Skip to content
Subscribe

2012 California Ballot “It’s About Taxes, Stupid!”

Published:

Prop 30 vs. Prop 38: One spearheaded by California’s biggest political heavyweight –Governor Jerry Brown, the other by insurgent “high wealth” activist Molly Munger. Both California ballot initiatives raise taxes. Brown’ s Prop 30 would increase the state sales tax by ¼ cent through the end of 2016 and increase income taxes for those earning over $250,000 through 2018. Munger’s Prop 38 is an across the board permanent income tax increase starting with those earning $ 7,316 per year. But, the measure also creates new early education programs for low income families and earmarks new tax revenues specifically for education.

If they both pass, the highest vote getter prevails. If they both fail, the Governor promised significant budget cuts. Many believe that if Democrats can win veto-proof 2/3rd majorities in both the Senate and the Assembly that the Legislature will increase taxes on its own – bypassing Brown’s pledge not to raise taxes without a vote of the people.

In order to appreciate the importance of these two measures, voters must recall that in 2011, several programs were transferred from the state to local governments, including certain prison, parole and substance abuse treatment programs. In order for local governments to afford running these programs, the state also allocated $6 billion in revenues received from sales tax.

At the same time, the state is obligated by Prop 98 to provide a minimum level of funding to schools. In order to not run afoul of that requirement, Gov. Brown has proposed an increase in the sales tax and a millionaire’s tax. Critics argue that this money will circumvent schools and be deposited in the to-be-created Education Protection Account, leaving an uncertainty as to whether or not schools would ever see any money at all.

The Munger alternative to the funding shortfall is to establish a graduated income tax. Under this plan, taxpayers would pay anywhere from an additional 0.4% to 2.2% depending on income. The funds raised from this tax would go directly to public schools, child-care, preschool programs, and state debt payments.

Both plans aspire to raise more money than is actually mandated under Prop 98 and both contain provisions that require surplus funds to help balance the State debt. Additionally, both plans are mere projections and could fall drastically short depending upon California’s economic health. Prop 30 relies on a healthy consumer base, while Prop 38 relies on a healthy employment environment in order to succeed. Neither plan is a permanent measure, so the only thing that’s certain is that this isn’t the last voters have heard on the issue of education funding.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

2012 California Ballot “It’s About Taxes, Stupid!”

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us