.
.
.
.
.
It was actually the obscure 19th-century British preacher Charles Hadden Spurgeon, NOT Mark Twain as often believed, who coined the great expression, “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still getting its boots on.” Sometimes the truth teller may be stuck playing the piano at a restaurant all night and has to stay up late to correct the lie, but the principle is the same.
Well, some on this blog, motivated by obscure and unquenchable vendettas, took advantage of my absence earlier tonight to equate assembly candidate Melissa Fox’s simple pledge to “re-invest in education” with a plan to “raise your taxes.” Right out of the old Republican playbook, huh? But we can’t let this lie just fester; like a dead seal on the beach it needs to be buried tonight or it will be smelling up the place by the afternoon.
I’m assuming that nobody outside of the Pacific Research Institute would disagree that it would be good to re-invest in education after all the cuts it’s suffered in this state over the last few years, right? (Well, if not, you know where to find the comments section.) I want to show how Democrats such as Melissa propose to do that without raising your taxes a red cent during these hard economic times.
There are two great Democratic ideas, both of which Melissa supports, which between them will produce more than enough revenue to save our faltering K-12 and higher education: the decriminalization and taxation of marijuana as proposed in November’s highly anticipated initiative, and the oil extraction tax (specifically Pedro Nava’s “Oil Industry Fair Share Act” which is superior to Torrico’s AB 656.) We’ve got five months still to talk about both of these ideas, but in brief:
The measure to decriminalize, regulate and tax marijuana
I know this is popular with this blog’s readers. STONERS! But it will also be a godsend to local governments, as commenter Mayor Quimby reminded us the other day:
The tax from sale of marijuana doesn’t go to Sacramento. Instead it goes to the local government where it is sold… Guys like Amante and Choi [Melissa’s likely opponents] spend a lot of time trying to defend their redevelopment schemes and fighting the state over money. They’re stupid to oppose a measure that stands to benefit their cities substantially and help redress the balance towards local control.
Excise and sales taxes of marijuana would raise hundreds of millions of dollars a year, on top of saving $200 million in law enforcement annually. Melissa Fox is one of the few politicians honest and courageous enough to publicly support this essential measure, but it doesn’t matter as the voters will pass it on their own in November. Needless to say, all of Melissa’s possible Republican opponents oppose the measure strenuously.
The oil extraction tax, Nava’s “Oil Industry Fair Share Act.”
I hope a certain stubborn blogger reads this; it’s as hard to convince him of new facts as it is to convince some of our racist commenters that the Bill of Rights applies to all persons in the US, not just citizens. But real quickly: Pedro Nava’s proposed oil extraction tax – which Melissa and all other Democrats support – would be 10% of the gross value of each barrel of oil taken out of us Californians’ ground. By comparison, Alaska charges oil companies 25%, and Texas 14%. We are the only oil-producing state in the nation without an oil extraction tax. We have been chumps.
The knee-jerk response – which is also what the oil companies will tell you to think as they try to protect their astronomical profits – is OH MY GOD THEY’LL PUNISH US BY RAISING THE PRICE AT THE PUMP! I would expect anyone with a cursory familiarity with how the global oil market works to not think such a ridiculous thing for more than a few seconds.
That’s probably not clear enough for certain stubborn bloggers. So let me try this: given the small fraction that California adds to the global oil market, our adding 10% for each barrel translates to a TINY FRACTION worldwide – adding maybe a fraction of a penny to prices at most – but the revenue for Californians will be $1.5 billion annually – a godsend in these hard times.
Just in case that’s not enough, the Nava bill specifically forbids oil companies to pass on the cost to consumers.
We can look into the oil severance tax, as well as the marijuana initiative, at greater length over the summer and fall. But for now I just want to show that Democrats like Melissa have plenty of good ideas to enable us to re-invest in education, and they have nothing to do with raising your taxes!
Fox has nothing to say about the oil tax on her website. But her opponent, Mike Glover, does. Interesting.
BTW, Alaska has no state tax and they give all residents a check each year, from the oil money the state makes.
And Texas taxes are overall much lower than ours.
See my new post about Fox to see how empty her rhetoric really is. She talks a good game but has ZERO solutions to offer. Typical.
“Fair Share”? i guess private property is a thing of the past.
Welcome to the concept of taxation, Irvine Reporter. Not a new concept actually. Don’t feel TOO sorry for the oil companies though – even after all the taxes they pay AROUND THE GLOBE, they still manage to be the most profitable companies in the history of the world.
As the only oil-producing state in the union without an extraction tax, California resembles that guy sitting in the corner with a big “P” on his forehead. “P” for “pendejo.” That needs to end this year.
Although I do support your position for marijuana legalization, I would prefer that you don’t belittle supporters of this proposition as “stoners.” As a MMJ patient myself for chronic pain, I don’t use marijuana to get “stoned.” In fact, I use to to deal with the pain that regular opiates, which Big Pharma is pushing, could not do. Actually, a lot of marijuana users and legalization activists that I have met are some of the most intelligent people. Are people who drink Jim Beam all “drunks” then accoridng to your interpretation.
I was leaning towards supporting Melissa Fox in November, but if that is what you and the rest of the Democratic Party thinks of us…I’d be better off voting Green, Libertarian or Independent.
There’s medical users, and there’s recreational users, and it should be legalized for both, although you’re right it’s more important for medical users. Excuse my playful language, which is not Melissa’s!
By the way has anyone seen The Oracle?