Current:Home > NewsCalifornia voters lose a shot at checking state and local tax hikes at the polls -MacroWatch
California voters lose a shot at checking state and local tax hikes at the polls
View
Date:2025-04-13 13:21:11
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The California Supreme Court on Thursday removed a measure from the November ballot that would have made it harder to raise taxes, siding with Gov. Gavin Newsom and his Democratic allies in the state Legislature.
The measure would have required voter approval for tax increases passed by the state Legislature. It also would have raised the threshold required for voter approval of certain local government tax increases to a two-thirds vote at the polls. Currently those tax increases can take affect if a simple majority of voters approve.
The measure would have applied retroactively to most tax increases approved since Jan. 1, 2022. Local governments warned that would mean they could have lost billions of dollars in revenue that had previously been approved by voters.
Newsom has opposed many tax increases during his time in office. But he sued to block this measure, saying it would harm local governments and take away the Legislature’s ability to raise taxes.
Supporters of the ballot measure argued that California has become too expensive and voters need more control over taxes. In a unanimous decision, the court ruled the measure could not be enacted by ballot initiative because it “would substantially alter our basic plan of government.” Justice Goodwin Liu wrote the opinion. “The Supreme Court’s decision to take this dangerous initiative off the ballot avoids a host of catastrophic impacts, protecting billions of dollars for schools, access to reproductive health care, gun safety laws that keep students safe in classrooms, and paid family leave,” said Jonathan Underland, spokesperson for the campaign that opposed the initiative. Removing a qualified measure from the ballot before an election is rare in California, but not unprecedented. The court wrote it was necessary in this case to review the initiative because it would have potentially voided tax increases put in place after Jan. 1, 2022. That may have deprived government of some funding lawmakers were counting on.
veryGood! (959)
Related
- The Daily Money: Spending more on holiday travel?
- Detlev Helmig Was Frugal With Tax Dollars. Then CU Fired Him for Misusing Funds.
- Global Carbon Emissions Unlikely to Peak Before 2040, IEA’s Energy Outlook Warns
- Southwest Airlines' #epicfail takes social media by storm
- Former longtime South Carolina congressman John Spratt dies at 82
- Unsafe streets: The dangers facing pedestrians
- Every Time We Applauded North West's Sass
- In bad news for true loves, inflation is hitting the 12 Days of Christmas
- Where will Elmo go? HBO moves away from 'Sesame Street'
- Interest rates up, but not on your savings account
Ranking
- Could your smelly farts help science?
- As Rooftop Solar Grows, What Should the Future of Net Metering Look Like?
- The overlooked power of Latino consumers
- German Election Prompts Hope For Climate Action, Worry That Democracies Can’t Do Enough
- North Carolina justices rule for restaurants in COVID
- BP and Shell Write-Off Billions in Assets, Citing Covid-19 and Climate Change
- California Dairy Farmers are Saving Money—and Cutting Methane Emissions—By Feeding Cows Leftovers
- Everything to Know About the Vampire Breast Lift, the Sister Treatment to the Vampire Facial
Recommendation
Have Dry, Sensitive Skin? You Need To Add These Gentle Skincare Products to Your Routine
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Plunge in Response to Coronavirus Pandemic
In New York’s 16th Congressional District, a Progressive Challenge to the Democratic Establishment Splits Climate Groups
Russia's economy is still working but sanctions are starting to have an effect
Apple iOS 18.2: What to know about top features, including Genmoji, AI updates
At a French factory, the newest employees come from Ukraine
At a French factory, the newest employees come from Ukraine
CVS and Walgreens limit sales of children's meds as the 'tripledemic' drives demand