Remember California Prop 6 – “the Voter Approval for Future Gas and Vehicle Taxes and 2017 Tax Repeal Initiative”? That measure, on the 2018 ballot, would have repealed fuel tax increases and vehicle fees that were enacted in 2017, including the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (RRAA) and required voter approval (via ballot propositions) for the California State Legislature to impose, increase, or extend fuel taxes or vehicle fees in the future. (Ballotpedia).
We know that California has the highest gas prices in the country because California has the highest state taxes on gas. The RRAA was enacted by the legislature, not the voters. Prop 6 was an opportunity to give the taxpayers more say in raising the tax. It failed with 43% of the vote. Was the election fair? Even before the election, critics had already started talking about, in Cal Matters contributor Dan Walters’ words, “a hostile official ballot title from Attorney General Xavier Becerra’s office.“
California Assembly member Carl DeMaio cried foul at the time. Many folks I spoke to were also outraged, including the tow truck driver that brought us home when our truck broke down on US 395 one hot July afternoon. People get pissed off when gas gets expensive, it drives up everything in the economy. Our tow driver said he felt the measure had been titled and written in a way that confused people, and they might vote NO when they really wanted to vote yes. He predicted the measure would fail.
Walters confirmed the deception. “Instead of describing it as a repeal of gas taxes, the official title is ‘Eliminates certain road repair and transportation funding. Requires certain fuel taxes and vehicle fees to be approved by the electorate.’”
Walters actually disclosed that he was in favor of the gas tax as it was, but still gave this impartial assessment. “Although Democrats were less likely than Republicans to vote for Proposition 6, the gap wasn’t as wide as one might have expected. The rather slanted title, which didn’t say it was a repeal, probably had something to do with it.”
Now Carl DeMaio has come back with Prop 39, the Voter ID initiative.
According to the Los Angeles Times, “Prop 39 would require voters to present government-issued identification, such as a state driver’s license, every time they vote in person. Voters who use mail-in ballots — by far the most popular method of voting in California — would be required to write a four-digit number, essentially a PIN, on their ballot envelopes. The PIN would come from ID such as a driver’s license or could be generated from the county.”
The measure also requires that the secretary of state and county elections officials to maintain accurate voter registration lists, verify citizenship, and report annually the percentage of each county’s voter roll that have been citizenship-verified.“
I don’t see anything unreasonable here. We have to present a valid ID for so many things we do. My dog has to have a license, and we have to be ready to present it. I think the current voter registration laws in California are way too lax.
Under current law, Californians are required to provide identification when registering to vote and must swear under penalty of perjury, a felony, that they are eligible to vote and are U.S. citizens. The loop hole here is that you don’t have to present proof of citizenship when you get your California driver’s license, and then the county is just taking your word for it on your voter registration? Give me a break.
They are not required to show or provide identification when casting a ballot in person or by mail. So, anybody could be voting in your name, again, give me a break.
You’d expect the Democrats to push back on this measure. Several Democratic legislators have joined together to sue the proponents over “false statements” in their Argument In Favor. But a bigger issue, “A group led by California Assemblymember Carl DeMaio (R-San Diego) allege in a 10-page lawsuit filed in Sacramento Superior Court that Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta violated election laws that require the “impartial” labeling of a measure’s purpose.“
DeMaio called it “a false title claiming it prohibits citizens from voting.”
The original language said the measure “establishes additional voters identification and citizenship verification requirements.”
“This measure would amend the California Constitution to further require that voters present government-issued identification at the polls or the last four digits of a government-issued identification number when voting by mail; the State provide voter identification cards on request; and elections officials annually report percentage of each county’s voters whose citizenship they have verified.”
According to the LA Times, “The summary language now states that the measure: ‘Prohibits citizens from voting unless they present government-issued identification.‘”
“Invalidates mail ballots that do not have last four digits of designated government-issued identification number written on envelope. Prohibits in-person voting without presenting government-issued identification.”
Read the full article, including details of the suit against the proponents, here
Like UCLA law professor Rick Hasen says, “it’s common practice for the AG to write things in ways that that align with the political interests of the Attorney General.”
Frankly, I think the Democrats are afraid if they can’t cheat they can’t win. Silly Rabbits.
Chico Taxpayers Association 