California Gov. Gavin Newsom ramped up his opposition to a proposed tax on the state's billionaire residents on Friday by endorsing a competing ballot measure that would both cancel out the billionaire wealth tax initiative and prohibit any new taxes on the ownership of financial assets or other personal property.

"He’s showing California his true colors," Debru Carthan, vice president of Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW)—which is leading the campaign for the California billionaire tax—said in response to Newsom's endorsement of Proposition 42. "He’d rather millions of children and families lose their healthcare than ask a couple hundred billionaires to finally pay their fair share."

The push for Proposition 42 is funded by Building a Better California, a group bankrolled by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires.

If passed, Prop 42 would ban "any new state tax... imposed on the ownership of personal property (all things people own other than real estate)." It would also prohibit any tax that "applies retroactively based on taxpayer’s past activities." (The proposed 5% billionaire tax, which will appear on California's November ballot as Proposition 40, would apply retroactively to billionaires living in California on or after January 1, 2026.)

In a statement, Newsom framed his support for Prop 42 as an effort to protect Californians' retirement savings.

"We all agree that Californians deserve to have their retirement and life savings protected from new state taxes so those savings are there when they need them," the governor said.

But critics have described Prop 42 as a "poison-pill measure" whose supporters are fearmongering about a nonexistent threat to retirement savings in an effort to defeat the proposed billionaire tax, revenue from which would be used to fund healthcare, food aid, and education in the state.

"Its true target is Prop 40," the editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle wrote of the Newsom-backed measure. "Prop 42 papers over its real purpose by cynically appealing to middle-class worries about retirement security. Reject this appalling tactic and disincentivize its further use by voting no."

Newsom has opposed the idea of a wealth tax on California's billionaires from the proposal's inception, pitting him against major unions, the California Democratic Party, and prominent national progressives such as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).

"Some of the SEIU-UHW members I’ve talked to are tired of Democratic politicians like Gavin Newsom taking their marching orders from the donors who would fund a future presidential campaign," Khanna, who is considering a presidential run, said during a rally in support of Prop 40 last weekend. "We are tired of a governor defying grassroots delegates in the California Democratic Party, defying California labor... all because he’s on the side of Trump allies like Peter Thiel and Sergey Brin."

"You can’t pretend to be anti-Trump if you’re doing the bidding of Trump donors," Khanna added.


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

1 comment

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] -2 points 1 month ago

While I'm not a GQP Newsom fanboy, this is a kinda skewed article. But what can you expect from Common Dreams? Always be sure to vet your news sources.

You might have to zoom in...

  • source
  • 17 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 36 points 1 month ago

    Double down and make this an annual tax.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 1 month ago

    What we really need is a rollback of the Reagan tax cuts, and an actual end to TRICKledown economics, just for starters. Economic Vampires like Newsom must be excised from the Democratic party.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago

    At the current rate, it would take 30 days for people to make that money back. They really really need to pay up, they forgot what the alternative is if they don't.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 4 weeks ago

    This man is not presidential material.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 weeks ago

    Fortunately, this is exactly why we have ballot measures. Go vote!

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 weeks ago (1 child)

    If Newsom wins the dem primary for president I‘m gonna be sooo inconsolable.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 4 weeks ago

    Oh what's that you say? What's Gavin newsoms net worth? Oh I dunno 30 million, he surely doesn't have a dog in that fight huh?

  • source
  • And this is why we're fucked. The system needs to change, but the people with the power to do so don't want the changes we need as it would remove their wealth and power... so when's the revolution because it'll only get worse until then.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 4 weeks ago

    This is how he will show America that he is a man of the people. A true champion of the working class!

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 4 weeks ago

    Yeah he sucks on alot of issues. If you live in California, you already know that. Most politicians out of California are in the deepest pockets of the mega wealthy just due to ease of access.

    This is predictable behavior from him. He knows where his bread gets buttered. This I hate less about him than his weird trans stances.

    Id still take him over any Republicans but I'm open to anyone that wants to primary against him! I assume many California's are in the same boat for a multitude of different reasons. No broadly acceptable replacement has appeared though.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Prop 40 is basically a performative measure that will get tossed out in court. And it’s completely toothless. A quick little one time handout. The tax code needs to be changed at the Federal level. But hey, if this get y’all to actually vote, fine.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    The state needs the money if they have any shot of covering the services shortfall that was cut federally. It's not about being punitive, that's just how they want you to think about it for propoganda purposes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago

    Then the state legislature can extract the money through, I dunno, actual taxes. Prop 40 was written by some university professors and got on the ballot because enough people signed a petition for a “wealth tax”. The wealthy, along with corporations, absolutely need to pay more in taxes. But a “one time” (how will that phrasing play in future attempts at properly taxing them!?!) siphoning of money (a mere 5%) will be a quick fix that’ll be gone within a year if the measure even survives the lawsuits.

  • source
  • parent
  • 11 comments in c/california@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 27 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Was there ever any doubt who’s side he was on.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • God he really fucking needs to lose the primary in two years. Who knows what the fuck will happen if the DNC anoints him 🫩

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    If he fails and the billionaire tax gets passed, he's going to hope this is memory holed. If the billionaire tax fails to pass or this measure goes through, he's going to immediately pivot to "That one tax wasn't the right way to do it."

    Spoiler: There will never be a "right" way to tax billionaires.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago

    If the tax gets passed, he'll shout from the rooftops that he's the governor that got the tax passed. Republicans do this shit all the time, be against something popular, vote against it, then when it passes take credit

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago

    Let this be the end of his career.

  • source
  • [+] -9 points 1 month ago (4 children)
  • [–] 17 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Chosen one? Wut? No he the fuck wasn't. He's been this way for-fucking-ever

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Cannot tell you how many of my boomer coworkers were in LOVE with this guy because he said a mean thing about Trump like.. twice. When I pointed out that Newsom is also a corporate stooge, they just accused me of "dividing the left". Still dunno why they think Newsom is left...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago

    Without Newsom, marriage equality would not be where it would be today. With that noted, there is only one way I’d vote for him in the primary and that would be if his sole opponent is Emmanuel. I really do not want to live in that world.

  • source
  • parent
  • wtf are you talking about…?

    Newsom is a corporatist neoliberal shitheel. He is a political mercenary, nothing more. He jumped the right way to capture some popular sentiment at the anger people have towards orangeboi. He is absolutely the worst kind of centrist.

  • source
  • parent
  • 7 comments in c/los_angeles@infosec.pub view that post
    [–] 10 points 1 month ago

    Is it ironic that he's shown here in the classic "And, y'all're surprised?!" gesture. 😐

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 4 weeks ago
    [+] -6 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    This story has been posted at least half a dozen times this weekend. We get it.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Then, don't comment? Or, better yet: put down the phone. 🥲

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 5 comments in c/gestapo_usa@lemmy.dbzer0.com view that post
    [–] 17 points 1 month ago

    The ideal outcome is that this fails AND makes Newsom radioactive when he goes for the Democrat nomination.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 month ago

    when it's something like reproductive and contraceptive rights, the whole thing can have no legal basis except for case law that can be overturned at any time by the whim of five people. but when it's taxing the wealthy, it's a constitutional amendment to guarantee it can never happen. their money gets legal protection, our lives don't

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    No on 42, yes on 40. Got it!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    Just like he endorsed the worst merger in history, recently. I'd be happy if I read he was hit by a car and didn't live to see tomorrow.

  • source