Sweetie and I were cruising down the Dennison Grade yesterday. Beautiful day, crystal clear even with that awful fire in Santa Barbara. About halfway down the grade we stopped at the temporary stoplight that heralds the road work on the cliff-side. Two guys with shovels were poking at the newly graded area. “At this rate they may finish before the next ice age ” I said to Sweetie.
The radio came to life with the 10 o’clock news. “State budget deficit to increase dramatically even if all six ballot propositions pass voter scrutiny on May 19. Bills won’t be paid. People in need will go without.”
“Those guys in Sacramento should be ashamed of themselves. What do we need them for?” my lovely wife said in her own unique style. “They should be doing their job. It’s their fault we’re in this mess. They shouldn’t get paid for doing nothing.”
I’ve been reading about 1A, 1B, 1C…that alphabet soup of unintelligible propositions that were once declared as the solution to our budget crisis. Alas, the guiding light that provides the secret of life is all but missing as I wade through the available information. Or maybe I’m just too lazy to cope with anything longer than one paragraph.
The Ventura Star tried to let us in on the secret last week. But it took a page and a half to scratch the surface of just one of propositions. The letters to the editor of the Star offer little in the way of sensible guidance. More often than not they are the products of ignorance and political bias. Frequently they seem to be produced by people who live in another galaxy. Often more entertaining than the comics page…more often a sad reflection of what passes as intelligence.
Paid advertisements are no comfort…surprise! While slicker and more emotional than the rantings of the letters to the editor, they are generally the products of people with ulterior and self-satisfying motives.
Current polls reflect Sweetie’s frustration. They show that five of the six propositions are doomed. Only F is getting a warm reception…banning pay hikes for legislators in deficit years…yippee. As the LA Times reported yesterday…
If the propositions do not pass, the state could find itself as much as $23 billion short of the money it needs to pay its bills over the next year, according to a new forecast by Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor. The poll, from the Public Policy Institute of California, found that even as voter interest in the ballot measures rises, all are trailing except the sixth one — Proposition 1F
The article also lists what will happen if the bills fail and revenue continues to fall. Including commuting the sentences of 38,000 prison inmates and closing fire stations. Howard Jarvis look-alikes say it’s just scare tactics.
And who’s to blame for this mess. Start with the 1978 ballot proposition we, the voters, embraced. Among other things, it gave a 1/3 minority in the legislature the ability to block tax increases. The tip of the iceberg.
With nothing better to do I looked at the various ballot propositions that we, in our infinite wisdom, passed during the last ten years. Twenty-two authorized the issuance of bonds and directed how the loaned money was to be spent. And for good measure, nine more simply restricted the ability of the legislature to collect or spend money. That’s just the last ten years. I peeked at the 1990’s and voter management of the state’s business is even more awe inspiring. When you consider that we just passed Proposition 8 limiting the definition of marriage, you get some idea of our continuing wisdom.
Just in case you think the legislature will absorb its losses after May 19, regroup and negotiate a new deal, think again. We, in a fit of pique, termed out most of the experienced representatives by voting for term limits. The current crop of negotiators is operating with learners’ permits. Heaven help us.
Oh, and for that vanishing breed of conservatives who just want to slash and pillage, our per capita State government spending in 2007 ranked us 26th in the country. Just behind Iowa and slightly ahead of Montana. Alaska, home of the Snow Queen, spent at three times our rate.
So who’s to blame for this mess anyway? Got a mirror?
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
It’s very true that the blame for our perennial budget woes can be laid at the feet of our own ballot proposition system and therefore the citizens of the State of California. The primary culprit, as you identified above, is the 2/3 rule in the legislature. Further, this same 2/3 rule extends to any initiative that seeks to raise taxes in any way as we so recently saw with Ojai’s own Measure P that lost by .05% or just 55 votes.
Because of this anti-democratic 2/3 rule, California always has protracted budget fights, but this year is particularly bad because the economy is in collapse. Somehow, with a $50+ billion budget shortfall, the minority party still thinks it can play these games with impunity.
This is actually a tremendous opportunity to to address the real problems behind our budgeting process here in California. Prop 1A is not going to pass. Plain and simple. When it fails, the budget that was forced on us by the minority party in the legislature back in February is a dead issue. The largest state, in terms of economy and population, will be without a budget and facing a $50+ billion dollar deficit.
