Believe it or not – it’s true. In one of the most blatant attempts that I have ever seen to deprive voters of a remotely fair and remotely balanced title and summary for a ballot measure, the state legislature approved wording for Proposition 1A for the ballot that literally fails to mention that voters are being asked to make a trade off — a spending cap (subject to a 2/3 legislative override via tax increases) in exchange for extending massive taxes for additional years. There is a case to be made to the voters for passing 1A even with the taxes, of course, that advocates can make. But it is insulting to Californians to purposely deprive them of information critical to making an informed decision.
If you want to play "Where’s Waldo" — click here for the official title and summary of Proposition 1A — you see if you can see where there is a mention of the massive taxes?
Well, someone is "taking it to a judge" as they say… Just in from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association…
Taxpayers deserve nothing less than fair, impartial ballot information
"Proposition 1A represents a deliberate attempt by the Legislature and its special interest allies to confuse and trick California voters into approving a continuation for another two years of one of the most regressive tax increase packages in state history," stated HJTA President Jon Coupal. "This lawsuit attempts to shine a bright light on the smoke and mirrors tactics offered up by tax and spend politicians," Coupal said.