Supermajority

HJTA’s 2018 scorecard identifies taxpayer allies, foes

December 3, 2018 By Jon Coupal 3 Comments

In 2018, perhaps scared off by the specter of an upcoming election and the recall of state Sen. Josh Newman, D-Fullerton, the California Legislature approved no new taxes for only the second time in the last six years. This was a radical departure from a year earlier, when three new taxes were approved.

However, that’s not to say that the Legislature didn’t try. New taxes on a host of items, including guns, fireworks, water and a sales tax on services were introduced without success. Next year, with tax-and-spend politicians holding a commanding two-thirds supermajority in both houses of the Legislature, the pressure to cave on new taxes will be even greater.

Considering what the future may hold, it is easy for taxpayers to question whether legislators will ever be held accountable. However, a useful tool to assist taxpayers is the annual legislative Report Card published by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Introduced back in 2007, the purpose of the report card is to document how lawmakers have voted on those issues most important to taxpayers.

Lawmakers tend to hide behind statements, sometimes of questionable truth, to justify their votes. The report card sets aside motives, back-room deal negotiations and party affiliations to focus on the one question that matters: did legislators stand up for the interests of taxpayers? While politicians may waver in their allegiance, the numbers don’t lie.

To read the entire column, please click here.

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: California legislature, HJTA, Howard Jarvis, Jon Coupal, Supermajority, taxes

A Major Reason to Protect the Initiative Process

October 31, 2018 By Joel Fox 3 Comments

At the Valley Industry and Commerce Association (VICA) annual conference last Friday a member of the audience, after listening to a discussion of the initiatives on the ballot and the initiative process in general, asked the panel why we even have the initiative process. As a member of that panel I offered an answer different from my fellow panelists— because California is becoming a one-party state.

The audience member’s question is a fair one. When one hears about measures sponsored by special interests, the millions of dollars it takes to qualifying and promote a proposition or the money raised to oppose some measures (a record setting $100-million plus to oppose the dialysis measure, Proposition 8), the concerns of ballot-box budgeting and laws created that don’t mesh with other laws on the books, while initiatives can only be changed by another vote of the people, you can understand why a question asking the need for the initiative process is asked.

Panelists responded to the question in various ways about energizing the electorate; having voters participating in political decisions.

I raised the issue that reflects modern day political California that demands protection of the initiative process: California is a one-party state.

The majority party, which soon could once again control the legislature with a supermajority two-thirds makeup and perhaps hold that margin for some time, is under the influence of an aggressive, progressive wing and special interests that benefit from legislative decisions. While the voters who elect this legislature may choose Democrats over a tarnished Republican Party, they don’t necessarily concur with the hard line agenda that is put forth. That’s why the initiative is a must as a possible check if the legislature goes too far or doesn’t address areas of voters’ concerns.

The controlling powers would prefer not to have competition from the initiative process. You can see that in legislation advanced to attempt to change rules associated with the initiative to give the majority more control over the process or even to make it harder to pass initiatives.

A couple of years ago, legislation passed to assure that all initiatives would appear on the November ballot. The political reason was because larger voter turnouts favored the majority party.

The last couple of years, bills reached Governor Brown’s desk to change the way professional signature gatherers are paid. Instead of paying them per signature, the bill demanded that paid signature gatherers receive a flat fee. The politics behind it was to take some of the incentive away from signature gatherers and to make it tougher to qualify measures.

Governor Brown vetoed both bills saying changing the rules would make it tougher to qualify a measure and in turn would allow only well-healed interests from qualifying initiatives.

What would the next governor do if and when that bill comes back?

(There has even been a desire to prohibit payment for initiative signature gathering but courts have stopped that move.)

The initiative process was created as a check on the legislature, which was controlled by outside interest at the beginning by the twentieth century. To a large degree matters have not changed. The initiative process must be protected as a check on the legislators and the interests that influence them.

Joel Fox is editor and co-publisher of Fox and Hounds Daily.

This article was originally published by Fox and Hounds Daily.

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: Initiative process, Prop. 8, Supermajority

The GOP Needs to Improve Its Marketing Skills

December 21, 2016 By Gary Aminoff 7 Comments

Photo courtesy of DonkeyHotey, flickr

California is now a one-party state, with Democrats having a supermajority in both the state Assembly and Senate.

How is it that the GOP can’t adequately explain to California residents that our ideas are better? Why is it that Republicans can’t convince Californians that our solutions will bring prosperity and a better life for everyone, Democrats included? The fact is that Republicans in California are poor marketers. We have a great product but don’t know how to sell it.

