The measure, in the form of an ordinance, if adopted by the voters, will prohibit the Mayor and the members of the City Council, and their Executive Assistants and appointed Commissioners, from (1) engaging in compensated employment or service for lobbying for any private person or organization before any local public agency located in the County of Orange, and (2) having a personal investment or monetary interest in City contracts. The Elections Code states that when a measure is placed on the ballot by the City Council (as opposed to by petition), then the City Council as a body, or any member or members of the City Council authorized by the City Council, or any individual voter who is eligible to vote on the measure, or bona fide association of citizens, or any combination of voters and associations, may file a written argument for or against the measure.  Click below for additional information about the June 3, 2008 Special Election and requirements for filing ballot arguments.

The Economic Stimulus of 2008 Act, signed into law by President Bush the day before Valentine’s Day, won’t work as advertised. The $168 billion measure won’t increase consumer spending by much because people don’t spend a temporary increase of income as readily as a permanent increase, as our experience with past rebates (and Nobel laureate Milton Friedman’s Permanent Income Hypothesis) have shown. Thus, those $600 rebates ($1,200 for married couples who file jointly) will largely go toward credit-card payments, rather than to make new purchases. Except for one provision that encourages businesses to make more capital investments, the stimulus package is merely a feel-good measure by which politicians can show voters that they are “doing something” to shore up an ailing economy during an election year.

“Even so, there is another reason that any economic benefits ultimately generated by the stimulus plan will be fleeting at best,” writes Independent Institute Senior Fellow William Shughart in a new op-ed. “The federal government has no means of its own, so the $168 billion needed to finance the package can come from just three sources: taxing, borrowing, or printing money.”

“For obvious political reasons, raising taxes is not an option during the run-up to an election,” Shughart continues. “The economic stimulus plan thus will be paid for through a combination of new deficit spending and currency creation. The former implies higher future taxes to pay interest to bondholders and to retire the debt when it matures; the latter adds to the inflationary pressures already evident in the economy. Both impose a heavier burden on the private sector, and auger slower rates of economic growth in the years to come…. If our elected representatives truly were interested in jumpstarting a sluggish economy, they would have acted to reduce uncertainty about future tax bills by cutting marginal income tax rates now and forevermore. Predictably, they chose political grandstanding instead.”

“A Failure to Stimulate,” by William F. Shughart II (2/20/0

Taxing Choice: The Predatory Politics of Fiscal Discrimination, edited by William F. Shughart II

The California Property Owners and Farmland Protection Act, which has qualified as proposition 98 on the June 3 ballot, defines rent control as a form of eminent domain and if enacted would provide that any rent control ordinance in effect prior to January 2007 become essentially invalid. Most of the cash thus far for the initiative has come from landlord and property owners’ groups and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. Two groups that have signed on to oppose Proposition 98 are the AARP and the League of Women Voters.There are currently 12 California cities with rent control ordinances, including several of the state’s largest urban centers: San Francisco, Oakland, Los Angeles, San Jose, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Palm Springs, Los Gatos, Hayward, East Palo Alto, and Berkeley. (Thousand Oaks also had a rent control ordinance in effect but has gradually phased it out.) Because California enacted vacancy decontrol measures in 1995, in communities with rent control, rental units have shown a huge discrepancy in price between vacated units, which landlords have been able to re-price beyond the standard allowable annual rent increase, and units with tenants who have remained put. Expect the number of vacated units (whether they are vacated voluntarily or involuntarily) in those communities to drastically rise if Proposition 98 becomes law.Source: Policy Inbox

Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama in the Democratic primary by 2.1 million to 1.7 million votes (51.9% to 42.3%), but because California’s 441 primary delegates are awarded on a proportional rather than a winner-take-all basis, nobody really won the primary outright except in terms of what headlines the newspapers chose to run about the event. In the final national Super Tuesday delegate count, Obama may actually wind up ahead of Clinton by anywhere from 8 to 12 delegates. Obama came out ahead of Clinton in 17 counties, including Alameda, Marin, Sacramento, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, Sonoma, and Yolo.

John McCain won California handily, beating out his closest rival, Mitt Romney, by 42% to 34%, with Mike Huckabee finishing third at 11.6%. Romney actually came out ahead of McCain in three counties: Fresno, Shasta, and Sierra. But in spite of media headlines proclaiming “McCain Savors Coast-to-Coast Wins,” while McCain clearly finishes far ahead of his two rivals in the national delegate count, he has not managed to outdistance Romney or Huckabee enough to be able to proclaim himself the outright winner and the prohibitive nominee — at least not yet. Huckabee in particular managed to sweep up enough delegates in five key Southern states (including in West Virginia, where it appears that a deal was brokered with McCain in the second round of caucus voting to prevent Romney from prevailing) to maintain a strong presence in the campaign going forward.

On the California ballot measure front, the Indian gaming compact initiatives (Props 94-97) all won by margins of roughly 56 to 44%, which was somewhat surprising considering the quantity of advertisements and other paid messages that were put out in opposition to the initiatives in the weeks leading up to the election. All of the other initiatives on the ballot went down to defeat: the transportation funds measure, Proposition 91, which was abandoned by its own supporters as superfluous in the weeks prior to the election (58-42% opposing); Proposition 92, the community college funding measure (57-43% opposing); and Proposition 93, the term limits reform initiative backed by Senate President Pro-Tem Don Perata and Assembly Speaker Fabián Núñez (54-46% opposing).

The Tax Policy Center, Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution
by KimRueben on Fri 25 Jan 2008

Six months ago, states were predicting balanced budgets and surpluses. Virtually all had surpluses at the end of fiscal year 2007 and more than half had ending balances equaling at least 10 percent of their general funds. Governors and legislatures were happily talking about property tax relief and expanding medical coverage to the uninsured.

How times have changed. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities about half of all states now expect a budget shortfall in FY ‘09, with the number growing as more states release their budgets for the coming year. Seventeen states expect deficits totaling at least $31 billion, and California and Maryland anticipate shortfalls in the current year as well. It is looking like states will have a much tougher time weathering the current downturn than they did in the last two recessions.

Why? One reason is that in 2001, after spending down rainy day funds, states were able to limit their own fiscal pain by cutting aid to cities, counties and school districts. Local governments were able to make up the lost funding because their major source of revenue—the property tax—was booming thanks to a huge rise in home values. Shifting the pain downward won’t be so easy this time, with property values plunging and homeowners demanding cuts in assessments. Cities are also anticipating their own budget tightening, with Mayor Bloomberg proposing budget cuts and anticipating deficits for New York City for the foreseeable future

The stimulus plan agreed to by President Bush and the House excludes aid to states, although there has been some talk about addressing this issue in a second bill later this year. However, states have no choice but to balance their budgets, since, unlike the president, governors can’t print money. That will mean after spending down their surpluses that states will have to cut spending or raise taxes, actions that will partially undo the benefits of any federal stimulus.

Last time around, the federal government provided $20 billion in aid to states. Half was a temporary increase in the federal share of Medicaid, and half was a general grant to states based on population. Although it didn’t come until 2003, after the recession ended, it still helped.

This time, the feds might want to think about ways to target relief to those states experiencing the most trouble—often those hardest hit in the housing crisis. Sadly, it seems like they will have plenty of time to act since the hit to state and local budgets seems likely to go on for a while, along with the downturn in property values.

Source: http://taxvox.taxpolicycenter.org/blog/_archives/2008/1/25/3486361.html