“Prop. 24 would repeal three corporate tax breaks enacted by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Legislature as parts of budget deals in 2008 and 2009.
“Prop. 25 would reduce the legislative vote requirement for budget passage to a simple majority, while retaining the two-thirds vote needed for tax increases. It also would strip legislators of their pay for each day a budget wasn’t passed on time.
“Prop. 26 would redefine some current “fees” as “taxes.” Therefore, they’d require a two-thirds majority vote to pass the Legislature or, if local fees, a vote of the people.”
A challenge for voters, by George Skelton, Capitol Journal, October 18, 2010
Prop 24: Yes
Prop 25: Yes
Prop 26: No. But don’t take my word for it:
“Prop. 26 would be a step backward from reform and should be dumped.
“The measure would make it more difficult for elected representatives in Sacramento and locally to do their jobs â€” specifically, in this case, to generate revenue through fees.
“The nonpartisan legislative analyst estimates that it would cost the deficit-plagued state general fund at least $1 billion annually.
“This proposal would not affect most user fees â€” at parks, for example â€” or property development charges. But it would affect regulatory fees â€” as on hazardous waste â€” and put a crimp in environmental protection and health safety programs.
“It also would cripple any attempt to restructure state taxes, a sorely needed action to rebalance rollercoaster revenues with spending.
“Currently, on a majority vote, a tax increase can be balanced with a tax cut if the net result is no rise in revenue. Under Prop. 25, any tax hike would require a two-thirds vote, regardless of a simultaneous reduction in other levees.”