Voter Attitudes on Raising Taxes

Although neither group wants to believe it, California’s elected officials and its journalists are very much alike in one respect: Both consistently underestimate and misread California’s voters.

The best example ever was in how both politicians and press misread the voters’ intents in passing Proposition 13, which led to a major reduction in property taxes as well as to stringent new requirements for levying new taxes. That movement was characterized as a simple-minded, gut-level reaction against taxes, even taxes for our children’s education.

Not true! The driving element of that fiscal change was an intent to change how taxes were collected, not an intent to hurt our kids. We voters didn’t--and don’t--want to be taxed on our homes, which represent our life savings.

Neither the politicos nor the writers got the message that time. Did they think we were too simple to reason at that level?

Now, we in Orange County are seeing it happen again. Proposition M fails and the immediate official and unofficial responses are that Orange County won’t go for new taxes, even for the roads we need.

Not true again! Those of us who read the proposition realized that much of the funding would go for new freeway lanes--but diamond lanes we’d be forced to pay for and then not be allowed to use.

We are already offended that gasoline taxes, once reserved for roads, were diverted into the general fund under Cranston’s leadership. We’re already offended that existing highway funds are being spent on lanes we are kept from using. And, finally, we’re offended that we were expected to be simple-minded enough to vote for it.

Try it again, M, but this time separate rails from roads and diamonds from asphalt.

Give us some credit. We will vote for school taxes if they are justified, just not for property taxes for schools. And we will vote for freeways, just not for diamond lanes.

RICHARD A. McLAUGHLIN

Fountain Valley