Democrats in the California Senate on Wednesday said they want to raise taxes on some of the largest corporations so they can cut taxes for nearly every other business.

But the proposal was met with swift opposition from the business community and Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom — highlighting the likely rocky budget negotiations ahead for a state facing an estimated $22.5 billion budget deficit.

All California businesses pay a state tax rate of 8.84% on income, a figure that has not changed since 1997. This new proposal would create two tax rates for businesses in California. Companies would pay 6.63% on the first $1.5 million they make. Any money made above that would be taxed at 10.99%.

NEW INDIANA STATE BUDGET PLAN WOULD KILL PROPOSED PRIVATE SCHOOL VOUCHER PROGRAM EXPANSION

The higher tax rate would only apply to about 2,500 companies and would bring in an extra $7.2 billion in revenue for the state. Meanwhile, about 1.6 million businesses would benefit from the smaller tax rate, reducing state revenue by about $2.2 billion.

The money that is left over — about $5 billion — would go to poor people who claim tax credits and would boost state programs for public education, child care and combatting homelessness.

The proposal is still a long way from becoming law. Tax increases require a two-thirds vote of both houses of the Legislature. Democrats control a majority of seats in both chambers, but leaders in the state Assembly have not yet agreed to the plan.

Then there's Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who would have to sign off on the proposal. Newsom has resisted raising taxes in the past as he has been building his national profile in recent years in advance of a possible run for president beyond 2024. Last year, Newsom campaigned against a ballot initiative that would have raised taxes on the rich to pay for environmental programs.

Wednesday, Newsom spokesman Anthony York said the governor could not support the proposal..

"It would be irresponsible to jeopardize the progress we've all made together over the last decade to protect the most vulnerable while putting our state on sound fiscal footing." York said.

Still, Democrats in the Senate will try to sell the idea by framing it as a partial reversal of the federal tax cuts signed into law by former Republican President Donald Trump. Nearly every Democrat in California, including Newsom, opposed those cuts, which Trump signed into law in 2017.

"The Senate’s 2023 plan will provide much needed tax relief to those small businesses which are the backbone of our economy and that have been really whacked by inflation," said state Sen. Nancy Skinner, a Democrat from Berkeley and chair of the Senate Budget Committee. "But it also ensures that the biggest corporations that pocketed massive tax cuts under Trump will start to pay their fair share."

OHIO GOV. DEWINE SIGNS $13.5 TRANSPORTATION BUDGET, RAIL SAFETY PACKAGE INTO LAW

The California Chamber of Commerce opposed the plan on Wednesday, saying a tax increase would "send the wrong signals to job creators and investors in the state’s economy."

"Now is not the time to test California’s ability to withstand the impact of an economic downturn or a recession by placing our economic success at risk," said Jennifer Barrera, the chamber's president and CEO.

John Kabateck, California state director for the National Federation of Independent Business, which represents small businesses, said the proposal "looks appealing at first glance." But he said his years of experience in dealing with leaders in the state Legislature has taught him not to endorse proposals too quickly.

"We’re not very keen on getting a tax break for Main Street at the expense of other businesses," Kabateck said.

Democrats in the state Senate based their proposal on budget numbers the Newsom administration released in January. Back then, Newsom said the state was facing an estimated $22.5 billion deficit.

Those numbers will change next month when Newsom updates his budget proposal based on new tax revenue received since January. It's likely the budget deficit will have grown, as tax revenues have continued to fall below projections. A larger budget deficit could make the Democrats' tax cut proposal infeasible.

Adding to the difficulty is that Newsom and lawmakers will have to pass a new spending plan before July 1 without knowing how much money the state has. That's because many Californians won't pay their taxes until mid-October, taking advantage of an extension offered after a series of strong winter storms caused widespread damage throughout the state.

Republican state Senate leader Brian Jones said he liked that Democrats were "finally proposing to give a little back to small business."

"Where have they been all these years when Senate Republicans have been putting forth real proposals to get this done?" he said.

North Dakota's governor vetoed a bill Wednesday that would have required librarians under threat of criminal penalty to screen sexually explicit materials from children, but signed another barring explicit materials from the children's sections of local and school libraries.

The Senate voted 33-14 to override Republican Gov. Doug Burgum's veto hours later, though a similar House vote would be needed to make a veto override successful. The House had passed the bill on a 54-38 vote last week, several votes shy of a veto-proof majority.

"Protecting children from explicit sexual material is common sense," Burgum said in a statement explaining why he signed one of the bills into law.

NORTH DAKOTA BILL LIMITS BATHROOM USE FOR TRANSGENDER PEOPLE

But he said the bill he vetoed would have created "an enormous burden" on hundreds of public libraries by imposing — under the threat of criminal prosecution — an expensive requirement that libraries review materials that have already been screened for age appropriateness. His statement said it would cost the state $300,000 initially to conduct such screening and $150,000 per year thereafter.

"This bill is unnecessary, vague, and will not only cause immediate hardship to our schools and libraries, but also opens the door to costly, and unnecessary litigation," library coordinator Misti Frink had said in testimony against the bill this month. "Robust checks and balances are already in place for print and digital resource selections."

Republican Sen. Janne Myrdal, of Edinburg, spoke on the Senate floor in urging her colleagues to override the governor's veto, saying exposure to sexually explicit material "is devastating for young people's brains and lives."

NORTH DAKOTA GOVERNOR SIGNS ABORTION BAN WITH LIMITED EXCEPTIONS

"We deal with millions of dollars here. $150,000 is like a drop in the bucket to protect our children," Myrdal said.

Language in the vetoed bill said prosecutors could charge a person with a class B misdemeanor — up to 30 days in prison and $1,500 in fines — for willfully displaying sexually explicit material at newsstands or any other business establishment visited by minors. It said this would not include colleges, universities, museums or art galleries but would include public libraries and public school libraries, among some other places.

Opponents, including the American Civil Liberties Union of North Dakota, have said the now-vetoed bill would promote government censorship and violate First Amendment rights to say, think, read and write whatever one wants without fear of government retaliation.

Across the country, attempted book bans and restrictions on libraries have surged, setting a record in 2022, according to a recent report by the American Library Association.

Some books have been targeted by liberals citing racist language — notably Mark Twain’s "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" — according to Deborah Caldwell-Stone, who directs the ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom.

But the vast majority of complaints have come from conservatives, directed at works with LGBTQIA+ or racial themes, Caldwell-Stone has said.

Bills to restrict books have been proposed or passed in Arizona, Iowa, Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Florida and other states.