California’s clueless politicians – San Bernardino Sun

In the history of California, there has never been a bigger disconnect between political elites and the citizenry than over the issue of Proposition 13. In June of 1978, every editorial board in California, every labor group, every education organization and, yes, even big business opposed Prop. 13. While its defeat seemed certain to the experts, the voters had other ideas and passed the iconic measure by nearly 65%. 

Even today, there remains a substantial gulf separating voters and elected officials as evidenced by the most recent November election. Take Proposition 36 for example, a citizen initiative designed to make crime illegal again. Progressives in the legislature pulled every trick in the book to prevent it from appearing on the ballot, including the consideration of passing “poison pill” legislation. But the political machinations and disinformation from the left were insufficient to counter voters’ desire to hold criminals accountable for their actions.

Progressive politicians were also on the wrong side of the ledger on other ballot measures, including one that would have loosened restrictions on rent control and another that would have prohibited work requirements for prison inmates. 

For taxpayers, it was Prop. 5 that exposed how a super-majority of elected legislators failed to learn the lesson from 1978. Passed by the Legislature as Assembly Constitutional Amendment 10 but needing voter approval, ACA 10 sought to make it easier to raise property tax bills by lowering the vote threshold to pass local bonds from the current two-thirds down to 55%. The two-thirds requirement, originally adopted in 1879 as a protection against excessive local debt, was incorporated into Prop. 13. 

In the interests of holding elected officials accountable for their votes, consider the following:

• Prop. 5 failed in 61 (76%) of the 80 Assembly Districts in California. More interestingly, it failed in 43 (69%) of the 62 Assembly Districts held by Democrats. Not surprisingly, it failed in all 18 Assembly Districts held by Republicans.
• Prop. 5 failed in 38 (70%) of the 54 Assembly Districts where the representative voted “Yes” on ACA 10, including Assembly District 4 held by anti-Prop. 13 progressive Cecilia Aguilar-Curry. She has been promoting ACA 10-type constitutional amendments for years. Even her own constituents solidly rejected Prop. 5, not only in her Assembly District but also by an even larger margin in the city of Winters (Yolo County) where she was previously the mayor.
• Prop. 5 failed in 8 (100%) of the 8 Assembly Districts where the representative voted against ACA 10. All 8 of these districts were held by Republicans.
• Prop. 5 failed in 14 (82%) of the 17 Assembly Districts where the representative abstained on ACA 10.  Of the foregoing 14 Assembly Districts where Prop. 5 failed, 9 were held by Republicans and 5 were held by Democrats.  In fact, more Republicans abstained from voting on ACA 10 (9) than voted No (8).
• In the California Senate, Prop. 5 failed in 32 (80%) of the 40 Senate Districts (2020 districts) in California. (For the Senate, data is unreliable because district lines have been altered. However, we can say with high confidence that Prop. 5 failed in the overwhelming percentage of Senate Districts where the representative voted to place ACA 10 on the ballot).