| Argument in Favor | This - 206 | Argument Against |

Rebuttal to Argument in Favor of Proposition 206

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

We agree that the Cal-Vet program has been financially self-supporting--so far. But California's real estate market isn't what it used to be. Foreclosures are at an all time high. If participating veterans default on their loans, taxpayers have to pay.

Proponents argue that Cal-Vet loans generate thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in annual payrolls. Where? Maybe in the government department that administers the program! If so, let's eliminate these jobs and payrolls, and save the taxpayers even more. If the proponents are talking about jobs and payroll in the housing industry, they'll have to prove it. A booming housing market may have been the norm after World War II, but now there are more houses for sale than people are willing or able to buy.

California's economy can be revived by cutting back government, reducing taxes, and eliminating agencies and regulations that put burdens on businesses. People would have more money in their pockets if taxes were lower and government were smaller. Then they could qualify for a home loan without the aid of government programs. Proposition 206 won't do any of this. Since it duplicates the federal VA home loan program, Cal-Vet is merely another unnecessary government program.

We appreciate the sacrifices made by our veterans, but it's obvious they are recognized with benefits from the federal government. When a state decides it must also provide veterans' benefits, it's clear the program is designed to gain votes for pork-barrel politicians. Please vote NO.

Treasurer, Libertarian Party of California

Retired Air Force Officer, Sacramento

Insurance Adjuster/Investigator, Pasadena

| Argument in Favor | This - 206 | Argument Against |