Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsJoel Fox
IN THE NEWS

Joel Fox

FEATURED ARTICLES
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
December 24, 1990
Rostenkowski praises senior members of Congress for making a courageous vote on the budget. Unfortunately, Rostenkowski has it all wrong. These members of Congress voted for business-as-usual. They did not make tough decisions to solve the budget problems; they merely voted to push off the problems for another time by voting for a patch work budget. Perhaps it does take new blood to fix the budgetary mess. JOEL FOX President Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn.
ARTICLES BY DATE
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
May 7, 2013 | By Jason Felch, Los Angeles Times
Two prominent defenders of Proposition 13 spoke out on Tuesday against "gimmicks" used by some companies to avoid paying additional property taxes when buying real estate in California. Responding to a Los Angeles Times story that ran Sunday, the presidents of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. and the Small Business Action Committee said they would be open to narrow legislation to fix the law, which appears to allow such deals. The statements mark a shift for two organizations that have long led the fight against changes to Proposition 13, the 1978 ballot initiative that transformed property taxes in California and sparked a nationwide tax revolt.
Advertisement
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 17, 1991
Joel Fox ("State's Tax Revolt Is Far From Over," Commentary, Oct. 13) and the judiciary need to have their brains unclogged. Jarvis-Gann is as unconstitutional as would be a state income tax permanently pegged at 10% of a person's income the day he or she started working in California or a state sales tax that was inversely correlated with the number of years one has lived here. MARK P. SCHOOLEY San Juan Capistrano
OPINION
March 31, 2004
"To Raise Taxes, Some Pin Hopes on State Ballot Box" (March 29) reports on putting a measure on the upcoming ballot to tax phones, both cell and landline, to help with emergency care and the underinsured. The article also states that in November 2002, voters agreed to a property tax in the county of Los Angeles to support the emergency and trauma care system. Did I miss something, or is the supposed money from 2002 and the current proposal intended for the same purpose and, if so, why?
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 16, 1990
In his column about the overuse of bonds by state government (Opinion, Oct. 7), Cary Lowe incorrectly states Proposition 136, which I authored, requires a two-thirds vote for new taxes. In fact, Proposition 136 requires a simple majority vote if the taxes go into the general fund where spending can be prioritized. The two-thirds requirement applies only to "special taxes," those taxes which are permanently locked in for special purposes. Lowe also misses the mark when he argues that general obligation bonds should receive a majority vote for passage.
OPINION
October 20, 1996
The article on Prop. 218 (Oct. 8) may have helped some people understand the five pages of fine-print mishmash with which the Jarvis organization wishes to distort the California Constitution. But one statement by Jarvis president Joel Fox needs refutation. He is quoted as saying, "It's putting power into the hands of the people .J.J. I believe we the people should control government." The assertion sounds democratic, but 218 would lead to a result opposite from local control. It actually takes power away from little people, puts it in the hands of wealthy, even absentee, landowners, and by destroying local governments' capacity to take responsibility for their communities, makes them dependent on handouts from Sacramento.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 5, 1997
The Times is right ("California Serfdom," editorial, Aug. 27). Let's get rid of Prop. 218 and go back to the system on assessments we had before--a system in which only property owners could send in a protest vote (if they were lucky enough to even learn about the proposed assessment); a system in which the votes were weighted, usually according to acreage (rather than according to the amount of tax the property owner must pay, as Prop. 218 requires); and, oh yes, a system that counted a lack of response from the property owner as a "yes" vote in favor of the assessment.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 28, 1989
Howard Jarvis often stated opponents of Proposition 13 would blame the eruption of Mt. Saint Helens on the initiative just because they hated the measure. Paul Conrad displayed such a knee-jerk reaction with his cartoon of the Nimitz Freeway (Oct. 24). State government revenues have tripled since Proposition 13 passed. Prioritizing that money for transportation could easily have been accomplished but the Legislature had other favorite programs to fund. Our organization attempted to reorganize priorities towards transportation by sponsoring Proposition 72 to use state sales tax on gasoline for transportation purposes instead of funneling it to the general fund.
OPINION
November 13, 2003
Re "Massive Loan for State Weighed," Nov. 11: Even as he insists on keeping his campaign promise to repeal the increase in the vehicle license fees ($4 billion), Gov.-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger is looking to borrow $20 billion. Now, that's fiscal irresponsibility. All on the optimistic and probably unrealistic hope that things will only get better. But what if things don't get better? What if jobs keep going overseas or getting eliminated by technological advances? What if the movie industry keeps moving to Canada and other places?
OPINION
March 31, 2004
"To Raise Taxes, Some Pin Hopes on State Ballot Box" (March 29) reports on putting a measure on the upcoming ballot to tax phones, both cell and landline, to help with emergency care and the underinsured. The article also states that in November 2002, voters agreed to a property tax in the county of Los Angeles to support the emergency and trauma care system. Did I miss something, or is the supposed money from 2002 and the current proposal intended for the same purpose and, if so, why?
