 calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register |
Posted on 04/25/2003 2:39:32 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO – The state budget battle could be affected by an initiative aimed at next year's March ballot that would allow Democratic legislators to pass a state budget and tax increases without Republican votes.
A coalition of public-interest groups and labor unions is sponsoring the initiative, which would lower the requirement for approving a state budget and related tax increases from two-thirds to a 55-percent vote of the Legislature.
The "Budget Accountability Act" also would cut the pay of legislators if the budget is late, give voters access to budget votes by legislators and create a budget reserve.
Some legislators speculate that the Democrats, with an eye to the initiative, will agree to a provisional budget this year only to change it next year.
"We have polled extensively, and we have it passing by a nice margin," said Gale Kaufman, a political consultant who said 22 focus groups were conducted. "We have actually polled this with more than one pollster, to make sure."
Kaufman said voters, even a "sizable" number of Republican voters, are frustrated with budget gridlock and want change. The state Constitution requires that the Legislature pass a budget by June 15, but the deadline has not been met since 1986.
Since then, the state has begun the new fiscal year on July 1 without a budget 13 times, including a record two-month deadlock last year when Gov. Gray Davis did not sign the budget until Sept. 5.
The budget battle this year is between Republicans who want to avoid a tax increase, and Democrats who aim for a solution that includes spending cuts and tax increases to help cover a shortfall that could be as high as $35 billion.
A two-thirds vote of approval – 27 in the 40-member Senate and 54 in the 80-member Assembly – means that at least two Republicans in the Senate and six Republicans in the Assembly would need to vote with Democrats for a measure to pass.
A 55 percent vote – 22 in the Senate and 44 in the Assembly – could be obtained from the 25 Democrats in the Senate and the 48 Democrats in the Assembly. It would mean that Republicans could not block a budget or tax increase.
The prospect of lowering the two-thirds requirement is alarming to Jon Coupal of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, who says more than 100 bills pending in the Legislature could result in a $60 billion tax increase.
"If we lose the two-thirds vote protection, the immediate question is, 'How much of that $60 billion would get through?' " said Coupal. "And I would submit quite a bit of it."
Coupal said the proposed initiative is similar to Proposition 39, a measure narrowly approved by 53 percent of the voters in November 2000 that lowered the requirement for passing local school bonds from two-thirds to 55 percent.
"It's a fairly transparent assault on taxpayers," said Coupal. "If you want to use Proposition 39 as an example, they tried to wrap that in the mantle of accountability."
The initiative backers include the Service Employees International Union, the California Teachers Association, the League of Women Voters and the consumer group Health Access.
Speculation about how the initiative might affect the budget battle this year has begun before the measure has received its official title and summary, expected soon, that will allow backers to begin gathering signatures.
"Frankly, I am not entirely certain that without this we will have a budget by then (next March)," said Anthony Wright of Health Access. "It's unclear to me how some of the stuff gets done without it."
Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson, D-Culver City, asked his staff earlier this year to look at what would happen if there is no new budget. The state issued more than $3 billion worth of "IOUs" during a two-month deadlock in 1992.
State Controller Steve Westly has warned that if the state has no budget after the new fiscal year begins July 1, in 30 to 60 days the state would lack the cash to pay all of its bills.
The lead Assembly Republican budget writer, John Campbell of Irvine, wondered if the initiative might at some point cause Democrats to vote for what they hope would be a provisional budget that could be rewritten later.
"If they felt they could get this qualified and passed, they might be able to make one-year concessions this year in order to change everything around next year," Campbell said.
One initiative backer, Lenny Goldberg of the California Tax Reform Association, said he believes that any budget enacted this year is likely to include a multiyear debt, which could be dealt with if the initiative is approved.
"This year is the year of terrible budget gridlock," said Goldberg. "Next year is the year when this can be broken."
If a drive to recall Davis gathered enough signatures to trigger an election this fall, initiative backers said, the measure would still be in the process of qualifying and would go on the March ballot.
California adopted the two-thirds vote requirement to pass a state budget in the early 1930s during the Great Depression. Only two other states – Arkansas and Rhode Island – require more than a majority vote to pass a budget.
