In a shocking exercise of raw political power that comes with one-party rule, the California Supreme Court has removed the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act, a qualified initiative, from the November ballot. Doing the bidding of Gov. Gavin Newsom and the state’s supermajority legislative leaders, they have ignored the rights of more than 1.4 million California voters who signed petitions to put the initiative on the ballot.
The Taxpayer Protection Act, or TPA, is the latest battle in the 46-year war over whether it will or will not be easier to raise taxes in California. TPA was sponsored by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, the California Business Roundtable, and the California Business Properties Association. It had broad support among hundreds of business associations, chambers of commerce and virtually every taxpayer association in California all concerned with the preservation of Propositions 13 and 218.
Proposition 13, adopted by voters in 1978, cut property taxes and capped annual increases in taxable value. It requires a two-thirds vote of each house of the legislature to increase taxes at the state level and imposes voter approval requirements for local taxes. Proposition 218 solidified the right to vote on all local taxes and set rules for fees on property so that they could not be imposed as an end-run around Proposition 13’s property tax rate cap.
Tax-and-spend interests have sought to destroy Propositions 13 and 218 ever since, persuading courts to carve loopholes in their constitutional protections and invent new ways for government agencies to raise revenue. Taxpayer advocates, often led by the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, have come back time and again with new initiatives to close those loopholes.
That’s exactly what the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act was written to accomplish — it restored, not revised, the state constitution.
But the California Supreme Court, in defiance of reality, declared that the TPA was a “revision” of the constitution, something that can only be launched by the legislature through a constitutional convention.
A close look at the decision reveals that the court has now devolved into just another tool of the progressive power structure in California. Ignoring over 100 years of case law recognizing the court’s duty to “jealously guard” the initiative power, the court now sees no value in the right of the sovereign people to control their government. Hiram Johnson must be spinning in his grave.
Now, the threat to Proposition 13 has never been greater. The Legislature has placed two proposed constitutional amendments on the November ballot that would make it easier to raise taxes and make it harder for taxpayers to ever again do anything about it.
Assembly Constitutional Amendment 1 (having been amended into what is now ACA 10) would eliminate the two-thirds vote rule for local bonds – which are repaid only by property owners. This two-thirds voter requirement has been a part of the California Constitution since 1879 and its elimination would open the door to virtually unlimited property taxes. Moreover, the tax increment that comes with these bonds creates a lien on real estate, and the failure to satisfy the obligation can result in foreclosure.
Related Articles
Matt Fleming: The plight of a double hater in the presidential election
Susan Shelley: Trump turns over tables with tariff talk
Another California crisis that can be solved with state officials getting out of the way
Many politicians would watch America burn before relinquishing their power
Biden’s attack ad is a missed opportunity ahead of first presidential debate
Just as bad if not worse is Assembly Constitutional Amendment 13. Throughout California’s history, all constitutional amendments have needed a simple majority vote of the electorate to pass. ACA 13 would increase this threshold selectively; citizens’ initiatives that require a two-thirds vote to raise taxes or borrow money would require a two-thirds vote to pass. Even Proposition 13 would have narrowly missed that mark as would all previous constitutional revisions and virtually every initiative since the early 1900’s.
Today, TPA proponents are justifiably angry and disappointed. But like so many instances when progressives overplay their hand, there is a swift and ferocious reaction. Here, the extraordinary coalition of hundreds of taxpayer, business, and property rights organizations – as well as their thousands of members – aren’t going to give up. We all are committed to saving California, no matter how long the battle lasts.
Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
