For those paying close attention to the race for California Governor, there has been a lot of criticism heaped on the candidacy of Treasurer Phil Angelides for failing to have any consistency message or theme throughout his campaign. Actually, all along, one of the reasons why the Schwarzenegger campaign has been so successful in defining Angelides’ campaign is because they have, in fact, discover the single consistent theme of the Governor’s Democrat opponent: Phil Angelides cannot help but support tax increases. Not some of them – ALL of them.
So it really isn’t that surprising or newsworthy that yesterday, the Democrat nominee for Governor endorsed Proposition 89, which imposes yet another tax on Californians — this time he is embracing a corporate tax increase (of course, FR readers understand that a tax on companies simply means that the products and/or services provided by that company will increase costs to we, the consumers).
Of course, every one of Phil’s calls for a tax increase comes with support for yet another program to increase the size and scope of California government. In this case, Angelides is embracing the use of taxpayer dollars to finance the campaigns of politicians running for office. This is a horrible idea. There are a number of reasons why the public financing of campaigns is a bad idea, but the single greatest reason is perversion of the first amendment. It is a cornerstone of American principle that we all enjoy the right to freedom of political speech — you should and can say anything, or express any view or position, as a candidate for office in this country. Whether you are conservative, liberal, socialist, communist, fascist or a cracker (see Perata’s comments today), you have the right to say and express your political views in America.
But for the government to ‘sanction’ what you say by taking tax dollars and giving them to candidates is outrageous.
It is completely ‘un-American’ to have tax dollars used to espouse political beliefs. And it is even more of a travesty to set up a system that penalizes those who object to this kind of system, and objects to rules that are set up to literally drive the Freedom of Speech out of the political system.
There is no doubt that there are problems with how the financing of campaigns has evolved, especially in recent decades. The reality is that political giving these days is overwhelmingly dominated by those who have interests with the government — whether labor unions who are looking out for their public sector employees — or corporations trying to protect a subsidy that aids their particular business.
**There is more – click the link**
August 4th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Your last point is your best one: legislators (and even Arnold) are forced to have their tin cups out all year long to fund their campaigns. Most people wouldn’t mind spending a few more dollars to have their elected officials put their priorities first.
As for spending tax dollars on things you don’t believe in … the word “Iraq” comes to mind for 60% of Californians.
August 4th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Note that it is the Corporations and not the unions that foot the bill. This is fair and balanced reform!!
August 4th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Unfortunately, in order to preserve the freedoms we all cherish and the republican form of government guaranteed to us by Art. IV, Section 4 of the US Constitution, we must on occasion check the actions of those few who would deprive the rest of us of our rights.
Unfortunately, self-serving unions, corporations, and politicians have used campaign cash to push the American people out of the discussion on a whole host of issues in order to line their pockets or maintain power.
Where would the Republican Party be on immigration without the huge financial clout of the Chamber of Commerce?
Where would the Democracts be on education reform without the financial clout of the CTA?
These interest groups have coopted government for their own ends to the detriment of the vast majority of Californians, which unchecked will continue to severely impede efforts to face the challenges confronting California.
Prop 89 might not be perfect, but it is a vast improvement on the status quo.
August 5th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Right on, Steven! Raising my hand as part of that 60% right here!