On his website, manataforassembly.org, Paso Robles resident Gerry Manata has a special page dedicated to the question, “Why am I running?”
“Why me? I ask myself this every few days when I wake up in the morning. I am almost sixty-six years old and have never held a public office, although I have been a Homeowners Association president and a college club president. I am always reminded, however, when I read the morning papers what a mess this state is in. Something has to be done, and by somebody,” Manata said.
Unlike his former hometowns of Chicago and Santa Barbara, he said, “my new home—Paso Robles and its Assembly district—is predominantly Republican.”
“This year nobody else wanted to try to repeat what, in the recent past, have been failed efforts to win here. After making a case with the Democrats that we should run somebody to challenge K.H. Achadjian this year, I soon found myself being the somebody,” he said.
With the June primary quickly approaching, the Sun contacted Manata to see where he stands on the issues.
If elected to the California State Assembly, how do you plan to address the state’s $16 billion deficit?
“I support [Gov. Jerry] Brown’s plan and his May revision. I hope the unions will accept the pay cuts as necessary, as well as agree to Brown’s 12-point pension reform plan or some version of it. We will need to raise taxes to pay off our overall debt ($361 billion).”
Manata said there are “some good initiatives potentially coming to the ballot that I support.”
He supports tax initiatives proposed by Brown and civil rights attorney Molly Munger. If passed, Brown’s measure would enact a temporary income-tax increase on Californians, making more than $250,000 a year to pay for education and public safety. Munger’s measure would raise income taxes on a sliding scale on all but the poorest California workers for 12 years, with most of the money going directly to schools and early development programs.
Manata also supports the oil extraction tax and the revision of tax treatment for multi-state businesses, which he said, “will help the schools.”
“I like the reassessment of business property and the charging of polluter fees to bring in extra money. If any fail to reach the ballot, I would bring them up in the Assembly,” he said.
According to your campaign website, you’re proposing the state start taxing items such as candy, fertilizer, and prescription drugs. How did you select these specific items?
“There is a tax system called ‘tax the bad and not the good,’ usually associated with steady state economics. Since we need to raise taxes, I wish to use this method to tax all the items mentioned in my website since they all, including prescription drugs, have negative effects on our health and well-being. I then wish to continue this process slowly in what is called tax shifting. That means to continue raising taxes on targeted items, while decreasing taxes by a comparable amount on other sales taxes or income taxes, or both. I go into more detail on my position paper on taxes in my website at manataforassembly.org.”
What would you say to constituents who don’t believe these items should be taxed?
“I would say that we are in the process of dumping a horrible fiscal and environmental mess on our children. This tax system addresses both. See my position paper on California’s children for more on what I mean on my website.”
What is your stance on fracking and other methods of oil extraction?
“I support heavier regulation of fracking along the lines of AB 591, and perhaps outlawing it entirely.”
On your website, one of your goals is to, “Eventually eliminate the Senate and expand the Assembly so that more legislators in a single body represent fewer constituents.” What do you think this would accomplish?
Although there were some good reasons in the 18th century for two houses at the federal level, there was no such reason for the state to emulate this. An extra house wastes time and money, merely duplicating the work. Each Assemblyperson currently represents about 420,000 people, the highest ratio in the country. Increasing the Assembly to perhaps 120 people (the 40 extra people lost from the Senate) would shrink this ratio, bringing the government closer to the people and reducing the effect of big money needed in campaigns to reach 420,000 people.”
You seem greatly concerned about the environment. What issues are most important to you and how do you plan to address them in the state Legislature?
“The state debt crisis, the school crisis, and the environment are most important for me, but, of course, there are many others. The greening of state government is a big issue. The universities already have something called ‘Policies on Sustainable Practices’ that they are applying, which is great. I would like to see this expanded to all schools and state government. Water is a big issue for the entire state. My anti-sprawl legislation (No. 20 on my website goals) would also have a major effect.”
If elected, what changes would you make to the way the 35th District office is currently run?
“I have no recommended changes.”
Do you think the recent redistricting process will help or hurt your campaign?
“It probably did neither.”
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
“The crux of my campaign will be to distinguish myself from my opponent in some key areas. As a legislator, I will be pro-environment, pro-consumer rights, and, for the most part, pro-labor. My opponent’s voting record show[s] him to be anti-environment, anti-consumer rights, and very anti-labor. I will also be flexible about tax increases. My opponent has vowed to not raise taxes for any reason.”
Contact Managing Editor Amy Asman at aasman@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in May 24-31, 2012.