legislature, League of California Cities and others asked the state Supreme Court to take the extraordinary step of removing the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (TPA) from the ballot?
To say that the governor’s legal maneuver is anti-democratic is an understatement. The state constitution specifically guarantees Californians the right to put referenda and initiatives on the ballot. That right was established 113 years ago to keep voters in charge and the legislature in check. Ironically, the governor is using Californians’ tax dollars to pay powerful law firms to disenfranchise voters in this case.
The governor and state bureaucrats who oppose the TPA believe it will eliminate their ability to increase taxes when they can’t rein in state spending. They are also concerned that the executive branch can’t increase bureaucratic fees and costs on taxpayers and localities where there is little accountability.
Yes, the TPA would prevent the government from increasing taxes or enacting hidden fees without voter approval, but under the proposal, the legislature would retain their taxing authority. Requiring state law conform to the constitution’s requirements for raising local taxes is hardly draconian. Current law requires a two-thirds vote of each legislative chamber or passage by a majority of voters. TPA would provide some legal consistency by requiring both.
Prohibiting unelected bureaucrats with no public accountability from imposing “hidden taxes” designed to raise billions of dollars in revenue off the backs of working families and businesses seems reasonable. Under the measure, any revenue increase must be passed by either the voters or an elected body, giving taxpayers more control over potential cost increases.
Californians are facing a cost-of-living crisis that is driven in part by high taxes. We pay the nation’s highest state income, sales and gasoline taxes. Indeed, according to the Census Bureau, we pay more in combined state and local taxes than any other state in the nation.
We also pay billions more in hidden government fees passed through to consumers in the prices we pay for products, services, food, fuel, transportation, utilities and housing. Still, special interests and government leaders continue to demand more from taxpayers and businesses.
California’s prohibitively high cost of living not only contributes to the state’s skyrocketing poverty, rampant homelessness, and rising crime, but it also pushes working families and job-providing businesses out of the state.
Related Articles
Why not abolish all foreign aid?
Will California Supreme Court knock anti-tax measure off the November ballot?
Crucial, not cruel and unusual: The Supreme Court weighs homelessness regulations
Government policies push higher union raises
Ending campus protests protects free speech
Today, Gov. Newsom is facing the worst budget deficit in state history, not because taxes are too low but because government spending is too high. State tax revenue has more than doubled from 2011-12 to 2021-22, and state spending has gone from $140 billion in Jerry Brown’s last year as governor to more than $300 billion this year. It seems Newsom is worried the TPA will tie his hands when it comes to sticking taxpayers with his reckless spending.
Proponents of the TPA have taken all the appropriate statutory steps to place their proposed initiative on the ballot. And while fair-minded individuals may hold different opinions about this initiative, it should be up to the people to decide, not judges.
As such, the governor and his Democratic allies should not be fighting their constituents and depriving them of their constitutional right to vote in November.
Lance Christensen is the Vice President of Government Affairs at the California Policy Center.