Théodore Chassériau: Spectre de Banquo, 1855. Image in Public Domain

The Legislature and Gov. Newsom’s panicked attempt to disqualify the Taxpayer Protection Act from 2024’s ballot only adds to Big Gov’t’s pattern of stifling democratic rights/processes, says the OC Register’s Jon Coupal. He goes on to argue that eliminating Prop 13 protections—which ensure that approving earmarked tax hikes is reasonably tough—would be nonsensical and ineffective.

The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (TPA) was written to restore key provisions of a series of voter-approved ballot measures that gave taxpayers, not politicians, more say over when and how new tax revenue is raised. Over the past decade, the California courts have created massive loopholes and confusion in long-established tax law and policy. TPA closes those loopholes and provides new safeguards to increase accountability and transparency over how politicians spend our tax dollars.

After more than a million Californians signed petitions to successfully put TPA on the November 2024 ballot, government officials started talking about this popular taxpayer-protection measure as if it was going to end Western Civilization.

First, the League of California Cities, which never met a tax that it didn’t like, disseminated a “Special Release” claiming TPA somehow restricts the right to vote on tax measures. This was absurd as the whole point of Proposition 13, Proposition 218, and now TPA, was to guarantee the right to vote on taxes.

Proposition 13 requires that a local special tax (meaning for a specific purpose) must receive a two-thirds vote of the electorate in order to pass. In 2017, this clear requirement was weakened by ambiguity in the California Supreme Court’s infamous Upland decision, which has been interpreted to allow special taxes to pass with only 50% plus one vote if the tax was put on the ballot by a “citizens’ initiative.” This has enabled special interests to write their own tax increases, direct the money to themselves, and get these self-serving measures passed with only a simple majority vote. TPA restores the two-thirds vote requirement and closes this costly loophole….

[O]n Tuesday, the governor and the Legislature filed their lawsuit to try to knock TPA off the ballot before the election.

This outrageous attempt to block voter approval of TPA may backfire. Now voters will hear even more about the measure’s key provisions, such as requiring all new state taxes passed by the Legislature to go on the ballot for voter approval. Voters will be happy to hear that TPA restores the two-thirds vote threshold for local special taxes, and that it clears up muddy definitions that allow taxes to be mislabeled as “fees.” Voters will also like TPA’s transparency requirement that ballot labels must not only state clearly that a tax increase is a tax increase, but also disclose how the money will be spent.

This article originally appeared in the Orange County Register. Read the whole thing here.

RELATED:

• Opinion: WSJ debunks absurd idea that Taxpayer Protection Act would snuff out cities’ essential services
• Leaders oppose SJ City Council’s tax-raising schemes
• Pierluigi Oliverio: Fearmongering about Taxpayer Protection Act a “misunderstanding” of the measure

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity