Author: William

I get bombarded with a plethora of junk mail each week. The other day I spotted a slick, glossy publication from the City of Elk Grove in amongst my pile of mail. On the cover are two items that together make what can only be an underhanded “in kind contribution” to the YES on Measure B campaign.

First was an article that claims that California now has early voting. Really? Until recently, I have been involved with various political groups that claim to be the guardians of public good—at least from a Conservative point of view—and I have never heard a peep out of anyone that California was adopting early voting. I know that in two years, we will have same day registration but early voting too? This is a bombshell announcement; however, the usual suspects are mute on this.

California seems to want more voter fraud to be committed more easily—at least as long as it benefits the party in power.

Next to this voter news on the newsletter was a plug for the Measure B campaign.

So we are told where to vote and what to vote for, seems like a plug for Measure B in my book.

UPDATE 08-31-2016

Sith Lord says that this is not a Texas style, full blown Early Voting System. Instead, Sacramento County Elections is trying voting at three locations in the county during week-ends. Voters will get one-time absentee ballot. They can then either vote on the spot or take ballot and return via snail mail or drop at a polling location later. Sith Lord was concerned about ballot security and county elections was not forthcoming about any chain-of-custody issues.

This is reportedly a trial program that will be evaluated later to decide if it should be continued.

The following was submitted to Sacramento County Elections as a ballot argument in opposition to the increase in local sales tax that will appear on the November ballot. This argument was not selected by the Registrar of Voters for Sacramento County. According to County Elections, several arguments were submitted.

Such arguments can be submitted by individuals or groups. This one was submitted as an argument by an individual. I’m curious what they ended-up selecting. Anyway, here is the text as submitted.

As a resident of Sacramento County, I’m respectfully submitting an argument in opposition to this 30 yearlong sale tax increase. Here are some reasons to oppose this tax.

First, until the state and federal governments restore the taxes they are diverting from roads to other programs, why should we here at the local level be taxed again for repairs we have already paid for but never received? Here are examples:

1. All diesel fuel sales taxes ($620 million) are diverted to public transit. Zero is spent on road improvements.

2. All vehicle weight fees ($1 billion) are diverted to California’s general fund. None is used on roads.

3. 25 percent of the federal Highway Trust Fund is spent on non-highway projects.

Second “transportation” does not equal road repairs and improvements. It can but does not have to. Much of this tax is already earmarked for busses and light rail despite the fact that there is no visible relationship between transit funding and transit ridership.

Third, just because revenue from this proposed tax is designated for transportation does not mean that transportation spending will increase. Historically, when a special tax such as this is passed, a budget swap is done.

Here’s an example.

Suppose 5 million is collected from this tax and given to the transportation budget. Now 5 million that was being spent on transportation is free to be spent elsewhere. The result:  transportation spending is unchanged but 5 million more is available in the general fund thus growing government without fixing anything.

Fourth, government wants to boost the wages of their employees proportional to the increase in the minimum wage. Much of this tax will go to wages and pensions of existing employees and not the promised improvements.

I don’t think I’m under taxed just under served. How about you?

During the Clinton Administration, Democrats were desperate to stop Republicans and the quickest way to stack the voter rolls was to create more voters by giving felons the right to vote. The fight to stack to voter rolls with more Democrats resulted in Paul Shanklin recording a parody of Elvis Presley’s Jail House Rock in 1999. The parody, sung by Jesse Jackson was titled Rev. Jackson’s Jailhouse Vote.

This is actually happening again right now in Virginia. In a desperate effort to help Democrats, the governor, Terry McAuliffe —an associate of Bill Clinton’s—is adding 200,000 felons to the voter rolls in time for the November election.

Virginia Governor Bypasses Court Ruling To Help 200,000 Ex-Felons Vote

Yesterday, I went to the Sacramento County Elections office and guess what I saw?
Yeah, the jailhouse voter rights sign.

A few years ago (2010), the City of Elk Grove put forward a ballot measure that claimed to reduce the local utility tax by .25 percent. The ballot argument submitted by the city attorney put this forward as the chief reason to support the measure.

Measure J: Shall an ordinance be adopted to reduce the existing Utility User Tax from 2.5% to 2.25%; modernize the current ordinance to treat taxpayers equally regardless of technology used for telecommunications and video services; to preserve funding for essential general municipal services, such as public safety?

FISCAL IMPACT The legal and technology issues could reduce the City’s projected General Fund revenues by as much as $600,000 per year. The General Fund pays for most of the City’s police, code enforcement, animal control, financial and administrative services, and some transit services. Some or all of these services could be affected by the lost revenue. Measure J would prevent the loss of those revenues.

www.elections.saccounty.net/ElectionInformation/Documents/sac_025024.pdf

There was no opposition to the measure. This tax argument was based on a willful lie or—as the Catholics call it—a sin of omission. The tax was technically a reduction; however, it more than doubled the amount of devices that were covered by the tax so in reality it was a huge, multi-million dollar tax increase. This was a textbook case of bait-and-switch.

The measure passed 76.57 % to 23.43 %

Since that time, many of us have vowed that no local tax measure would go unchallenged on the ballot. Unfortunately, those groups in our community that claim to stand for lower taxes and less government have failed to act. With both elected Republicans and Democrats acting in concert to raise taxes, these advocacy groups have ceded the argument and the fight.

Sacramento County is now trying to pass a sales tax increase for transportation called Measure B. Measure B—an 8.5 billion dollar tax over 30 years—will be on the November 8th ballot. As of a month ago, none of the so-called conservative leaders in the Elk Grove area knew anything about the measure and were surprised to hear it was going to voters. Furthermore, none plan to do anything about it.

Thanks in part to the work of one of my friends, the Elk Grove City Council decided not to go after a local sales tax after they had paid for all the groundwork to get it on the ballot in November. Prior to the vote he sent each Council member a letter outlining the spending excesses of the Council and some of the things they had foolishly done with taxpayer money. Since the total amount he listed was several times the amount they hope to get from the tax, the motion died with only one YES vote. Again no local groups did anything to oppose the tax.

But never fear faithful readers, yours truly promises that some sort of argument against Measure B will be on the ballot. Thus far, two arguments have been submitted in opposition—including mine—and as of yesterday no argument in favor had been submitted.

I will keep you updated on what happens. Arguments must be filed by close of business on Thursday and rebuttal arguments are due on Monday.