Realizing that the real problem is the 2/3 rule itself, the impending bankruptcy of the largest economy in the entire nation is the perfect opportunity to remove this odious, anti-democratic rule from our Constitution.
The frame will have to be changed quickly after the failure of these propositions. The Republican Senators in the State Legislature are do nothing, failed ideologues. Empowered by the 2/3 rule, they have intentionally sat on their hands and forced this crisis upon us. Their Norquistian “no new tax” stance is totally irresponsible and borderline negligent. Newly elected Sen. Tony Strickland and his Republican colleagues somehow feel that they should obstruct the budgeting process and threaten the entire state with bankruptcy because of their failed “drown government in the bathtub” ideology. All this despite the fact that Strickland only won his seat by less then 900 votes! Tony Strickland is ignoring or going against at least 50% of his constituency with his reckless recalcitrance and slavish devotion to failed, movement conservative ideals.
When Strickland reveals that he intends to follow up on the threat that he and his Republican cohorts will “take this state off the cliff”, we need to be ready to act and begin recall proceedings. Further, we need to call the Democrats in the legislature and order them to grow a spine and fight for us. They must not begin hacking the budget out of the fear of Republican threats.
The 2/3 rule is the target. It has to go.
No, it isn’t true that the budget problems are due to ballot propositions and the citizens of California. Always amusing when a 30 year-old law or impotent Republicans are blamed for this problem that seemingly has no solution other than “more money!” The 2/3 law is just fine, certainly not the cause, leave it alone.
For anyone interested in the real numbers, here is a study done by the Reason Foundation that will blow your mind.
Here is a summary.
Since former Gov. George Deukmejian’s final budget in Fiscal Year 1990-91, California’s spending has skyrocketed 181 percent. Spending nearly tripled from $51.4 billion in FY 1990-91 to $144.5 billion in FY 2008-09. Are California’s taxpayers getting higher quality services than they did in the 90s? They should be. In FY 1990-91 the state spent $1,350 per capita. Today, the government spends $2,644 per person.
Politicians often blame falling revenues for California’s budget woes, but state revenues jumped 167 percent between 1990 and 2008. In FY 1990-91, the state took in over $38 billion in General Fund revenues. By FY 2008-09 revenues were $102 billion. If California had simply limited its spending increases to the 4.38 percent average increase in the state’s consumer price index and population growth each year since FY 1990-91, the state would be sitting on a $15 billion surplus right now.
Jeez JC, gettin’ all scholarly on me. It’s just too bad you chose the Reason Foundation as your only source to refute my arguments. It’s small wonder, vanishingly small, that the Reason Foundation is against the repeal of the anti-democratic 2/3 rule. You see, the Reason Foundation is Koch-eyed.
The Reason Foundation describes itself as fighting for “libertarian principles, including individual liberty, free markets, and the rule of law.” Some may remember the Reason Foundation and its sad story from the middle nineties when it was totally discredited because of the yeoman’s work it did for the tobacco industry. Perhaps you saw “Thank You For Smoking” about the lobbying firms that helped protect the tobacco industry on/from capital hill. Well these libertarian/right wing think tanks like the Reason Foundation are the second prong in the two pronged attack presented by big business and industry. The think tanks are hired to come up with the talking points and “facts” and the lobbying firms use the “facts” presented by the think tanks to hustle for the highest bidder. They are both funded by the same big money. In the Reason Foundation’s case it is primarily the infamous Koch Industries. I realize that Koch is pronounced “coke”, but I couldn’t resist the above pun.
This, from Source Watch, pretty much sums up Koch:
Bold and parenthetical added by me.
To paraphrase Hugo Chavez, does anyone else smell brimstone? I say this tongue in cheek, but seriouslly, wtf!
Another of Reason’s illustrious employers is ExxonMobil. They hired Reason, along with most of the other right wing think tanks, to help pretend that global warming caused by man doesn’t exist. Here is a list of the culprits involved it trying to refute global warming:
Much of this information came from this article at the Institute for Public Integrity: http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/731/
These entities are but a few that are responsible for the delay in meaningful policy regarding global warming for at least a decade. No one yet knows just how much damage will be done by this delay or how much could have been averted if these hired guns hadn’t obstructed, well, reason.
