Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Wednesday, January 09, 2008

A Liberal Opposes the Phone Tax AKA "Measure Shady"

Dear Los Angeles Voters,

You have another treat waiting for you on the Feb 5th ballot...

Proposition S--"Reduction of Tax Rate and Modernization of Communications Users Tax."

Wow!!! Great!!! A tax REDUCTION to vote on!!!

What's that you say? Politicians have actually put something on the ballot to reduce our taxes??? Sounds too good to be true??? IT IS!!!!

The following article gives a rather in-depth backgrounder on what's up with our LA City Council and the Mayor. Both of them want this badly to keep the phone tax you now pay streaming into the general fund. The reason it's on the ballot NOW, is because there are court cases that could invalidate the tax COMPLETELY. Our illustrious City Council, including my guy, Dennis Zine, voted to put this on the ballot BEFORE the court case is decided. By doing this, they get the city voters to VOTE IN THE TAX so that any subsequent court decisions are moot and will not apply since the voters have APPROVED the tax. Sleazy, eh??

Now it well may be that the city needs these funds for various services. But, aren't you a little tired of being lied to? I know I am. Wouldn't it be nice if they could just present their case clearly? Have enough respect for the voters to actually tell the full story? TRANSPARENCY would go a long ways to restoring some level of believability. As it is, most people are assuming that most politicians are lying all of the time, and they're not far from wrong. This proposition re-enforces the rampant distrust of our electeds.

Listen to these sales points from the ballot: "reduction of tax rate," "10% to 9%," exempt low-income senior-citizen and disabled households," fund general municipal services, such as 911, police, fire protection." On and on, and NO WHERE ON THE BALLOT is there a full disclosure that court decisions are pending that could ELIMINATE the tax entirely, UNLESS voters are fooled into voting in this tax permanently. The best part is the "treat taxpayers equally regardless of technology used." This obfuscation really means that you get to pay MORE by adding the tax onto internet services. Wow, great tax reduction! Oh, and you'll be happy to know that telemarketers are treated MORE equally than you with a tax break...they get to pay 5% instead of your 9%.

So there you have it. PDLA's endorsement committee has NOT taken a formal position on this measure...mainly because we were dealing with all of the other state props last time around. But, the absentee ballots are coming out now, and several people have been asking about this one. So, check this over.

The Voter Information Pamphlet sent from the city gives the complete legal language as well as analysis from the City Legislative Analyst and the City Administrative Officer. Both of these are beholden to the City Council and tailor their writing accordingly. As usual, there are the usual suspects listed supporting this and a single opposing person....funny how they never seem to have many opposition voices included.

Just be sure that you do NOT ever vote for ANY of these propositions without doing a thorough study. This should include who is behind the measure as well as who has paid for the signatures if it's one put on by an interest group. ALL of them recently seem to have a hidden agenda concealed by seemingly innocuous language written for voter consumption. The casual voter will be fooled every time.///

Linda Sutton
Truth Now Productions
41st AD Delegate
PDLA, Endorsement and Education Committees
Progressive Caucus CDP, Media Reform
Valley Democrats United
West Los Angeles Democratic Club
UTLA, Human Rights Committee, House of Reps
NEA, Peace & Justice

LA Weekly-- "Better Than Phone Tax"

Labels: , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said:

Got my ballot.

Eight things to decide.

91 transportation funds
92 Community Colleges
93 limits on Legislators
94/95/96/97 - Indian Gaming

On the back page
S - reduction of tax rate; modernization of communications user tax. Proposition S

League of Women do not vote on City issues for Prop S

I know what to do with all except 93 Limits on Legislators I know I dont want them extended but I am not sure to write Yes or No.

League of Women Voters is neutral.
Which do I want mark to get knucklehead Nunez out.

January 10, 2008 1:30 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No on 93 gets rid of Nunez in Nov. 2008, Yes on 93 we get Nunez for maybe 6 more years, Gil Cedillo for 4+ more years (till 2014), Don Perata for four more years.......

Of course NO on S.......

January 10, 2008 8:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No one gets rid of you. Till the SEC shows up and says "get rid of Tony's idiot."

It'll happen. You just watch.

January 10, 2008 9:12 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home