Why Cut Off an Ear When You Can Cut Off a Head October 17, 2007
I’m a big believer in smaller government. Any chance to reduce the size of government, any government, is a
chance worth taking. Whether you have a chef’s knife or just a pare knife at you disposal, take a cut out of
government when you can. One California office holder has set the table.
Enter Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. He has been uncommonly candid in expressing his 110 percent
support for a 10 percent cut to the city’s telephone utility users tax. In Mayor Villaraigosa’s Los Angeles, citizens
will have the opportunity to vote themselves a tax cut by supporting a ballot measure reducing this particular
users tax to nine percent, down from the current 10 percent. The tax is paid by telephone users, collected by the
phone service providers and sent to the city. To earn this revenue, the Mayor has to do nothing, so it won’t take
quality time away from his affairs of office or any of his other affairs for that matter..
Currently, the telephone utility users tax translates into about $270 million of the city’s total budget revenue of
over $6.6 billion. The measure to shave 10 percent off the $270 million will appear on the ballot on February 5
when polls will be filled with presidential primary voters. If this sounds like a good deal, think again.
What’s really going on is typical of today’s breed of politicians, of which Mayor Villaraigosa is an up and coming
poster child. The prospect of adverse court decisions and an IRS directive on this type of tax have sent the
mayor’s office scrambling to reshape the tax. The Mayor decided that he would rather cede part of the tax than
lose it all. He called in his political strategists. They brought in the pollsters and, in true Clintonian fashion, he
has formulated a strategy to save the tax.
Pollsters contacted a sampling of Los Angeles residents. Six out of 10 survey respondents indicated they would
support a decreased tax rate. Questioned whether to keep the whole tax or do away with it, a little over half of
the respondents said the tax should remain on the books. Armed with this information, the mayor approached
the City Council with a plan. In order to introduce a tax under California’s Proposition 218, it must be approval
unanimously by the local lawmakers and meet specific time lines. In this case, it could not go in front of the
voters until 2009. The city could lose the tax revenue by an unfavorable court decision by then. So the council
voted to declare an emergency, climbing through a hole in the 218 Proposition. Politicians only have power if
they have our money. Take away the revenue and you chip away at their power, so this situation was a great
and serious emergency indeed! The resulting council vote set up the ballot measure for February. Then the
voters will have a direct say.
Giving the voters a say scares the heck out of cynical politicians. To assuage his own fears, Mayor Villaraigosa
has employed the services of his Democratic strategists to sell the measure as a tax cut. If voter opinion doesn’t
go as planned leading up to the vote, he’s prepared to shift into second gear. The same strategists will begin
the scare campaign to convince voters that if the tax cut measure fails, police and firefighting services will suffer,
public safety will be compromised and the City of Angels will go to hell because it will lose .004 percent of it’s
billions in tax revenue. Confusing? It may be intended on the mayor’s part.
The irony of the situation is this. If a voter casts a “No” on the measure to cut the tax, the entire tax goes away. A
“Yes” vote for the measure approves the 10 percent cut. Why vote in favor of a cut when you have the power to
trim the whole enchilada. Mayor Villaraigosa deserves to lose this battle for his cynicism and admitted tactics but
mainly for his arrogant insistence on persistent taxation. It’s a good day when politicians have to go a little
hungry; it’s a better day when they starve. Remember, always count the silverware after the mayor leaves. Bon
appetit!
Copyright 2007
Mark E. Sheedy
Current Column...
Politicians only
have power if
they have our
money. Take
away the revenue
and you chip
away at their
power, so this
situation was a
great and serious
emergency indeed!