Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

California: Initiative to reform state budget process set for March ballot
Sacramento Bee ^ | AUg 27, 2003 | Tom Chorneau

Posted on 08/27/2003 4:30:01 PM PDT by John Jorsett

Edited on 04/12/2004 5:56:30 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

SACRAMENTO (AP) - Saying the gubernatorial recall will not fix California's fiscal problems, a coalition of public-interest groups said Wednesday they've gathered more than enough signatures to place a budget reform measure before voters in March. The Budget Accountability Act would change the state's constitution so that a budget could be adopted by 55 percent of lawmakers, rather than the two-thirds majority required today.


(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: 26kdollarwelfaretom; calgov2002
That two-thirds requirement is all that stood between us and the legislature passing higher taxes. Naturally the Forces of Evil are out to eliminate it.
1 posted on 08/27/2003 4:30:02 PM PDT by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Ping
2 posted on 08/27/2003 4:30:20 PM PDT by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Evil indeed. Its sponsors' signature gatherers were all touting it as, "Cut off their pay if they're late with the budget!", never mentioning that gutting of the 2/3 requirement.
3 posted on 08/27/2003 4:32:40 PM PDT by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
I would not be surprised if this passed. The intiative to make it easier to pass bond issues (from 2/3 to 55% vote) went through, and now every election we see a raft of bond proposals on the ballot, and nearly all of them pass. This would be disastrous for us. I know that my state assembly person (Loni Hancock) and State Senator Tom Torlakson are all for it. The railed against the Republicans for "holding up the budget". We will really need to fight this one.
4 posted on 08/27/2003 4:35:58 PM PDT by .38sw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Its deceptively named. It should really be titled, The Liberal Give Us A Blank Check For The Budget Act.
5 posted on 08/27/2003 4:38:20 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
55% is too close to 50%.
6 posted on 08/27/2003 4:42:16 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
The lack of a two-thirds requirement makes it a non-starter in my book!
7 posted on 08/27/2003 4:43:49 PM PDT by zchip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Yep. We need to protect the people from Budget impasses, so let's lower the percentage rate needed to pass the budget from 2/3 to 55%. (The chickens need to be protected said the fox, I'll volunteer.)
8 posted on 08/27/2003 4:57:44 PM PDT by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
I like that. This should be how the anti-initiative is marketed. Of course, what is really needed is a competing initiative called "The Real Budget Accountability Act," requiring spending caps (the Gann Amendment Redux).
9 posted on 08/27/2003 4:59:41 PM PDT by LALALAW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LALALAW
requiring spending caps

And to that I'd add a vote of the people for any tax increases.

10 posted on 08/27/2003 5:05:59 PM PDT by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
The measure, backed by the League of Women Voters...

I think there is a mis-spelling, it should say: League of Women Lesbian Voters...

11 posted on 08/27/2003 5:06:42 PM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
The measure, backed by the League of Women Voters...

I think there is a mis-spelling, it should say: League of Women Lesbian Voters...

12 posted on 08/27/2003 5:06:46 PM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Notice the evil. Nothing about balancing the budget, or cutting spending, just getting the budget in on time, no matter how wretched it is for taxpayers. Just make sure the employees on the public dole get their checks on time.

Its over folks. God's intervention in ways we can't imagine is the only hope. No more confining him to the four corners of a bunch of ineffective, dead churchs. Time for a new day and a new way!

13 posted on 08/27/2003 5:38:43 PM PDT by Russell Scott (Without massive intervention from Heaven, America doesn't have a prayer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Vote for this? Har! Har! Har!
14 posted on 08/27/2003 5:45:39 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (Further, the statement assumed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
a coalition of public-interest groups said Wednesday they've gathered more than enough signatures to place a budget reform measure before voters in March.

John, don't you just love it.

15 posted on 08/27/2003 7:07:32 PM PDT by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
In the San Joaquin Valley the pitch at the card table in front of the supermarket/bigboxstrore was "sign this to withold the legislature's pay if they don't pass a budget on time."

I'm sure the pitch was a little closer to the truth in San Francisco and Hollywood.

