How are you voting on Prop 6? (Orange: moving to, gas, county)

[SportyandMisty]

Rather than a new gas tax to generate $$$ for road repair, why not a proposition that segregates more $$$ from general tax revenue already in existence to pay for road repair?

[Elliott_CA]

Originally Posted by davidt1

A NO vote will let politicians pass any future gas tax increase without voter participation, thus taking away voter's right to vote on it.

There is NO "taking away" of ANY voter's rights if Prop 6 fails. It simply isn't true.

The very fact you and I are voting on Prop 6 proves that the voters have lost no rights. If voters don't like what the legislature does, we have and will continue to have the right to overturn or repeal what they did by ballot measure. Prop 6 is the voters exercising their right to repeal a gas tax.

No voter rights are taken away if Prop 6 fails.

[davidt1]

Originally Posted by Elliott_CA

There is NO "taking away" of ANY voter's rights if Prop 6 fails. It simply isn't true.

The very fact you and I are voting on Prop 6 proves that the voters have lost no rights. If voters don't like what the legislature does, we have and will continue to have the right to overturn or repeal what they did by ballot measure. Prop 6 is the voters exercising their right to repeal a gas tax.

No voter rights are taken away if Prop 6 fails.

The reason Prop 6 came into existence was because voters were denied the right to vote on the gas and car tax in the first place. If the politicians had put this tax before voters for a vote, there would be no need for Prop 6. If voters have a say in the first place, there won't be a need for any repeal.

YES on Prop 6 = voters can vote on future gas taxes.

NO on Prop 6 = Voter can not vote on future gas taxes.

Vote YES on Prop 6. Protect your voter rights.

[SFBayBoomer]

Don't kid yourself. Proposition 6 is—more than anything else—a Republican "get out the vote" ballot measure.
The Yes on Prop 6 campaign and allied committees raised more than $4.42 million, including $467,143 from the California Republican Party, $300,000 from Kevin McCarthy's campaign committee, and $250,000 from John Cox's campaign committee.

https://ballotpedia.org/California_P...itiative_(2018)

These Republicans don't care that California's crummy, pothole-heavy roads will cost drivers more in the long run in time lost and damage to vehicles/tires, and they really don't care about gas taxes.

They just want their angry mob of Republican drivers—like davidt1, above—to get out and vote, because they don't want their candidates to lose in the coming election.

[Finper]

Originally Posted by SFBayBoomer

Don't kid yourself. Proposition 6 is—more than anything else—a Republican "get out the vote" ballot measure.
The Yes on Prop 6 campaign and allied committees raised more than $4.42 million, including $467,143 from the California Republican Party, $300,000 from Kevin McCarthy's campaign committee, and $250,000 from John Cox's campaign committee.

https://ballotpedia.org/California_P...itiative_(2018)

These Republicans don't care that California's crummy, pothole-heavy roads will cost drivers more in the long run in time lost and damage to vehicles/tires, and they really don't care about gas taxes.

They just want their angry mob of Republican drivers—like davidt1, above—to get out and vote, because they don't want their candidates to lose in the coming election.

Oh darn a SF liberal found us out and now is speaking for every Repub in the whole state .... WRONG

[SFBayBoomer]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

Rather than a new gas tax to generate $$$ for road repair, why not a proposition that segregates more $$$ from general tax revenue already in existence to pay for road repair?

Heavy road users—DRIVERS who drive the most miles—should pay more in gas taxes at the pump to fix the roads and bridges and related projects than low-to-moderate road users. Also, some people don't drive at all.

The gas tax is a USE TAX, and the users should foot most of the bill. Gas taxes capture the tax revenue at the pump. If you drive less, you'll be taxed less.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Finper

Oh darn a SF liberal found us out and now is speaking for every Repub in the whole state .... WRONG

Um no. He is speaking of the Republican strategy for getting out the vote. Plain as the nose on your face. Nothing surprising here. Smart angle to play. Partisan politics modus operandi.

[JJonesIII]

Originally Posted by SFBayBoomer

If you drive less, you'll be taxed less.

Really?

Joe has a car that gets 13 mpg and drives 130 miles per week (10 gallons of gas)

Mike has a hybrid that gets 50 mpg and drive 250 miles per week (5 gallons of gas)

Hmmm?

[TCROX]

The money is not being used for roads- SB 1 is practically less than a year old
We were already paying for roads are still are plus an acid trip fantasy bullet ( rhymes with bs) train . Obviously our roads still suck and the money is being banked.
The SB 1 money is for piggy "public servants" -everybody knows that- the chp guy in the flyer I got makes OVER 800k per year ++++
Hello
Yes on 6 - repeal the taxes
Spread the word on any device you have - now - for you and the message of change for the future this state needs now!

[Kaphawoman]

Originally Posted by SFBayBoomer

Heavy road users—DRIVERS who drive the most miles—should pay more in gas taxes at the pump to fix the roads and bridges and related projects than low-to-moderate road users. Also, some people don't drive at all.

The gas tax is a USE TAX, and the users should foot most of the bill. Gas taxes capture the tax revenue at the pump. If you drive less, you'll be taxed less.

Uh, that’s already built in by the person driving more miles needing to buy more gallons. The person who drives the EXACT SAME amount this year as last year is paying more. Increasing the price punishes everyone, but particularly poor, working, and middle classes.