We need to learn how to market it. You can manufacture a great widget that will do incredible things, including saving people tons of money. But if you don’t know how to market it, you won’t make any sales, even if it is better than sliced bread.

The blame is not completely with the Republican Party. Selling our ideas is only one of the ways we can improve our standing with California voters. We have many obstacles in California. The populous cities of the state are predominantly filled with secular progressives who aren’t interested in limited government, lower taxes and a better business environment. The unions run the Democrat Party and they and multi-millionaire Democrats provide funding to Democrats and their candidates that Republicans can only dream about. It isn’t easy to overcome the Democrat funding, no matter how well we sell our ideas.

Also, the Democrats have been very successful over the past several decades in convincing voters that Republicans are heartless, racist, misogynist and white supremacists, without compassion, and who are essentially evil. We have let them get away with that and have done very little to counter those false charges.

We also need to get active in the inner cities and show the African American community that we care about them. We do, but saying so means nothing compared to getting into the communities and actually doing something to help their community.

We have been active in the Latino community, and have several Latino-American elected officials and party leaders. Programs like the Grow Elect program are doing great things in the Latino community, and state and local leaders like Mario Guerra, Jack Guerrero, Ignacio Velazquez, Alex Vargas and others are making a big difference in the Latino community. We need to do more to show Latinos that their future and the prosperity for their families lies with the Republican Party.

With the supermajority now in the Legislature, one way we can make a public relations difference is to propose legislation that will benefit Californians. Go the the extremes. Eliminate the carbon tax, reduce stifling regulations on business, propose lowering taxes. Of course, none of these bills will pass, but we can then issue press releases that Republicans are trying to make life better for Californians by submitting important bills that are being voted down by Democrats. Let’s learn how to use the press and public relations. In the next two years let’s see if we can convince Californians to try voting for Republicans. Let’s convince the voters that they have nothing to lose, and might have everything to gain.

I know we can do it.

By Gary Aminoff, Treasurer, The Republican Party of Los Angeles County

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: CA GOP, California legislature, Supermajority

Can California’s Legislative Supermajority Act Responsibly?

December 5, 2016 By Wayne Hughes, Jr. 7 Comments

After a thunderstorm of post-election recounts across the Golden State, it appears that Democrats have reclaimed a supermajority in the California Legislature.

Whatever one’s political sway – and this applies to national election results, as well – it’s important for all voters to respect that “the people have spoken,” turn the page and hope for the best.

Having said that, as a proud entrepreneur, supporter of my community, rancher and surfer, I love the great state of California and want nothing more than to see our economy and future thrive for generations to come. To that end, I thought it might be timely to offer our new crop of Democrats in the State Capitol a few words of instructive advice before they settle in all too soon.

First and foremost, think carefully about the consequences of your agenda. There are more than a few rumblings about the new Legislature and governor poised to tackle many big issues in the new year – issues for which the two-thirds vote, in my opinion, play a critically important role in assuring a level of caution and restraint. Transportation and infrastructure reform, climate change, affordable housing are some of the hot-button items that appear looming on the legislative horizon. To many, these may seem noble and venerable priorities and opportunities for an improved quality of life. But at what cost – literally? Will these trailblazing new policies be funded on the backs of small business owners, working families and future generations through taxes, fees, levies, assessments and other costs? Californians already pay the highest income tax, statewide sales tax, gas taxes, minimum wage and myriad fees to comply with onerous regulations. A bold agenda is one thing, but crippling our small employers and communities with hordes of new, unanticipated costs is another – and one that will further prolong our state’s economic and jobs recovery. Think before you act.

Second, don’t forsake your Republican colleagues in the Legislature – they represent voters, too. It may be easy for some to render the GOP irrelevant – but they’re not. And neither are the many, many voters in their districts who are looking to them for hope, help and a future bursting with promise. The Moderate Democrats are and will continue to be a vital bloc, focused on advancing a pro-business agenda within their party. I am hopeful that they will remain true to their words on the campaign trail and match their actions with their slogans – and inspire others within the Democratic Party to follow their direction. But no one should ever count the Republicans out in California – theirs is a party of ideas, individualism, and economic success. A one-party rule can have dire consequences if the majority fails to heed the thoughts, ideas and concerns of everyone in the electorate. Work across the aisle every day, respect the GOP, and it will result in better policy for everyone in the long haul.