Obstruction, there’s that word again. Brings me right back to the 2/3 rule here in California. Johnny, your assertion that Republicans like Tony Strickland in our state legislature are somehow impotent is either knowingly disingenuous or ignorant of the effects of the 2/3 rule. Under the 2/3 rule, it is the minority party that holds all of the cards. That is why it is anti-democratic.
Further, the Norquist Republicans like the Stricklands and most of the other state Republicans are funded by the exact same sources that fund the above think tanks and lobbying firms: Koch, Mellon Scaife, Ahmanson, et al. I can not begin to tell you how much it irks me that these people, by virtue of their ability or their ancestors abilities to beg, barrow, steal, defraud or otherwise acquire vast wealth somehow think they should have inordinate influence on this country. Is it any wonder at all that these people tend toward anti-democratic instruments like the 2/3 rule? Worse than these zealots are the learned and talented men and women who willingly prostitute themselves by justifying and shilling for their causes. The people in these think tanks and lobbying firms are well paid, one might even say “kept”. I’m not a religious man, but I seem to recall something about false witness and thou shalt not, etc. How they are able to live with themselves I’ll never know.
As to the content of the white paper put out by the Reason Foundation that prompted my screed, the Project Director is listed by greenpeace as one of the soldiers in the “deny global warming” fight He also farms out work for other libertarian/right wing truthsayers. Adam B. Summers is stringer for Reason and he also does scut work for The Heartland Institute and other Koch funded organs like the Independent Institute. I just don’t understand how obviously talented intelligent people could allow themselves to be so easily purchased. Many of the numbers the report uses do not account for inflation. Some use constant dollars, but many do not. That’s an old trick. Also, there is no accounting of for population growth, another clever trick used by the “no tax” Norquist crowd. At what point will the libertarian, free market, de-regulation ideology be discredited? How much more damage do they have to do to the economy before we acknowledge that their’s is a failed ideology?
In FY 1990-91 the state spent $1,350 per capita. Today, the government spends $2,644 per person.
That’s all you got?
Okay, I’ll play a little longer, but reading these faked-up white papers hurts my soul. Here’s this,
Oooooo, sounds bad. Of course, I’m not seeing where they are using constant dollars, but I’ll assume they aren’t taking that kind advantage of their acolytes. But what’s this a little later,
The only problem is that the per capita increase is only 3.81% per year on average. So they are telling us the per capita based on constant dollars (we’ll assume) and they are telling us the population growth and the CPI are 4.38% per year. That’s actually a deficit of .57% per year by their own admission. We won’t even go into how inadequate the CPI is to divining actual inflation. Now this 5.37% number their using in the above quote doesn’t even jibe with their own per capita numbers. The reason for this is probably that the 5.37% number is derived by not accounting for inflation. Sneaky. I told you these prostitutes were smart, but I also told you they lie.
I’ll leave you with this:
Sean P Keenan, you need to answer the charges, not just attack the source. The following will clear up some of your misunderstanding.
1) the 3.81% per capita figure is for General Fund only, it doesn’t include bond debt.
2) you wrote “ The reason for this is probably that the 5.37% number is derived by not accounting for inflation.” RIGHT! That is the figure to use to compare to population increase and inflation, 4.38%. If the spending stayed even with population and inflation, it would ONLY BE 4.38%, and NOT the compounded 5.37% rate of State spending year after year for 20 years, which has resulted in this debacle.
3) whenever I see someone use that Mark Twain quote, it is usually by someone who doesn’t understand the numbers or doesn’t like what the numbers indicate; sometimes, it is both.
4) lastly, there is a little secret way the State has already found around the 2/3 rule: bond indenture.
Well, things are about to get ugly. Good luck to us all. Cheers!
SPK and Johnny Chingas, you are both right and you are both wrong.
Chingas is right that attacking the source of his initial foray is sort of beside the point. There is a real shortfall happening now, and there are real reasons for it. What are they?
SPK is right that a general increase in spending is a useless thing to complain about. What have we increased spending on, specifically, and why? Johnny Chingas, get down to brass tacks and tell us where the money has been/is being wasted. Tell us specifically what we cannot afford to spend on. Tell us what programs to cut to get us back to fiscal health.