The requirement that tax increases be approved by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature was imposed by Proposition 13, the landmark property-tax cut approved by voters in 1978.
Ten other states require more than a majority vote of the Legislature to raise taxes, ranging from three-fifths to three-quarters approval, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
The new initiative would allow tax increases to be approved by a 55 percent vote of the Legislature if they are related to the budget and do not increase property taxes.
If the budget is not passed by June 15, the legislators would lose part of their salary, which is $99,000 a year, and tax-free expense payments, at $125 a day, for each day the budget is late. The governor also would lose part of his pay.
In years when there is a budget surplus, a reserve of up to 5 percent of the general fund would be created to be spent during an emergency or when revenue falls below the level needed to provide current services.
Each state ballot pamphlet would include a two-page summary of how state funds are spent and directions to a state Web site that shows how individual legislators voted on the budget and budget-related taxes.
If legislators threaten to punish other legislators for their budget votes, a complaint would trigger an ethics committee investigation resulting in a public report of the findings and appropriate action, including censure.
Katie, Bar the Door if this passes!
|
calgov2002: for old calgov2002 articles. calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register |
The article offers this chuckler -
The "Budget Accountability Act" also would cut the pay of legislators if the budget is late, give voters access to budget votes by legislators and create a budget reserve.
Laughable.. and so deceitful.
This baby needs to go down bigtime!
This is scary stuff and I am sure it will pass just as the school bonds initiative passed last time. Damn few school bonds failed to pass in the last election.
First the standard was applied to school bonds. Then to municipal bonds. Now the taxing authority of the assembly.
Under ordinary circumstances I would raise hell but California is already so totally ****** that it does not matter.
If California is hell bent to surrender itself to Mexico and bankrupt it's government then what does it matter if there are higher taxes. There will be no one to pay them.
All you can do is bang the drum harder and maybe some of the voters asleep at the wheel will wake up before this puppy goes over the cliff's edge.
We had such high hopes for this state, too.. unfortunately, it's turned into a Stephen King horror tale, instead.
The answer, unfortunately is yes.
The educational campaign on this will be critical:
Disagree. We have had the two-thirds requirement for ages and it has served us fairly well in keeping excesses in check on both sides of the aisle.
Why the push for change now? Only because the 'rats see a need and possibly a last opportunity. They thought they could reach a two-thirds majority in the last election and instead got rolled back a seat or two. They want to get this through just in case that becomes a trend. And it's got to be in the March 2004 primary instead of the general which might have too much GWB coattails.
I can see it now, tho'. Fortress states...where businesses can actually be allowed to make more money then they pay in taxes. *-| It could work.
We may be reliving and leaving the GreeKs Golden Age and are now entering the decline.
I can not for the life of me figure out how so many good people can be so disconnected from the fate that awaits them.
Oh, well!! I got to go watch South Park and the Man Show. :-)
While I appreciated your (very) kind offer, I've already fled to Idaho. Near as I can figure, most the folks in CA are playing with monopoly money, whether it be the legislature or homebuyers.
Told my wife it was time to grab the money (sell the house) and run....fast!
No, in fact rather than barring the door, the floodgates will open and the hosts who still (inexplicably) remain in Kalifornia will flee the parasites in droves, LOFL!
Anyway, if this initiative passes, I would hope that the Republicans would take a page out of the scumbag Democrats' playbook and go to court. Try to bog things down for awhile. (Granted, the courts in Kalifornia are generally packed with corrupt scumbags, but it would still be worth a try.)
Ha! You gotta hand it to the sneaky scumbags - - they sure know how to con the mindless rabble. They choose a great name for the initiative and throw this meaningless provison in there, and voila!, the ignorant chattering class will just suck it right up!
If your house is burning down around you, no matter how much you love that old house, you have to get out. You simply have no choice.
I would hate to someday be comparing taxpaying, traditional California families to the people who hung on too long in Zimbabwe, hoping against hope, and ultimately failing to see that country's decline into third world chaos until it was too late. (The classic example of the frog in the steadily heating pot of water.)
Do not wait. NOW is the time to get out of California.
Regards,
LH
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.