PROP. 160 : Infinite Regress

Any change in state property tax exemptions requires a constitutional amendment. And that requirement creates a lot of problems for California.

The infamous Proposition 13 is rife with inequities because of its rigidity, and Proposition 160, on the November ballot, is an effort to address one such problem. It is a tempting measure, too, but the temptation must be resisted.

The measure is a well-intentioned proposal put on the ballot by the Legislature. It would authorize the creation of a new property tax exemption for surviving spouses of people who died while on active military duty as a result of service-related injury or disease.

The measure is certainly a reasonable, even thoughtful, effort to deal with human needs and help some Californians escape the straitjacket of Proposition 13.

But are we going to amend the Constitution for every disadvantaged group?

Or is it not more properly the case that Proposition 13, passed in 1978, itself needs thorough review--and perhaps amendment? Widows and widowers deserve our respect and our help, but they are not the only group that is disadvantaged by the inflexible property tax system created by Proposition 13.

What about police widows? Widows of firefighters? Why not a constitutional amendment for them, too?

Existing law already provides for some exemptions from property taxes for disabled veterans and their spouses. They deserve more--but this is not the way to go about it. Prop. 160 is an abuse of the initiative process.