Skip to content
Subscribe

The Sacramento Tea Party

Published:

It is fully 233 years since the American colonists first declared "notaxation without representation" and struck back against their"virtual" representation in the British Parliament. Those times don'tseem so long ago, however, when one considers what the CaliforniaLegislature has just decided to do - namely, raise taxes by 9.3 billion dollars without so much as a vote from the GOP minority. According to the Los Angeles Times,the reason why this "brazen" attack on the democratic process is evenbeing permitted to be mentioned is because of an "arcane loophole instate law that letslegislators pass a tax bill with a simple majority vote -- if the billdoes not raise more revenue."

Well, lovely! So nice to know that when statists can't get their way via argument, they'll just violate therule of law under cover of crisis.

Thistax hike is quite plainly a slap at the much more democraticallyapproved Proposition 13, which requires a 2/3 majority in the Legislature before any new taxes can be imposed. Of course, theirhypocritical name notwithstanding, one can't expect the Democrats torecognize such a fact. After all, the neanderthals on the other sidesimply don't recognize how vitally important it is that we fix thebudget by taxing one of the most vital resources people need in orderto work. Yes, that's right, the Democrats plan to finance their plan onthe backs of not oil companies, but the people who buy from them -namely, the average California consumer. Thank God there's no tax onbikes...darn it, now I've given them ideas.

Of course, the GOP is rightly screaming bloody murder. Republican Assemblyleader Michael Villines called the plan "funny math" and "trickery."Unfortunately, despite its obvious truth, the latter accusation isprobably the weaker because the idea of a politician accusing hisfellows of trickery is somewhat comparable to a cat accusing his fellowcats of cruelty to mice. More importantly, a group of anti-taxadvocates have planned to file suit against the Democrats for theirvicious disregard for the balance of power.

"If they proceed with thisproposal to raise taxes with a simple majority vote, they will be suedand they will lose," Jon Coupal, President of the Howard JarvisTaxpayers' association, told the Los Angeles Times. One hopes that Mr.Coupal's optimism is warranted, considering that California's courts don't have the best history of respecting the rule of law.

Indeed, disrespect for the rule of law seems to be the "in thing"nowadays with the Democratic majority. If one reads the quotes fromthose Democrats responsible for this behavior, the cacophany oftotalitarian, anti-debate rhetoric immediately blasts the ears. "Sen.Steinberg and I are committed to getting this job done with orwithout our Republican colleagues," says Assembly Speaker Karen Bass(D-Los Angeles), while Senate President Pro Tem Darrel Steinbergsanctimoniously sniffs, "there is an even greater responsibilitythan practicing bipartisanship,and that is to govern. And that is what we intend to do here today."

Yes, because clearly, using arcane legal rules to get around thoseactually vested with the power to govern is an example of exemplarygovernance. Come to think of it, I think I read this language somewherein the voting guide - right between War is Peace and Ignorance isStrength, that is.

Still, even if the legal challenge fails, one can count on theRepublicans to mount a concerted and very reasonable opposition to thisbit of legalistic malfeasance. It certainly will be easy, given thatthe taxes imposed by the Democrats are just harsh enough that most ofCalifornia's citizens will undoubtedly feel the pinch. It's a goodthing, too, because while the Democrats might be interested in playing Lord North,some of us still believe in the old American ideas that liberated usfrom London. Let's hope we don't have to do the same to Sacramento.

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

The Sacramento Tea Party

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