Veterans Homes Bond Act of 2000.
	Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 16

Arguments on this page are the opinions of the authors and have not been checked for accuracy by any official agency.

Bond supporters always say that the measure will not increase taxes. How then will the bonds be paid? Taxpayers must pay the principal and interest on the bonds for 30 years. This money comes from our tax dollars. Taxpayers are currently paying over $3 billion per year on existing bond debt.

As the governor tells it, Proposition 16 is small potatoes. $50 million gets lost in a state with a budget of $81 billion. Indeed, there are dozens of appropriations just like this one. That's why we're baffled why the legislators and the governor didn't just pay the $50 million out of the state budget. Since bond financing almost doubles the cost of any government project, it seems like they are purposely trying to cost taxpayers more than necessary.

We agree that our veterans are deserving of respect. If indeed we seek a place for elderly or infirm veterans to live, it would be a lot less expensive to place them in private retirement homes and hospitals. The government could contract with existing facilities--not build new ones.

Of course, all of the veterans organizations support this. Of course, almost every legislator voted for it. After all, it's easy to cast a "pro-veteran" vote. But when will our legislators be really courageous--and cast a pro-taxpayer vote?

GAIL K. LIGHTFOOT
Past Chair, Libertarian Party of California

LARRY HINES
U. S. Marine Corps veteran

TED BROWN
Insurance Adjuster/Investigator

Proposition 16 | Vote 2000 Home | Next - Prop 17 | Secretary of State Home |