OPINION
November 13, 2003
Re "Massive Loan for State Weighed," Nov. 11: Even as he insists on keeping his campaign promise to repeal the increase in the vehicle license fees ($4 billion), Gov.-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger is looking to borrow $20 billion. Now, that's fiscal irresponsibility. All on the optimistic and probably unrealistic hope that things will only get better. But what if things don't get better? What if jobs keep going overseas or getting eliminated by technological advances? What if the movie industry keeps moving to Canada and other places?
OPINION
June 3, 2003
Re "Low Taxes for Some, Chaos for All," Opinion, June 1: Sound government fiscal policy, while exceedingly difficult to enact, is easy enough to understand: Don't spend more than you take in. That was one of the key messages we sent legislators in 1978. Too bad they didn't get it. Proposition 13 corrected something that was clearly out of whack -- a code that taxed home-price appreciation before it was realized. By laying nearly every fiscal woe that has befallen the state since 1978 at the feet of Proposition 13, William Fulton and Paul Shigley are indulging in a fallacy known as post hoc, ergo propter hoc, or, "after this, therefore on account of this."
NEWS
March 14, 1999 | TED ROHRLICH, TIMES STAFF WRITER
For the first time in a generation, significant momentum is building among California's politicians and civic activists to restore powers to local government that were taken away by Proposition 13. As the closest thing to a sacred icon that California politics has produced, Proposition 13 has been treated as untouchable since the 1978 voter revolt over spiraling property taxes produced a state constitutional amendment limiting the levy.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 5, 1997
The Times is right ("California Serfdom," editorial, Aug. 27). Let's get rid of Prop. 218 and go back to the system on assessments we had before--a system in which only property owners could send in a protest vote (if they were lucky enough to even learn about the proposed assessment); a system in which the votes were weighted, usually according to acreage (rather than according to the amount of tax the property owner must pay, as Prop. 218 requires); and, oh yes, a system that counted a lack of response from the property owner as a "yes" vote in favor of the assessment.
OPINION
October 20, 1996
The article on Prop. 218 (Oct. 8) may have helped some people understand the five pages of fine-print mishmash with which the Jarvis organization wishes to distort the California Constitution. But one statement by Jarvis president Joel Fox needs refutation. He is quoted as saying, "It's putting power into the hands of the people .J.J. I believe we the people should control government." The assertion sounds democratic, but 218 would lead to a result opposite from local control. It actually takes power away from little people, puts it in the hands of wealthy, even absentee, landowners, and by destroying local governments' capacity to take responsibility for their communities, makes them dependent on handouts from Sacramento.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
May 11, 1993 | JOEL FOX, Joel Fox is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn.
Here's a suggestion for solving the problem of funding more police in Los Angeles: Call our bluff. I'm talking about those of us who opposed Proposition 1, which was rejected by voters last month, and last November's Proposition N, both of which would have increased property taxes to add 1,000 new LAPD officers. During both campaigns, opponents offered a number of ideas on how to raise revenue for police without resorting to a tax increase.
OPINION
June 3, 2003
Re "Low Taxes for Some, Chaos for All," Opinion, June 1: Sound government fiscal policy, while exceedingly difficult to enact, is easy enough to understand: Don't spend more than you take in. That was one of the key messages we sent legislators in 1978. Too bad they didn't get it. Proposition 13 corrected something that was clearly out of whack -- a code that taxed home-price appreciation before it was realized. By laying nearly every fiscal woe that has befallen the state since 1978 at the feet of Proposition 13, William Fulton and Paul Shigley are indulging in a fallacy known as post hoc, ergo propter hoc, or, "after this, therefore on account of this."
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
May 7, 2013 | By Jason Felch, Los Angeles Times
Two prominent defenders of Proposition 13 spoke out on Tuesday against "gimmicks" used by some companies to avoid paying additional property taxes when buying real estate in California. Responding to a Los Angeles Times story that ran Sunday, the presidents of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. and the Small Business Action Committee said they would be open to narrow legislation to fix the law, which appears to allow such deals. The statements mark a shift for two organizations that have long led the fight against changes to Proposition 13, the 1978 ballot initiative that transformed property taxes in California and sparked a nationwide tax revolt.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
July 13, 1992 | JOEL FOX, Joel Fox is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn.
The city of Los Angeles needs more police officers. The residents of Los Angeles do not need more property taxes. Mayor Tom Bradley wants to place a parcel tax on Los Angeles property to pay for 1,000 new police officers and 200 support personnel. As yet, the mayor hasn't explained why these additional 1,200 employees will cost the taxpayers an average of $83,333 per worker. It matters little because this plan will sink.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 18, 1992 | JOEL FOX, Joel Fox is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn
In a democracy, when it comes to a vote, majority rules. Except in California when the vote is for increased taxes. The State Supreme Court has upheld Proposition 13's provision requiring a two-thirds vote to raise local taxes. The decision comes during a protracted recession when most governments are scrambling for more revenue, thus setting off howls of protest from the bureaucracy.
Los Angeles Times Articles
|