As we mentioned previously, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association has filed a lawsuit asking a judge for relief because the state legislature and the governor are in the midst of a deceptive effort to cause Californian’s to consider whether to support or oppose Proposition 1A without having all of the information about the measure readily available to them — there is no mention in the title or summary of this measure that mentions that the passage of it would extend a boatload of taxes for years! Below we have linked the legal documents filed with court for those who would like to read them.
This "keep all of the facts from the voters" campaign extends beyond the omitting of information in the official voter guide pamphlet (though that omission is the most egregious) — it seems that proponents of Proposition 1A literally don’t want to even mention the taxes. Of course, what they should be doing is making the case that they feel the spending cap in 1A is strong enough to justify extending tens of billions in taxes on Californians.
Another example of this "don’t fully disclose and discuss the pros and cons of 1A" effort actually appears in the FlashReport today. FR friend Bill Jones, the former Secretary of State for California, has penned a column laying out in some detail why he supports 1A, talking all about the spending cap. In his entire column, however, he fails to mention the tax extensions, which then causes me as a reader to doubt the credibility of what he says. If Jones and others in support of 1A aren’t willing to be up front about the choice before voters with 1A, it will undermine their credibility in advocating its passage.
Actually, I know Jones well enough that I am sure he is quite displeased with shenanigans by the legislature and governor with 1A’s title and summary. Jones should file a brief with the court supporting the HJTA lawsuit. And in the future, he should present a balance view of Proposition 1A, treating voters as mature adults, not like kids.