In the 1970s the voters of California had had enough of the State of California, and with the help of Howard Jarvis, launched a tax revolt. Proposition 13 absolutely polarized the people of California, which was helped along by such maneuvers as the State of California issuing "pink slips" to all state employees, with the message that if Proposition 13 was voted into law, the pink slips would be real. Governor Jerry Brown at first came out against it, only to suggest after its overwhelming victory on election day that he had actually always been in favor of it. 1998 is the 20^th year anniversary of the enactment of Proposition 13, which was followed by copycat measures in many of those states that have initiative and referendum. And now there are two decades of precedents to tell us what it all meant.

The truth is that a corrupt system of government had produced a burdened population, that suffered under one of the most tyrannical state regimes in the western United States. The State of California has a long history of heavy-handedness and racism that its modern operators have chosen to conceal, because ethically driven people would feel impelled to seek its retirement and dissolution as an institution, to be succeeded by a more democratic and benign representative government. Before the turn of the century the railroads had the state legislature in a death-grip, and the only reason any progressive legislation ever came to California was because of the tradition of popular resistance against the State of California. The amendments to the state constitution authorizing popular initiatives and referendums only became law as a result of popular upheavals, setting a precedent of legislation by initiative, which is not a truly sound way to formulate law. Proposition 13 fits into that model of government by initiative, which when reduced to its basic nuts and bolts is really a kind of mobocracy, driven by the passions of an election year.

In order to understand how Proposition 13 makes for bad law, it is important to understand what qualities make for good law. A good law is a law that accurately captures the values and practices of a community, and expresses those values in terms of principles that can be applied to various situations. An example of a good law is the prohibition against murder, which is based on the universal natural principle that killing and violence are antisocial and retrogressive. Once such a principle is enunciated, it is possible to examine various situations in which a human being dies, to determine whether or not the cause of death was a criminal act. But if a specific act is qualified as illegal, then even if a person dies, if the specific act is not committed in its details, the perpetrator cannot be convicted of a crime, even if culpable. It is this drive to micromanage the lives and affairs of average Americans that ultimately renders the Federal republic a police state.

What Proposition 13 did was it reduced the taxes of people who owned property in a particular year (1978), and it limited the power of the state to raise taxes by forcing the government to seek public approval of measures to raise taxes. On the surface this appears benign enough, but the loophole was that when those original people sold their homes, the new owners would not benefit from the reduced taxes, and would experience a jump in the property taxes, creating vast inequities when a property assessed at Prop. 13 values paid about $500 per year, and the next door neighbor paid $1500 per year. Additionally, the State of California suddenly became very cash-conscious, and use fees - like those paid to the DMV for the "privilege" to drive a car - skyrocketed, as the State realized that they were unexploited profit centers. The really pernicious influence of Proposition 13, however, has been the hostility the politicians have felt towards the electorate, as expressed by deliberate policies that allow public services to deteriorate, so that the public can be pressured to vote a tax increase. Worse yet, like all bad laws, Proposition 13 will be voided by the passage of time, because at some point all the property owners of 1978 will pass away, and when their properties transfer to new owners, the taxes will all rise.

Simply because Proposition 13 was bad legislation, however, does not mean that it was unnecessary. The State of California has always operated as a police state, under the thumb of tycoons like Chandler, Hearst, Doheny, etc. The arrogance of California state bureaucracies is the stuff of legends, and in the 1970s the voters wanted to send a message to Sacramento that would stick, and the only man capable of doing it was Howard Jarvis. Proposition 13 literally crippled the power of the state overnight; but it eventually recovered, in a more aggressive form that today is literally seizing and selling the cars of those unfortunate enough to drive without a drivers' license, or registration; offenses that once were minor "fix it" tickets.

PROPOSITION 13 IS HERE TO STAY

By Joel Fox

(Joel Fox is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn.)

As Proposition 13's 20^th anniversary approaches, expect a plethora of studies, seminars and retrospectives on the famous property tax cutting measure. If the past 20 years is a guide, there will be a study to fit every taste. On the question of whether California governments collect more tax revenue in constant dollars than they did before Proposition 13, expect to find some that say yes and others that say no, along with disputes about what actually constitutes a tax.

There will be seminars on how government works or doesn't work under Proposition 13's provisions. And, new proposals for changes in government and tax structure will make the rounds, especially by those who found managing under the old tax system more to their liking. Remembrances of older people of how their home ownership was in jeopardy before 1978 undoubtedly will make television retrospectives. (If television doesn't decide to skip the whole anniversary of a successful tax revolt altogether. WFI Editor)

A catalog of woes attributed to Proposition 13 will be circulated. In biblical times, unfortunate occurrences and unexpected terrors came from the hand of God. In 20^th century California, it seems modern plagues are the result of Proposition 13:

-When the Nimitz Freeway in Oakland collapsed during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, a Los Angeles Times editorial cartoon by Paul Conrad showed a car crushed by a freeway. The license plate of the car read "Prop. 13."

-When 12-year-old Polly Klaas was abducted from her home in Petaluma (California) and brutally murdere, Proposition 13 was judged culpable in the crime by columnist Richard Reeves in a Money magazine article. Reeves wrote that the killer might have been apprehended before the murder took place if only the police had advanced communication equipment, which surely was denied them by the Proposition 13 tax cuts. (Of course, if the police really need advanced technology, they can always lay off the vice division, and use all of those resources solving real crimes, like homicide. WFI Editor)

-The property tax cut measure even made an appearance just after the so-called trial of the century. In his TRB column in the New Republic, Robert Wright proclaimed that the No. 1 reason the O. J. Simpson criminal trial ended without a conviction was because of Howard Jarvis and Proposition 13. His theory had something to do with reduced municipal resources so that there wasn't enough money to hire competent investigators.

Despite all this and the comments about Proposition 13's effect on schools and other public services, Proposition 13 has been found not guilty in the court of public opinion. California's population has nearly doubled since the initiative was approved by voters in June, 1978. More than two-thirds of the people have moved from homes they owned in 1978, thereby allowing the property taxes on those homes to rise to market levels. But Proposition 13 is still supported by the public. While Proposition 13 opponents vilified it during the recent recession because government revenue was limited and new revenues were harder to get, the Proposition 13 system again is working its magic. Some counties are running surpluses, while homeowners are protected against the high inflation in the housing market that is starting to sweep across the Golden State and would bring with it a tax shock under the pre-Proposition 13 system.

Before all the reminiscing occurs, however, let's realize that the Proposition 13 is more than a tax law. It has become a symbol for people taking control of government and having a stronger voice in tax matters. That is why it will be difficult to dislodge. Passed in the shadow of Watergate and still going strong in full view of government fiscal follies such as those at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, that concept is something to hold onto.

An obscure but sensible piece of American political philosophy says that nothing much happens until the status quo becomes more painful than change. This was certainly true when Proposition 13 passed. Voters risked difficult cuts in the public sector to prevent the real possibility that they might lose their homes. Aging tax rebels recognize that Proposition 13 is now the status quo. The people will remove it if they fear the status quo more than any proposed change. That does not appear to be the case as Californians prepare to commemorate - or simply to acknowledge - Proposition 13's 20^th anniversary.

SOURCE: Reprinted from the 22 March, 1998, issue of the Los Angeles Times, Orange County Edition, Opinion section. Reprinted in the public service of the national interest of the American people.