Michael and Jim write:
>> Michael Perelman wrote:
>> > David, the most powerful interests often acted as if they were speaking
>> > for the middle
>> class, but that was pure pretense. You are absolutely correct that there
>> were inequities
>> in the property tax, but Proposition 13 was a meat ax aimed at the entire
>> fiscal system.<
>>
>> The powerful interests appealed to the short-term interests of the
>> middle class ("get a tax cut now!"), but went against the latter's
>> long-term interests (say, in having half-decent public schools, ones
>> significantly better than in Alabama). By the way, there were a lot of
>> powerful interests -- e.g., the Bank of America -- who opposed Prop.
>> 13.
Jim's last point is absolutely correct and I think Michael is rewriting
history. The "commanding sectors" of the State (the governor, the
legislature, the employee unions, newspapers, the large banks and other
connected businesses, etc.) were amost unanimoulsy opposed to Prop 13 and
predicted disaster. In fact, I remember that most economists, with the
memorable exception of Art Laffer, predicted disaster. Prop 13 was a true
grass roots movement. Tell me, specifically, who were the "powerful interests"
that intentionally mislead the gullible middle class? Prop 13, and the debate
about Prop 13, was as true an example of "democracy," meaning that the
citizenry as a whole was actively and directly engaged on a matter of public
policy, that I remember in my life. Average people normally politically
disinterested were engaged, became informed and argued with their friends and
family members.
David Shemano
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