Finally, it’s time to focus on making California government work more efficiently for the people. It’s time to clean up the still-obscene piles of waste, paper, logjams and errors that are ultimately treating taxpayers like a non-stop ATM. I hope our leaders and others will join me in making this a primary focus and priority in 2017 and beyond. I’m committed to this cleanup because I’ve heard from one too many small business owners, seniors, veterans and community leaders that our politicians and bureaucrats are still spending hard-earned tax dollars like drunken sailors (apologies, drunken sailors). Our new supermajority should halt discussions about new spending and first look to eliminate much of the inefficiencies and frivolity that have grossly infected our mammoth government beast. Our leaders should continue a bipartisan crusade for historic pension, workers’ comp and unemployment insurance reform – all costs that threaten to leave our children’s children with irreparable debt. And the new legislature must continue to insist on opening the books of every department, agency and operation, demanding answers to where our money is being spent, and seeking alternatives or reductions that will improve efficiency and keep more resources in the pockets of families, consumers and “mom and pops”? We should all urge our legislators to push for increased transparency and accountability with every single program and activity so that Golden State government works for us, not for itself. We need to regularly audit our expenses. It’s something every job creator must do each day if they want to keep their doors open; why shouldn’t the “body politic” which we’re all funding be held to that same standard?

November 8^th is finally behind us. The ads have stopped running, the polls have closed, and the people have, indeed, spoken. Now is not the time for protests, sour grapes, crossed arms or furrowed brows. Now is the time for our newly-electeds to take a breath, take their oath of office, and take their job seriously. I’m hopeful that the new supermajority will remember to think about the impact of their agenda, work with Republicans who still represent and serve many voters out there, and fight vigorously to make our government more efficient – and affordable – for all of us. That’s the California wave all of us will be proud to ride for many years to come.

Wayne Hughes, Jr. is a California businessman, philanthropist and founder of SkyRose Ranch and Serving California in Central California which treats veterans with PTSD and other disorders. Find out more atwww.bwaynehughesjr.com @BWayneHughesJr

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: California legislature, Jerry Brown, Supermajority

What Threat Does a Democratic Supermajority in the Legislature Really Pose?

October 19, 2016 By John Seiler 5 Comments

Photo courtesy Franco Folini, flickr

Once again, we’re confronted with the possibility of Democrats grabbing two-thirds control of both houses of the California Legislature. As with the U.S. Senate at the national level, because of higher voter turnout Democrats in California generally do better in presidential election years (2008, 2012) than in the non-presidential years (2010, Tea Party time, and 2014).

The last time this happened, after the 2012 election, Gov. Jerry Brown joked to Democrats in the Legislature, “Remember, hug a Republican.” But then Dems had a problem leveraging their two-thirds supermajorities because several legislators were promoted to the state Senate or the U.S. Congress, leaving vacant seats. Then special elections sometimes elected Republicans, such as state Sen. Andy Vidak of Hanford in July 2013. That election ran up $5 million in campaign costs.

It used to be the two-thirds vote was needed to pass the state budget. That brought up the quasi-undemocratic Gang of Five meetings of the governor and the Democratic and Republican leaders of the Assembly and state Senate. Republicans had real clout and could delay passage of a budget for weeks, even months.

All that ended in 2010, when voters passed Proposition 25, allowing a majority vote for passing the budget. Also helping pass budgets by the June 15 deadline have been large new revenues from the economic recovery and the adept moves of a governor now in his fourth term in office.

Today, the two-thirds supermajority only applies to tax increases, putting measures on the ballot and reversing gubernatorial vetoes.

Tax increases likely won’t be on the agenda because two more probably are going to pass on Nov. 8: Proposition 55, the “extension” of Proposition 30 from 2012. And Proposition 56, the $2 a pack increase in cigarette taxes to further impoverish poor and lower-middle-class smokers. Even Democrats have a limit of how much they can increase taxes. (Don’t they?)

Of course, if the economy tanks next year, once again we’ll have $20 billion budget deficits, and howls for higher taxes to pay for the overspending during the recent years of prosperity. But the deficits usually lag the start of a recession by a year or two, bringing us to 2018, another election year, so the increases would just be put on the ballot.

As to putting measures on the ballot, after the 17 mind-numbing initiatives put before voters this year, does anyone really want any more in 2018? How about that “advisory” initiative, Proposition 59, stuck before voters when the Legislature passed Senate Bill 254? It urges California members of Congress to reverse the Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that allowed campaign contributions by corporations.

