Political Review: California Proposition 1C

Author: RealistPublished: Oct 14, 2006 at 6:11 pm 1 comment

Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

This passage from the Gospel of Matthew (Matt 25:40) is supposed to be the motivation for the voters of California to pass Proposition 1c, a part of the Rebuild California Plan. But I say, "do not be fooled," for Prop 1c is, in reality, a lupine adorned in chamois.

Proposition 1c is declared by its proponents to be the friend of the friendless by providing funding for worthy causes such as battered women's shelters and housing assistance for the elderly and the disabled. But the truth is that much of the money is pork intended to relieve housing developers of the costs of creating parks and utility infrastructure in their new housing developments, a requirement in many California cities.

According to an analysis of Proposition 1c published by the League of Women Voters of California, housing construction and homebuyer programs are to receive $1.5 billion, only $50 million of which is to be allocated to homeless shelters. The balance is to go for things such as "construction of multi-family housing," and for "farm worker housing" (because the agricultural interests of California are too cheap to pay for it themselves.)

In addition, "development programs" are to receive $1.35 billion for such goals as "transit-oriented development" which looks to me to mean "housing development in urban areas near public transportation".

I know it's tough buying a house in California today, but it wasn't people such as me who caused home prices to rise so high. It took me 20 years and a lot of work, but I have completely paid for my home. I am not using my home equity to buy expensive toys like SUVs and boats I can only use once a year. If more people were more responsible with their assets, more people could afford to buy homes today without government assistance, because fewer opportunities to profit on someone's misery would be offered.

But that scene wouldn't play well with "entrepreneurs." Investors seeking a quick buck from "flipping" properties exacerbated an already-aggravated housing market at a time when housing nationally is over-built and under-bought, in part because of job losses and reduced wages. Inventories are high, and with developers cutting profit margins to offer incentives to buy, one can understand why they would be calling in all those chits they stacked up during the electoral campaigns in the past through contributions to their sycophantic candidates.

Continued on the next page Page 1 — Page 2
Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Profile image for realist

Article Author: Realist

You don't have to be Pessimist to become Realist - but it certainly helps!

Visit Realist's author pageRealist's Blog

Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own

Article comments

  • 1 - scout

    Oct 16, 2006 at 10:33 am

    pess, I am voting negative on this prop. NO MORE TAX INCREASES. It's that simple.

    We must get rid of taxation, not increase taxes. If we want to help people, then we must pass laws forcing corps to provide essential drugs to the poor at bottom line prices: like about a nickel.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Nov 30, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for October

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs