THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Opinion: No justification for Calif. transportation tax hike


image_pdfimage_print

By Jon Coupal 

A personal digression: My father was head of the Iowa Department of Transportation (then called the Iowa Highway Commission) in the late 1960s and early 1970s before he was appointed by President Gerald Ford to serve as deputy federal highway administrator. (Of course, he lost that job when Jimmy Carter became president, but he continued to work in the private sector for a transportation think tank). When I was in high school, I remember him coming home from an ASHTO conference. That organization, the Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, was a pretty well respected group and still is. He was complaining bitterly about what was going on in California. I don’t recall his exact words, but the gist of it was that the new head of California’s transportation agency, called Caltrans, had been taken over by a certifiably crazy person (with no background in transportation policy) by the name of Adriana Gianturco. According to my father, in the 1950s and ’60s, California had the best transportation agency in the entire world. But all that changed with the election of a new, anti-growth, small-is-beautiful governor by the name of Jerry Brown.

Now, fast forward 40 years. Gov. Brown, version 2.0, proposes a budget that assumes a big increase in transportation taxes and fees. The California Legislature shouldn’t just say no, it should say hell no.

Where to start? First, let’s take judicial notice of the fact that California is already a high tax state with the highest income tax rate and the highest state sales tax in America. But more relevant for the issue at hand, we also have the highest fuel costs in the nation. This is because of both the foutth highest excise tax on fuel and the fact that refineries are burdened with additional costs to comply with California’s environmental regulations.

The high cost to drive in California might be understandable if we were getting value for our tax dollars. But we aren’t. A big problem is that Caltrans is dysfunctional, plain and simple. It has never fully recovered from the days when the agency was effectively destroyed by Gianturco. A report by the California state auditor just a couple of months ago concluded that a primary responsibility of Caltrans – maintenance of our highways – is not being executed in a manner that is even close to being efficient or competent.

State Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa, the only CPA currently serving in the California Legislature, reacted saying that, “This audit reinforces the fact that our bad roads are not a result of a lack of funding. They’re a result of a lack of competence at Caltrans.”

Moreover, a report by the legislative analyst concluded that Caltrans is overstaffed by 3,500 employees costing California taxpayers over a half billion dollars a year. All this compels the obvious question: Why, for goodness sake, do we want to give these people even more money?

Another unneeded and costly practice consists of project labor agreements for transportation construction projects. These pro-union policies shut out otherwise competent companies from bidding on projects resulting in California taxpayers shelling out as high as 25 percent more than they should for building highways and bridges.

Finally, California’s environmental requirements are legendary for their inefficiency while also doing little for the environment. Exhibit A in this foolishness is Brown’s incomprehensible pursuit of the ill-fated high speed rail project. Not only has the project failed to live up to any of the promises made to voters, it is currently being kept alive only by virtue of the state’s diversion of “cap and trade” funds which are supposed to be expended on projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But in the Kafkaesque world of California transportation policies, the LAO has concluded that the construction of the HSR project actually produces a net increase in emissions, at least for the foreseeable future.

No one disputes the dire need for improvements in California’s transportation infrastructure. But imposing draconian taxes and higher registration fees that serve only to punish the middle class while wasting billions on projects that don’t help getting Californians get to work or school cannot and should not be tolerated. Legislators who present themselves to voters as fiscally responsible need to understand that a vote for higher transportation taxes will engender a very angry response from their constituents.

Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, California’s largest grass-roots taxpayer organization dedicated to the protection of Proposition 13 and the advancement of taxpayers’ rights.

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (2)
  1. Michael Clark says - Posted: June 6, 2016

    While most people would agree about Caltrans’ apparent incompetence, the idea again presented here that it is all attributable to a particular politician or a particular political party is absurd. The beauty of our government is that there are checks and balances.

    The fact is that it is not that simple. Continuing the divisive and partisan blame game is obviously getting us nowhere. The only result of the partisan bickering is that the politicians can get away with whatever they like by blaming the other party. We have only one option: to start being honest with ourselves and demand that our politicians take their constituents into consideration above all else.

    What this biased perspective completely ignores is that California also had the worst air pollution in the country and that because of those regulations, the pollution is now far, far better.

    The author contradicts himself by complaining: “But all that changed with the election of a new, anti-growth, small-is-beautiful governor by the name of Jerry Brown.” This is then followed by a call for less regulation (and presumably a return to the “good old days” of polluting cars, trucks and refineries). For Adriana Gianturco’s faults, she did bring car pool lanes to California, encouraging people to more effectively use our roads.

    By the way, for political perspective, Adriana Gianturco was married to John Saltonstall, Jr. who bravely bridged the political party gap in Massachusetts by running as a Democrat despite his Republican roots.

  2. Carl Ribaudo says - Posted: June 6, 2016

    Is auto emission standards set by state or federal government? I was under the impression it was Feds? Before any new taxes are considered it would be great to see Cal Trans completely re-engineered for increased productivity.