Los Angeles City Special Municipal Election

Proposition S offers to reduce City’s tax on communications users from 10% to 9%; modernize the ordinance to treat taxpayers equally regardless of technology used; exempt low-income senior-citizen and disabled households; to fund general municipal servers, such as 911, police, fire protection, street maintenance, parks and libraries.

Let me tell you why I am voting no on Proposition S. It’s a sham!

The city of Los Angeles has been illegally collecting a 10% tax on cellular phone services but the courts declared it as an invalid tax and a violation of Prop 218 due to the fact the city voters never voted for it.

If people vote yes on this Proposition our tax will be lowered to 9% but then there will be an additional tax placed on many of our other electronic communications. So basically we would be paying less in tax on the current service but we would then be paying a new tax on many additional electronic communication services. So in essence it will end up costing us much more.

But that’s not all!

The real pisser about this is the trickery taking place. They are trying to pull the wool over our eyes. Currently the City is appealing the courts and if they lose then there will be no tax on any electronic communications. If they lose, we will not have to pay a tax on any of these services. They are throwing in Proposition S as a way to get us to really vote yes to secure their tax knowing full well that they are playing dirty pool.

Their logic is if they tell us it’s a reduction in taxes we will vote it in, not knowingly voting in a tax which we should have never had to pay in the first place.

I almost want to become a politician to come in and clean up scams like these but then at the end of the day I would be a politician.

Vote No and we should ask for our money back.

Four of the largest southern California Indian tribes along with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger are pushing to amend an existing gaming compact with the state that would allow the expansion of their casinos. This expansion would make them some of the largest casinos in the world.

Out of all the propositions I have read, these required a bit of time to gather my thoughts and figure out which way to vote. As an avid poker junkie and a frequent visitor to these Indian Casinos it would seem obvious to vote yes to let them expand their operations. The trouble is, I am torn between my selfish desire to enjoy Vegas style casinos here in California and what I morally feel is the right thing to do.

In the simplest terms the Casinos are asking to expand their Nevada-style slot machines from 2,000 to 7,500. In exchange more payments would be made to the California General Fund. Governor Schwarzenegger is pushing for this as a way to pay down some of the 11 billion dollar fiscal deficit.

Schwarzenegger stipulates that by voting yes, 9 billion dollars in additional revenues would be collected over the next 20 years that can be used for public safety, local and State Law Enforcement, Senior Citizens, and Education.

Before we get too excited about all these billions of dollars in additional revenue, the state is only really looking at an additional $450 million per year. This equates to 0.3% of the state’s annual budget.

In an attempt to bring myself up to speed on all the issues surrounding this Indian Gaming act I have come across some extremely high emotions.

• There are those who feel Indians deserve to expand their Casino Empire and be allowed to make as much money as they can. It is about time Native Americans have a piece of the pie considering what the white man has done to them. When it comes to what the Native Americans have, no one has a right to complain.
• Then there are some Native Americans who themselves report that the wealth brought in from the Casinos are unfairly distributed to the smaller tribes. It has been reported by some tribe members that they have been expelled from their homes as a way for those with higher percentages of Native American blood can keep more of the distribution for themselves. The words “organized mafia” appears to get mentioned.

I have absolutely no idea if the claims made from Native Americans who have been expelled from their tribes for the sake of monetary gain are accurate, but I personally have been known to say we should give Native Americans anything within reason considering our brutal history with them. (Update: Video 1: Pechanga Membership Battle - Video 2: Tribe-Pechanga Casino Tribal Member Issues)

Anything in reason is how I’ve come to my decision to vote NO on this proposition. Casinos are basically money printing presses. The gambling odds are stacked in their favor over the long term and I see no reason for them to have a monopoly on all casino business here in California.

I’ve read somewhere each slot machine can bring in $130,000 a year after payouts. For purely selfish purposes I want a piece of that action.

Since Indian Gaming is a monopoly, their taxes should be much higher than what we are currently asking. The only competition for real Vegas style gambling in California are the Indian casinos themselves. The least they can do is pay two to three times what normal businesses would have to pay in state taxes.

Another thing that really has bugged me is the way this proposition is being presented to us Californians. Since our state is in fiscal trouble we must vote to allow the casinos to save us. The way I see it, if Indian Gaming can lower the states deficit problems then why don’t we just legalize gambling as a whole and impose a hefty tax which guarantees more money to the General Fund?

There are too many special interests to allow that to happen.

The California lottery was setup as a means to help pay down our deficit and as a way to contribute directly to education. From looking at the current state of our educational system I question how much that has helped.

Lastly, at the end of the day I just do not like slot machines (and the lottery for that matter) since they are nothing more than a senseless activity requiring zero skill. My grandmother used to call them “one arm bandits” as they stood there taking people’s money all day long.

When I was last at the Palms Hotel in Las Vegas there was a line to the cashier dedicated to only cashing employment checks. Sadly it was filled with people all the way around the corner. I fear all those new slot machines which the Indian Casinos want to add will attract the same type of low economic people.

If this is the road we must travel then the least we can do is see to it that a large percentage of our resident’s losses in these expanding casinos will come back to the state in the form of a high gaming tax.

Proposition 92 is designed to lower student fee’s in community colleges across California. Additionally it limits future fee increases practically locking in low student tuition rates. The proposition also guarantees that the community college system would become independent from state politics and be self governed.

When I first read about this proposition I thought it sounded really good. My thoughts were that lowering fees would allow more students to attend college and increase their education. More students would mean more college educated workers in the work force making it better for society as a whole.

After careful review it appears this proposition may actually hurt the state more than benefit it. Although prop 92 says they will not hurt K-12 funding or raise taxes I cannot see where they will get the money to fund this. Our state is already running at a deficit and the only way to fund such a plan would be to raise taxes of pull from the funds of other critical programs.

One of the main reasons I am voting down this prop is from reading the stats which I found from the arguments in favor. The average student is 28 years old and they will see their income jump from $25,600 to $47,571 three years after earning their degree. That’s a nice raise in income and quite an incentive for students to pay their way.

In various places around the web I’ve read that the students fees may represent no more than 5 percent of the real cost for students. Living expenses, books and transportation are the real costs for students.

Unless I see a real plan demonstrating where the monies will come to support this proposition, I am shooting it down.

Proposition 91 was created to prevent the state from spending gas tax revenues on endeavors not related to transportation.

This would appear to be a good thing to vote yes on if it were not for the fact that this measure had already been voted on in Nov 2006 under Prop 1A.

77% of the voters have already approved this measure. I plan to vote no or just leave it blank.