Proposition 30 and 38: Supporters Duel Over Tax Increase Measures

Voters have two approaches to weigh in deciding whether to approve higher taxes to fund California schools.

The biggest test is fast approaching for two ballot measures designed to help state schools by raising taxes, but it will be up to voters this November to decide which proposition will pass or fail.

Propositions 30 and 38 have been the subject of much debate statewide.

Proposition 30, backed by Gov. Jerry Brown, would raise the sales tax by one-quarter of one cent for four years while increasing personal income taxes for Californians who earn over $250,000 for seven years.

Those who support it, like the California Teachers’ Association, argue its failure would have a devastating impact on schools, which have already undergone massive cuts over the past several years and resulted in larger classes, thousands of layoffs, and a shortened school year for many districts.

Prop 38 has been primarily financed by Pasadena attorney Molly Munger. The proposal, supported by California PTA which worked with Munger on the measure, aims to increase personal income taxes using a sliding scale, with a single filer earning as little as $17,346 per year, for example, seeing higher taxes, according to the Legislative Analyst's Office.

Scott Folsom, vice president of the California PTA’s 10th District which covers Los Angeles County, says Prop 38 makes the most sense.

“It’s really the only initiative on the ballot that brings new funding to schools,” Folsom said. “The money Prop 38 raises is not disbursed by Sacramento. It’s decided at the local school site. The money goes directly to schools.”

However, the PTA’s official stance is it will not necessarily encourage Prop 38 supporters to vote against Prop 30, he said.

“The state PTA has looked at and decided to take no position on it,” Folsom said. “We’re asking our members to carefully look at Proposition 30 and make up your own mind.”

The PTA nonetheless sees some problems with Proposition 30.

“It doesn’t bring new money to the schools, and if it doesn’t pass, it reduces money,” Folsom said. “It doesn’t solve the problem schools are in now. If it fails, it cuts funding. It’s the reverse of bringing money to the schools.”

Prop 30 backers are playing hard ball. Supporters of Gov. Brown have started a committee called Stop the Middle Class Tax Hike - No on Prop. 38 to oppose the plan. For her part, Munger has funded a TV advertising campaign against Proposition 30, the San Jose Mercury News reported.

A “yes” vote on Prop 30 means “the new tax revenues would be available to fund programs in the state budget,” according to California's official Voter Information Guide. A "no" vote means state budget cuts, which would primarily impact education programs, would take effect in 2012 to 2013.

According to the guide, a "yes" vote on Prop 38 means personal income tax rates would guarantee new funding to restore budget cuts and improve educational results. A "no" vote would mean no additional revenue from the measure would be available for schools, child care, preschool, and state debt payments.

If both propositions pass, the measure with the most "yes" votes would go into effect, according to the California Legislative Analyst's office.

To see more information on the major propositions up for vote in November, go to the MapLight voter guide.

Petaluman8tv October 15, 2012 at 09:55 PM
While both measures will help schools, there is no question that Prop 38 is better for schools. Prop 30 allows half the money raised to be spent elsewhere. Given what the state legislature has done to schools in the last decade, there is no question that half the money WILL be spent elsewhere. Miss Loffee, nice slant with your cute little description of people paying as little as $17K getting higher taxes. More honesty and balance would be a good idea for a journalist. How about, the sliding scale of Prop 38 insures that the wealthiest Californians pay not only the most, but disproportionately the most, for this tax increase. Yes, lower and middle income families will pay a LITTLE.
mikeg55 October 16, 2012 at 02:29 PM
vote no on both! NO MORE TAXES!!! California continues to waste money and keeps raising new taxes to pay for their waste. Get the budget under control, route money from the high speed rail project to education, fix the pension system, get rid of state goverment perks. I already pay too much in local taxes (including education parcel taxes) . I'm not giving them more money!
Milan Moravec October 20, 2012 at 06:22 PM
Create California’s future. Vote No on Prop 30, 38, 32. Keep the California dream alive and well. Decisions you make on Nov 6 determine California’s course for years. We are kidding ourselves by believing that education funding shortfalls disappear with Prop 30, Prop 38. Prop 30, Prop 38 levy significant taxes on each one of us. The wounds that Prop 30, 38 are to heal have been self inflicted largely by our elected Sacramento politicians who simply do not say no to any influential interest group be they, University of California (29% increase in salaries last 6 years), public employees, business, teachers, or other unions or lobbyists. And now Prop 30, 38 are used by Sacramento politicians and lobbyists to blackmail us


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something