Political and tax reform won’t happen under incrementalists

California’s political dysfunction has evolved from a theory first advanced by a few jaundiced observers a generation ago — including yours truly — to a widely embraced axiom that has spawned endless journalistic, academic and civic discourse.

While there’s broad agreement on symptoms of California’s malaise, such as chronic budget deficits, there’s wide disagreement on its causes and what might be done to correct it.

Reformers divide roughly into two camps: Those who believe that tweaking political processes incrementally can make government work again, and those who contend there’s a more fundamental disconnect that can be cured only by creating a new structure attuned to 21st-century reality.

The latter approach, which would require a constitutional convention, hasn’t gotten very far because of its inherent complexity and riskiness.

Meanwhile, incrementalists enjoy strong support from wealthy foundations and individuals who are naturally skeptical of blowing up governmental boxes and starting from scratch.

The foundations backed an effort called California Forward, a consortium of civic and political figures that backed incremental reforms such as an independent redistricting commission and a “top-two” primary election system, both of which were endorsed by voters.

Many of those involved with California Forward then segued into the Think Long Committee for California, bankrolled by billionaire Nicholas Berggruen’s personal foundation, which this week unveiled its incremental prescription for California.

The 23-page proposal’s two most important points would be a major tax overhaul — extending sales taxes to services and flattening the personal income tax — that would raise about $10 billion more a year, and the creation of a “Citizens Council for Government Accountability” that would be a new layer of government to oversee the other layers.

Berggruen is prepared, it’s said, to spend $20 million to sell the plan to voters. And that’s where reform gets messy.

While the scheme has some commendable aspects, it falls short of the top-to-bottom overhaul that California probably needs.

Its tax provisions also complicate plans by unions and Gov. Jerry Brown to put their own tax increase on the ballot next year.

The Think Long tax plan resembles one from a blue-ribbon commission a couple of years ago that would appear to shift tax burdens from the wealthy to middle-income taxpayers.

If voters face two major tax measures — and a third is also being bandied about — the most likely result would be confusion that bodes  ill for all.

Dan Walters’ Sacramento Bee columns on state politics are syndicated by the Scripps Howard News Service.

Dan WaltersOp EdsOpinionSan Francisco

Just Posted

ose Pak and Willie Brown at an event in 2014. 
Rose Pak and Willie Brown at an event in 2014.
Willie and Rose: An alliance for the ages

How the Mayor and Chinatown activist shaped San Francisco, then and now

San Francisco supervisors are considering plans to replace trash cans — a “Renaissance” garbage can is pictured on Market Street — with pricey, unnecessary upgrades. (Kevin N. Hume/The Examiner)
San Francisco must end ridiculous and expensive quest for ‘pretty’ trash cans

SF’s unique and pricey garbage bins a dream of disgraced former Public Works director

Giants right fielder Mike Yastrzemski is pictured at bat on July 29 against the Dodgers at Oracle Park; the teams are in the top spots in their league as the season closes. (Chris Victorio/Special to The Examiner)
With playoff positions on the line, old rivalries get new life

Giants cruised through season, Dodgers not far behind

Golden Gate Park visitors may take a survey about options regarding private car access on John F. Kennedy Drive, which has been the subject of controversy during the pandemic.<ins> (Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)</ins>
Your chance to weigh in: Should JFK remain closed to cars?

Host of mobility improvements for Golden Gate Park proposed

Drivers gathered to urge voters to reject an initiative that would exempt Uber, Lyft, and other gig economy companies from state labor laws, in San Francisco in October 2020. (Jim Wilson/New York Times)
What’s the role of unions in the 21st century?

As membership declines in California, economic inequality increases

Most Read