something to think about

Officials see Prop. 21 as key to future of California's state parks - latimes.com

$18 a year/car to keep beaches and parks open... and then California licensed drivers don't have to pay $8/visit to park.... Why is passing Prop 21 even a question?

Proponents (mainly a group called "Californians Against Car Taxes") say it's not fair to charge every person in California with a car -- many of whom may never use the state parks -- to keep the parks open and maintained. But doesn't every person in California who may not drive end up paying for roads via state taxes on employment or property? Doesn't every homeowner, whether they have children or not, pay taxes to keep our public schools (those that remain, and however crappy they are) running?

Others say it's not fair just to charge tourists to park when they visit. Hate to burst a bubble here, but $8 for a day on a hiking trail or at a beautiful beach is way cheaper than what tourists get charged for parking + admission at Disneyland, Sea World, Universal Studios or to park in Hollywood to look at stars and handprints on the sidewalk. So I really don't think there's going to be a major uproar or tourist exodus from the state.

If this passes, the $130 million the state currently spends on parks would go back into the state general fund to be spent on other things. (May I suggest hiring good teachers and filling in potholes as two possible expenditures?)

However, if this passes, proponents feel this would also set a really bad precedent. Don't like the way the legislature is spending the budget? Create a proposition to tax people and funnel funds to your initiative of choice. It's called "ballot box budgeting" and it's the one thing that's making me really think about how I'll vote on Prop 21. Although, right now I'm leaning towards the opinion that if voters vote to pay more money out of their pocket for an initiative, then the government should be more than happy to let them...