Here’s some advice to the Legislature: Stop putting initiatives on the ballot! Let the people only do so through the signature process.

As to overturning vetoes by governors, the last time that happened was in 1979. If Dems do regain their two-thirds majorities, what’s likely to happen is a repeat of 2013: fighting over open seats interspersed with increased clout for moderate Democrats.

As Capital Public Radio reported in January 2013, “The most important members of the California Legislature this year might not be the two Democratic leaders – despite the two-thirds supermajorities they hold in each chamber. And it almost certainly won’t be the Republicans. They’ve been courted for key votes in recent years but now don’t have the numbers to block any bills on their own. The leverage in this legislative session may well lie with a newly-critical voting bloc: moderate Democrats.”

Republicans’ role? Pretty much what it has been in recent years. They sometimes pair up with Democrats to give bipartisan legitimacy to bills, such as the excellent asset forfeiture bill passed this year. And they put on the eyeshades like state Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa, a CPA, and look at the budget numbers.

It’s something. And it’s not likely to change until the return of the Emperor Norton.

Veteran California columnist John Seiler now edits the Seiler Report. His email: writejohnseiler@gmail.com

This piece was originally published by Fox and Hounds Daily.

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: Citizens United, John Moorlach, John Seiler, Prop. 25, Supermajority

Reprieve for Prop. 13

November 11, 2014 By Jon Coupal 3 Comments

By now, most Californians have read dozens of analyses from experts and partisans alike about the meaning of last Tuesday’s election. Analyzing the national scene is not rocket science. Republicans romped and Democrats took a shellacking.

But understanding the impact here in ever-so-blue California is a bit more complicated. While it is true that Republicans, who tend to be more taxpayer friendly, did not win a single statewide seat, the news for fans of Proposition 13 is actually quite good.

Rather than focus on the statewide races, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association was laser focused on using our political muscle to prevent the tax-and-spend majority party from securing the dreaded two-thirds supermajority in both the California Senate and Assembly. The reason why a two-thirds supermajority is so dangerous is two-fold. First, under Proposition 13, taxes imposed by the state cannot be imposed without the two-thirds vote. As long as the minority Republicans hold firm against tax hikes, Californians will be protected. (And it’s not like California needs higher taxes. We already have the highest income tax rate, the highest sales tax rate and the highest gas tax in America).

Second, it takes a two-thirds vote of each house to place a proposed amendment to the California Constitution on the ballot. Had the majority party achieved the supermajority, it could have placed anti-Proposition 13 measures on the ballot at will. But, because the Democrats were thwarted in their efforts, they will have to convince their political allies – principally the public sector unions – to spend several million dollars to collect the necessary signatures to qualify such a proposal.

Another observation about this year’s election is that, as if there were any doubt, the branding of Proposition 13 has never been stronger. Both true Proposition 13 defenders and pretenders used Proposition 13 as a talking point in their campaigns. Turns out that those candidates who were true Proposition 13 defenders – meaning they had the endorsement of the HJTA Political Action Committee – did very well. So much, in fact, that most of the endorsed candidates won, even those whom the pundits thought had little chance of victory.

That Proposition 13 itself was such a centerpiece of this election cycle is astounding. This landmark measure was on the ballot more than 35 years ago and yet incumbent legislators who had bad Proposition 13 votes while in the Legislature suddenly felt vulnerable. A former legislator who was openly anti-Proposition 13 lost badly to an HJTA endorsed candidate, Janet Nguyen, in a contested Senate seat. Her opponent, Jose Solorio, was in such deep trouble that Governor Brown cut one of his very few television ads this election cycle in a failed attempt to save him. As in 1978, Jerry Brown was bested by Proposition 13.

But to those who think that these political victories allow us a chance to rest, think again. Already, the enemies of Proposition 13 are conducting extensive political research – both polling and focus groups – to determine how best to dismantle these critical taxpayer protections. And left leaning anti-taxpayer groups have intensified their efforts to convince local governments and school district boards to pass anti-Proposition 13 “resolutions.” These resolutions may be non-binding, but our adversaries are laying the groundwork for a repeal of Proposition 13 in 2016. That much is very clear.

But for now, let’s enjoy the victories just achieved. Just in time for the coming holiday, taxpayers and homeowners in California have much to be thankful for. And while we realize our reprieve will be short and that we must prepare for battle anew in a few short weeks, these victories give us the much needed hope that California can, once again, become the Golden State it once was.

Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association — California’s largest grass-roots taxpayer organization dedicated to the protection of Proposition 13 and the advancement of taxpayers’ rights.