Chingas is wrong to dismiss the 2/3 rule entirely as having anything to do with this current state of affairs. The state Repugnicans are on record that their goal is to bankrupt the state of California. They think that will help them politically. They don’t care about the harm it will cause. The 2/3 rule is the tool they are using to effect their plan. That’s why both Schwarzenneger and Maldonado “betrayed” them. Maldonado has recounted how he went into the Repugnican caucus on the budget, and was told that there are NO solutions to be embraced, NO programs to be looked at – the single goal of the Repugnicans was to induce bankruptcy by standing together with their 1/3 “party of No”, in the hope that the people of California are too stupid to blame them for what happens.
SPK is wrong to blame the 2/3 rule and the initiative system for the current state of affairs. The 2/3 rule is a tool; it is being abused by certain people whose goals are antithetical to the common good. The real problem is much deeper. How can the party of economic depression and collapse, torture, lost wars of choice, environmental degradation and government by, for and of the robber kings have 1/3 of the legislature and the governorship? If we had functioning politics and an electorate with the knowledge and intelligence to vote in its own interest, for leaders whose primary goal is intelligent policy for the common good, we could have a 9/10 rule and it would not be a problem.
JC & Anon – I disagree that attacking the Reason Foundation is beside the point. It is exactly the point. I totally reject the white paper put out by Reason and Koch Industries and I’ve already pointed how and why their numbers are highly suspect. In fact, they are not even internally consistent. Further, as to your statement, “there is a little secret way the State has already found around the 2/3 rule: bond indenture”(bold is mine), you fail to notice that initiatives passed by the electorate for bonds are a reaction to the 2/3 rules, not some sneaky, sinister plot by the STATE or Democrats. We are the state when it comes to initiatives regarding bonds. Because of the anti-democratic 2/3 rules, bond measures are one of the few ways to fund the workings of this state. As an example of some of the others, I’ll bring this discussion into the realm of the current and very near:
Prop 1D & 1E and their attempt to rob these successful programs are a direct result of the undemocratic 2/3 rules.
Now, JC, as a libertarian, Norquist acolyte, I fully understand that you would rather see the entire state government drowned in a bathtub, but I sincerely doubt the rest of the population shares your failed ideology. The irony here is that the state has this huge budgetary short fall as a direct result of the economic policies proscribed for the last 30 years by the likes of Reason, Cato, Heritage, Manhattan, et al. This selfsame failed ideaology is has now gone on to destroy the global economy. That we now have to be lectured by shills who deny global warming and the ills of second-hand smoke is beyond pale.
Anon, as I’ve already explained why JC’s source is highly suspect and not worth attributing any more effort toward, I’ll move on to where you claim the initiative process of our state is not to blame. The claim that much of what is happening with regard to budgeting and taxation, namely the lack of the ability to perform either task competently, is a direct result of our initiative process. The 2/3 rules that require a 2/3 majority to either approve a budget or to administer taxation authority were themselves stapled onto our Constitution by initiative. That said, I am a supporter of California’s initiative process. Contradictory, not really. I think we need something akin to a Constitutional Convention in this State that could address the ills of our Direct Democracy. Saying that the 2/3 rules are just tools is to miss the significance in its entirety. If I’m deciphering your writing correctly, I think you are saying that it is the fault of California voters that there are even any Republicans in the legislature or in the executive to take advantage of the 2/3 rule. Well, yea. But in our system there will always be a minority party and I don’t really think one party rule is all that desirable.
Anon, you are asking for specific cuts. This should be the legislature’s job to solve, and instead they are all up in Sacramento waiting for a miracle. The most obvious cuts should be the Bond Initiatives (i.e. $10billion for High-Speed Rail, etc.) and begin removing the last-hired State employees. CA state employees get 14 paid holidays per year, that is another excess that can be addressed. Caltrans employees have been furloughed two days/month; has anyone really noticed a difference?
SPK, you are refusing to answer a legitimate question because you find the source of that question distasteful. I will repeat that the Reason report is consistent; you are confusing General Fund spending with total spending (including bond indenture).
Prop. 13 passed in 1978 65% to 35%, and would pass again today by a wide margin. It was passed in the first place because politicians couldn’t get the job done, just like they can’t today. These initiatives are going to fail, and there will be some hard decisions to make. We’ll see if the legislature can face reality, or continue to blame a 30 year old law and impotent Republicans.
Pelosi is history