top
California
California
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Should Progressives Support Proposition 88?

by Paul Hogarth, Beyond Chron (reposted)
As California continues to be the 43rd state in the nation in education spending (due to Prop 13 and Arnold Schwarzenegger), some education advocates have placed Proposition 88 on the November ballot to address this problem. Funded by Netflix founder Reed Hastings and venture capitalist John Doerr, the $50 parcel tax would raise $470 million a year to fund the state’s public schools. Locally, Prop 88 has the support of the San Francisco Bay Guardian – whose endorsement carries enormous weight among the city’s left-leaning voters, especially in down-ballot races with minimal media coverage. But not all progressives and public school advocates think it’s a good idea.
The California Democratic Party, the state PTA and the state Federation of Teachers are all against it, while the California Teachers Association remains neutral. This puts these groups in common cause with anti-tax zealots like the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers’ Association. In the Official Ballot Argument against Prop 88, right-wing opponents say that it undermines the “clear intent of Prop 13 to limit property taxes,” an argument not likely to convince many voters who care about education. But progressives have very different reasons for opposing Proposition 88.

“It’s a regressive tax that will unfairly burden low-income homeowners,” said School Board candidate Jane Kim. “We just don’t have the guts to tax wealthy individuals and businesses fairly, and we should be going after Prop 13.” Prop 88 would charge every parcel of real property in the state (regardless of size or value) a flat $50 fee. While elderly and disabled homeowners have an exemption, there is no equivalent break for low-income homeowners or parcels with low property values. “A $50 parcel tax is nothing for someone living in a $3 million house,” said Natasha Marsh of the League of Pissed Off Voters, but it’s another expense for working-class people struggling to get by.

But Tim Redmond, executive editor of the Bay Guardian, argues that this is not realistic. “In a perfect world and in a relatively sane world, property taxes in Marin would pay for schools in Bayview,” he explained. And while a parcel tax is more regressive than an income tax, it is far less regressive than a sales tax, which disproportionately hurts poor people the most. “Only those who own property will pay it -- not renters,” said Redmond. “And unlike bond measures, landlords in San Francisco can’t pass it on to their tenants. It’s hard for me to oppose anything that is remotely non-regressive and with the $50 parcel tax, the schools will be better off than they are now.”

Read More
http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=3770#more
Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by Keith Richard Radford Jr. (webmaster [at] theevilnextdoor.com)
Most of these sex offenders have families, friends, relatives, and
children. Some are required to register for much lesser crimes of
flashing, prostitution, and a host of other moral offences.

contrary to the media’s torch, grouping all registered sex offenders
as dangerous. Even the DOJ in a report states American politicians have lied.

This you can find on the Department Of Justice website,
November 2003, NCJ 198281. http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/rsorp94.txt

In fact only 3.5% of new sex offences are committed by offender on the sex offender's registry. The rest are committed by unregistered citizens.

Most are contributing to their neighborhoods as workers tax payers and
family supporters. Is that what people want so badly to destroy?

To say it is the moral way to deal with the situation is not true.

To try to say sex offenders can not be rehabilitated is a criminal
statement by Politicians.

To continue to inflict suffering on those that are meeting society’s
needs is criminal.

Please remit your mailing address, Post Office Box, or Mail Stop, and I
will send a copy free of charge.

Or see it now on YouTube at
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=evil9999999999999999

Best regards,
Keith Richard Radford Jr.
http://www.SOSunite.com
http://www.youtube.com/sosunite
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$180.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network