This piece was originally published on HJTA.org

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: HTJA, Janet Nguyen, Jerry Brown, Jon Coupal, Jose Solorio, Prop 13, Supermajority

A Few Good Fits for Desperately Hungry Republicans

November 9, 2014 By Steven Greenhut 4 Comments

PHOTO BY RBERTEIG

The wave that swept Republicans back into power in blue states such as Colorado, Maryland, Maine, and Massachusetts didn’t quite reach California, the state that once produced Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. In fact, every Republican candidate for statewide constitutional office lost. Governor Jerry Brown creamed his Republican opponent—and Brown didn’t even run a campaign. Democrats maintained strong majorities in both legislative houses. So why are California GOP officials so giddy about how the election played out?

Two reasons come to mind. First, Republicans won three critical state senate races and stopped the Democrats from holding a supermajority in that body. Election night results looked good for Republican prospects in the state assembly, too, though the final counts in two races will determine whether the GOP prevents a Democratic supermajority in the lower house. Democrats need at least two-thirds of those seats to meet the state constitution’s threshold for passing tax increases. Republicans, as a rule, oppose every new tax increase in a state that already has the nation’s highest individual income-tax rate.

Second, while it still has no idea how to win a statewide election, the California GOP has figured out how to win in targeted districts—even in some that lean Democratic. In the last legislative session, Democrats lost their supermajority in the state senate after scandal drove three legislators from office. One was convicted of voter fraud and perjury, and two others face federal corruption charges. But Republicans chose not to focus on Democratic foibles. Instead, under the leadership of former state senator Jim Brulte, the party put its resources into a handful of winnable races.

Sacramento-based GOP political consultant Jeff Randle said that the Republicans “had to show incremental progress [Tuesday] night and we did that by winning with really good candidates.” Randle, who helps recruit viable candidates through the Trailblazers program, credited the party’s successes to its newfound emphasis on “finding candidates that match their districts.” The best example may be Senator Andy Vidak, a Spanish-speaking cherry farmer from the San Joaquin Valley. Though Democrats enjoy a 20-point voter-registration edge in Vidak’s heavily Latino district, voters in the politically moderate farm region tend to favor independence. Vidak, a cowboy hat-wearing conservative populist, beat his Democratic rival, Fresno school board trustee Luis Chavez, by 10 points.

Republicans also held a senate seat that many pollsters and professional political operatives predicted they would lose. Anthony Cannella, the former mayor of the San Joaquin Valley city of Ceres and son of former Democratic state assemblyman Sal Cannella, prevailed in part by drawing union support away from his Democratic challenger, Shawn Bagley. And Republicans scored a key win in ethnically diverse and politically competitive central Orange County, where county supervisor Janet Nguyen won a state senate seat in a race in which Republicans effectively tapped Asian support. Asians now represent 12 percent of California voters, and they turn out in higher percentages than many other ethnic groups. So Nguyen was another GOP candidate who matched well with her district.

In the assembly, the Republicans did well in all but one of their targeted races. In the eastern Bay Area, the socially moderate Catherine Baker took a hard line on public-employee unions, strongly opposing the 2013 Bay Area Rapid Transit strike in a district that spans Orinda and Walnut Creek east of the Berkeley Hills to the Tri-Valley—in other words, a district full of voting commuters hard hit by two four-day work stoppages in July and October of last year. Pending a final count of absentee and provisional ballots, Baker leads Democrat and union activist Tim Sbranti in the contest for an open assembly seat. Retired police officer Tom Lackey unseated the Democratic incumbent in the Palmdale area, and Korean-American Young Kim, a former staffer for veteran Republican congressman Ed Royce, ousted incumbent assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva, 56 percent to 44 percent, in northern Orange County.

One could argue, however, that the Democrats should never have held some of these seats in the first place. “It’s true Republicans did well, but that’s only because Democrats overreached so far,” said Grant Gillham, a political consultant and former Republican staffer. “You’re living in an alley, eating out of garbage cans and you find half of a Big Mac and you think you’ve hit the jackpot. That’s the situation with Republicans now,” he said, jokingly. He’s got a point, but half a Big Mac is looking pretty good to a desperately hungry party.

This piece was originally published on by City Journal.

Steven Greenhut is the California columnist for U-T San Diego. Write to him at steven.greenhut@utsandiego.com.

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: Andy Vidak, Anthony Cannella, CA Assembly, CA Senate, Election 2014, Midterms, Supermajority