5057

Well, appointed by Jerry Brown probably means he’s a good one, appointed by Arnold not so much. So there’s that.

5058

One thing the Dems should do, especially in states or cities they gain power, is to avoid the temptation to use consumption taxes of any sort to micromanage either funding or behavior. People hate consumption taxes, and notice them much more than income tax withholding. The amount of funds derived is also usually puny, and if not regressive, definitely not progressive. I do make an exception for a carbon tax, properly structured which IMO is more of an “externalities tax” than a consumption tax.

On the issue of the CA gas tax, it’s really pretty dumb - it raises tiny money and gives the GOP a hook for campaigning. People notice it, and hate it, and yet it doesn’t bring in much money.

For example, the avg working adult in CA will use about 400 gallons of gas in a year, meaning they will pay $60 in gas tax. That’s a small amount, only a bit over a buck a week, and yet it’s buck that slaps people in the face when they go to the pump. It’s not rational, but it is human nature.

Compare that $60/yr per working adult in revenue ($60 X roughly 22 million working adults is $1.3 billion, or about 0.6% of all state/local combined spending in CA.) Pocket change, but pocket change that pisses off voters.

By contrast a 1% increase in income tax on the top 20% of earners in CA would bring in approximately 10 times the total revenue as a gas tax and although high earners would oppose it initially, it would fade into the background quickly (no weekly slap in the face) and it would not impact most voters. It would be progressive, not regressive also.

I guess this is a pet peeve of mine but conservatives often pass stupid “sin” taxes and liberals often pass stupid targeted taxes, and we should avoid both. Tax to obtain the revenue needed; don’t micromanage; tax progressively, and try to keep it simple if possible. Those are my general principles for tax policy.

Anyhow, TLDR: gas tax = dumb.

5059

Wouldn’t a carbon tax amount to a de facto gas tax, though, as it gets passed down to the consumer in the form of price hikes?

5060

It’s much less noticeable though. My issue here is not so much about policy but about framing, and dealing with the irrationality of many voters. In reality, a gas tax is no big deal. But people hate it.

5061

Democratic SuperPAC ad airing in MN, hat tip to Chris Gwinn:

5062

Good bit.

5063

Sure, but you can make it as progressive or regressive as you like by adjusting other taxes.

5064

Not sure how easy it would be, since it would effectively be a tax on everything in our entire economy.

5065

Hey, look it’s the winning argument for the Democrats.

5066

A VAT is also a tax on nearly everything in the economy, yet lots of countries use it.

Anyway, some regions of Canada have already implemented a carbon tax. It was even supposed to be revenue-neutral, so that every dollar collected would be returned as income tax credits (ie those who used a lot of carbon would effectively be paying those who used less carbon).

5067

And most proposed carbon taxes are the refundable kind, so unlike the standard gas tax they’re not inherently regressive.

BTW, in California, isn’t the state gas tax just folded into the price of the fuel, like the federal one? That’s the way it works in Oregon, anyway.

5068

BTW, good ol’ Michael Avenatti put up a big “Donate to Beto” thing over the last few days.

And then Michael Avenatti pocketed half the money he raised.

Dear fellow left-leaners: this snake oil salesman is not to be trusted and is not a friend. It’s very likely that his nonsense regarding Kavanaugh tipped the scales on that.

Hove him outta the nest.

5069

Avevannti = Trump basically. Big surprise. But fair warning.

5070

I’m no Avenatti fan, rather the opposite, but this particular claim from the GOP is nonsense and we shouldn’t repeat it. Before Avenatti got involved, Republicans were almost certain to confirm Kavanaugh. After Avenatti got involved, Republicans were almost certain to confirm Kavanaugh. There’s no evidence that Avenatti’s claims about his client were in any factor in the outcome. Jeff Flake was really the key, and when he decided to like the bogus background check, it was basically all over, and Avenatti had nothing to do with that.

5071

That can’t be legal, can it?

5072

It is legal, and Avenatti did it. He set up a PAC (which he disguised as a straight up donation page for O’Rourke) even though Beto is well-known for not accepting PAC money. That allows him to “split” the fundraising for administrative expenses in creative ways, as long as he can show his own creative accounting on it.

5073

I’ve seen it claimed by smart people on the left, actually and thanks.

When someone tells me not to repeat something that I feel has merit, I tend to do just the opposite.

Michael Avenatti’s claim that he represented multiple clients who had credible accounts against Judge Kavanaugh, and his failure to produce any corroborating evidence whatsoever from the one client he had who was willing to come forward weakened the claims of Dr. Ford and Deborah Ramirez and helped provide cover to Republicans to vote to confirm.

5074

For example?

Who were the Republican ‘no’ votes before Avenatti butted in?

5075

(Doesn’t seem to be a Republican talking point there, at least to me.)

I’m not sure any. But as I said, he provided political cover for that vote to confirm. Cover that seems – in polling after the confirmation – to have greatly helped Dean Heller in Nevada and Ted Cruz in Texas, and possibly bumped Marsha Blackburn in Tennessee. All of those Republican incumbents/candidates saw their numbers bump sharply to help them during and post-Kavanaugh hearings.

Since the hearings, we’ve seen red-ish states start polling bright red, and some of that seems to be the Avenatti media circus allowing the GOP to paint the allegations against Kavanaugh with a very broad brush.

5076

Beto raised $38.1m in Q3 2018. For context, Barack Obama raised $23.8m in the last quarter before the 2008 Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire primaries (and was considered an eye-popping number at the time).

Beto looks like he’s probably not going to win. But as has been pointed out, there’s a reasonable hope that his coattails will help in downballot congressional and state races.