16 posted on 08/27/2003 7:13:10 PM PDT by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett

Budget initiative gains steam

The plan seeking lower threshold for passage may be on March ballot.

By John Hill -- Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 2:15 a.m. PDT Thursday, August 28, 2003

Organizers of an initiative that would make it easier for the Legislature to pass budgets and raise taxes said Wednesday that they have more than enough signatures to put the measure on the ballot.

"It's a broken process that we're facing, and this is what's going to fix it," said Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access, a statewide coalition that advocates for health care coverage.

Public employee unions, local governments and advocates for people who get state services are backing the initiative that would lower the state constitutional threshold for passing the budget and related tax increases from two-thirds to 55 percent.

Opponents said that a better name for the "Budget Accountability Act" would be the "Blank Check Initiative," and vowed to warn Californians that it will lead quickly to higher taxes.

"This initiative goes in the wrong direction," said Larry McCarthy, president of the California Taxpayers' Association.

In the meantime, a proposal to reverse the recent tripling of the vehicle license fee and replace the revenue with higher taxes on the wealthy and cigarette smokers will not be put to a vote in the current legislative session.

Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said that the elaborate tax swap, which Democrats argue could be done with a simple majority vote, needs more legal analysis.

The major question is whether a portion of the new revenue would have to be spent on schools under the terms of Proposition 98, a 1988 initiative that guarantees education a piece of the state treasury. Such a requirement could make the swap unworkable because it would shift billions of dollars from local governments to schools.

Steinberg said he also wants to monitor the progress of an initiative now gathering signatures that would roll back the car tax to $1 -- a move that would leave a $6 billion hole in the state budget. If the vehicle license fee is threatened, Steinberg said, it would make more sense to try to replace it with the other forms of revenue.

"In all probability, it's something we'll look at again next year," Steinberg said.

Backers of the budget initiative hope to get it on the March 2 ballot. They said they were submitting more than 1 million signatures to county offices this week -- substantially more than the required 598,105.

County election officers will validate the signatures in the next few weeks. California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley has until Oct. 23 to determine whether the initiative will qualify for the March ballot.

Lowering the state constitutional threshold to 55 percent, under the current configuration of the Legislature, would make it possible for majority Democrats to pass the budget and raise taxes without the consent of Republicans. Late budgets have become the norm as the two parties haggle over tax increases and program cuts.

The initiative would strip lawmakers and the governor of their pay and expenses if they failed to approve a budget by the June 15 constitutional deadline. In addition, legislators could not leave town or consider other bills unless the governor declared an emergency.

It would bar lawmakers from threatening to "punish" their colleagues for their votes on the budget and related tax bills, making them subject to censure. Senate Republican leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga set off a controversy this summer by promising to campaign against members of his party who voted for tax increases.

The initiative calls for one-quarter of revenue windfalls to be put into a rainy day reserve, until the reserve grows to 5 percent of the general fund. And it requires voter ballot pamphlets sent out by the state before elections to include two pages of information about the budget.

Wright said the measure would end partisan wrangling and gridlock and put a stop to half-measures that fail to address the state's ongoing deficit. He compared the last two budgets to a bad movie.

"Some people think we can get a better movie if we change the actor," he said, referring to the Oct. 7 recall election. "In fact, I think we need a better plot."

Backers pointed out that only two states -- Rhode Island and Arkansas -- have a two-thirds requirement for passing a budget.

"It doesn't make sense for a state the size of California, with its diversity, to be saddled with this high threshold," said Cecilia Mansfield of the California State PTA.

But at least 14 other states require a "supermajority" to approve taxes, according to Mandy Rafool of the National Conference of State Legislatures. And a study in March in the Journal of Economic Literature found that taxes per capita were $46 lower -- about 8 percent -- in states with supermajority requirements for raising taxes.

McCarthy, of the taxpayers' association, said a coalition of businesses and tax organizations will work to defeat the initiative. He said voters will look askance at tinkering with Proposition 13, which enshrined the two-thirds requirement for legislative approval of tax increases.

"The opposition campaign will need to make sure the public understands what this initiative is really about," he said.

Sourceyles=

17 posted on 08/28/2003 6:37:39 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson