As tax season approaches (insert dramatic drum roll) California taxpayers begin thinking once again about just how much of our income goes to the government annually, even though the state's multibillion dollar structural deficit continues to linger on.
Indeed, government overspending and high taxes have savaged the state's economy since the Gann Spending Limit was hamstrung in 1990.
I have introduced Senate Constitutional Amendment 23, legislation that will place limits on state and local spending. This bill will put the teeth back into the Gann Limit, which was originally approved by the voters in 1979 when it appeared on the statewide ballot as Proposition 4.
Proposition 4 was sponsored by tax reformer Paul Gann. It was his follow-up effort to Proposition 13 (1978), which Gann and fellow reformer Howard Jarvis had placed on the ballot to address runaway property tax abuse.
The Gann Limit held state spending in check throughout the 1980s, but was substantially weakened by the special interest-driven Proposition 111 (1990). SCA 23 would reverse the provisions of Proposition 111 that had weakened the Gann Limit.
SCA 23's principal co-author is my longtime friend and colleague Senator Tom McClintock (R-Simi Valley). Tom has been California's most knowledgeable advocate for fiscal reform for nearly two decades.
The principal components of SCA 23 would:
? Limit spending increases to the following formula: Take previous spending and increase it only by a combined factor of population growth and inflation.
? The measure also would prohibit the Legislature from spending surplus revenues by requiring that surpluses be returned to the taxpayers who paid them.
? Permit emergency appropriations that are exempt from this limit, but only by a 4/5ths vote of the appropriate legislative bodies.
Prohibit state government from imposing program mandates on local governments unless the state also provides the funding for those programs.
Caps the amount of bonded indebtedness that the State may incur through the use of general obligation bonds.
All legislatively originated constitutional amendments require a 2/3rds vote in each house of the Legislature (no Governor's signature is required) and approval by the voters on the statewide election ballot. I will be sure to provide up to date information on the status of this bill regularly.
It's time for the madness to stop. We had a system that worked before the special interests disabled it. It's time to get back to what works.
Indeed, government overspending and high taxes have savaged the state's economy since the Gann Spending Limit was hamstrung in 1990.
I have introduced Senate Constitutional Amendment 23, legislation that will place limits on state and local spending. This bill will put the teeth back into the Gann Limit, which was originally approved by the voters in 1979 when it appeared on the statewide ballot as Proposition 4.
Proposition 4 was sponsored by tax reformer Paul Gann. It was his follow-up effort to Proposition 13 (1978), which Gann and fellow reformer Howard Jarvis had placed on the ballot to address runaway property tax abuse.
The Gann Limit held state spending in check throughout the 1980s, but was substantially weakened by the special interest-driven Proposition 111 (1990). SCA 23 would reverse the provisions of Proposition 111 that had weakened the Gann Limit.
SCA 23's principal co-author is my longtime friend and colleague Senator Tom McClintock (R-Simi Valley). Tom has been California's most knowledgeable advocate for fiscal reform for nearly two decades.
The principal components of SCA 23 would:
? Limit spending increases to the following formula: Take previous spending and increase it only by a combined factor of population growth and inflation.
? The measure also would prohibit the Legislature from spending surplus revenues by requiring that surpluses be returned to the taxpayers who paid them.
? Permit emergency appropriations that are exempt from this limit, but only by a 4/5ths vote of the appropriate legislative bodies.
Prohibit state government from imposing program mandates on local governments unless the state also provides the funding for those programs.
Caps the amount of bonded indebtedness that the State may incur through the use of general obligation bonds.
All legislatively originated constitutional amendments require a 2/3rds vote in each house of the Legislature (no Governor's signature is required) and approval by the voters on the statewide election ballot. I will be sure to provide up to date information on the status of this bill regularly.
It's time for the madness to stop. We had a system that worked before the special interests disabled it. It's time to get back to what works.