Unable to fix the real problems facing California, our state's elected officials look for scapegoats to blame for our late and unbalanced budgets, and underperforming state programs and services. Recently, the target of their wrath has increasingly been the two-thirds super majority of votes needed to pass a budget.
Here is a well written article of how the two-thirds threshold came to be [note, I don't always/often agree with the views of this particular website, but their research here is excellent]. Briefly, in 1933 a constitutional amendment was passed, stating that the budget could not grow more than 5% in a year unless approved by 2/3 of the legislature. In 1962, as part of Prop 16 - which condensed the state constitution - the 5% rule was removed, leaving us with the current requirement of a two-thirds super majority vote necessary to pass a budget.
In 2004, Prop 56 asked to lower the majority needed to pass a budget or raise taxes (also 2/3) down to 55%. Overwhelmingly, voters were against it, with nearly 66% voting to maintain the super majority.
So, is the super majority a good thing? If so, why?
California is, in many ways, a microcosm of the United States. Much like the nation in general, our state is massive in area, yet has relatively small pockets of high population density. For example, Los Angeles County alone accounts for nearly 10 million out of the estimated 36,756,666 population of California. Combine that with the over 3 million people each living in both San Diego and Orange Counties, and the over 2 million people each living in both Riverside and San Bernadino counties, and that totals over 20 million people, more than half of the total state population. [Figures from U.S. Census Bureau 2008 estimates].
The federal government deals with a similar issue by having two methods of legislative representation. The House of Representatives accords legislators based on state population. The Senate accepts two Senators from every state, regardless of size. California's State Assembly and State Senate both draw districts based on population size, and have since 1968 (before then, each county could only have one State Senator).
Now, we happen to live at a moment when the party line split in the two state legislative houses is just short of two-thirds for Democrats and just above one-third for Republicans. This has led many to consider the super majority threshold to be a partisan issue. But, let's forget political parties for a moment and remember that the legislators represent (or, at least are supposed to represent) the people of their districts throughout our state.
As outlined above, Southern California has the population, and with it the legislators, to dictate the budget process for the entire state, if a simple majority ruled. Northern California and, especially, central California would be left out to dry. Indeed, in the past this has sparked in-state fighting over issues such as water sharing, transportation funding, etc.
California's Central Valley, for example, has a population of about 6.5 million covering 42,000 square miles (as opposed to almost 10 million people living on L.A. County's 4,752 square miles). Yet "four of the top five counties in agricultural sales in the U.S. are in the Central Valley." Should this type of extraordinary production not have a meaningful voice in state budget discussions?
Therefore, the two thirds super majority vote is necessary specifically for a state such as ours. It ensures meaningful representation for all Californians. When todays' budget compromise was passed, it raised taxes on everyone throughout our state. And, we have quite a history in this nation of opposing taxation without representation.
Beyond that, with the state budget growing to over 100 BILLION dollars, isn't it reasonable to expect that our paid, elected officials can come up with a plan that at least 66% of them will support?
Showing posts with label Budgets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Budgets. Show all posts
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Time To Can The Lottery
It has been done.
Early this morning, the California state legislature passed the much maligned budget plan. Though the revised plan drops the previously suggested 12cent per gallon gas tax increase, it still includes a .25% across the board income tax increase, a 1cent on the dollar sales tax increase and a doubling of the car tax (along with a reduction in the dependent tax credit). These measures will take more money out of the hands of every California taxpayer [calculate your "share" here] without even pretending to address the underlying issues facing our state.
As Reuters reports, the state faces a $42billion deficit. This faulty plan tries to make up the costs by combining $24.2billion in tax increases and borrowing (including borrowing $5billion from expected future lottery revenues), and with $15billion in "spending cuts." One of the many problems with the plan, though, is that the cuts are not really cuts at all. As Reuters states in the above-referenced article: "They clamped down on spending by putting public works projects on hold, withholding payments to counties for social services and postponing tax refunds." That's the equivalent of you or I saying we will cut down our monthly expenses by stopping payments to our water, electric and credit card bills.
The biggest problem, though, goes beyond the simple act of raising taxes. We live in a state with a graduation rate of only 70% (and just 57% for African Americans), per the Alliance For Excellent Education, who also note that "Dropouts from the class of 2008 will cost California almost $42.1 billion in lost wages over their lifetimes."
We live in a state full of traffic congestion, yet the best our elected officials can offer is nebulous bond measures that lead to more confusion and no less traffic.
We live in a state with struggling or failing public hospitals.
We live in a state ranked with the 17th highest murder rate in America and an illiteracy rate higher than any other state.
Surely, before they increased taxes the politicians must have found ways to address these and numerous other problems, right? Not quite. Truthfully, real government reform was never even addressed.
The battle of the budget centered around spending cuts (favored by Republicans) and tax increases (favored by Democrats). Unfortunately, neither party focused on attaching real accountability to the taxpayers' money, aka the state's budget.
For programs or services to be successful, they need to have power, responsibility and accountability over the funds allocated to them. For example, when I was working my way up towards producing, there came a time when I was given responsibility over production budgets. But, I wasn't given the power to make changes I deemed necessary. I explained that I needed that power - willing, of course, to consult others - in order to fulfill my responsibility. I was given that power, and the projects came in on time, under budget, and creatively successful. I also had accountability. If the projects were over budget, I would likely lose my job.
The days of funding programs and services merely because they received money the year before have to end. Handing out dollars without clear instructions of what is expected in return must no longer occur.
California needed leaders who could reform government and improve our state. Instead, our politicians pushed through a sham of a budget that gives us the same old failures with one exception: THEY COST MORE!
Our elected officials failed, and will continue to fail as long as we keep subsidizing their efforts by sending our money into the state's piggy bank. The time has come to Can The Lottery.
Early this morning, the California state legislature passed the much maligned budget plan. Though the revised plan drops the previously suggested 12cent per gallon gas tax increase, it still includes a .25% across the board income tax increase, a 1cent on the dollar sales tax increase and a doubling of the car tax (along with a reduction in the dependent tax credit). These measures will take more money out of the hands of every California taxpayer [calculate your "share" here] without even pretending to address the underlying issues facing our state.
As Reuters reports, the state faces a $42billion deficit. This faulty plan tries to make up the costs by combining $24.2billion in tax increases and borrowing (including borrowing $5billion from expected future lottery revenues), and with $15billion in "spending cuts." One of the many problems with the plan, though, is that the cuts are not really cuts at all. As Reuters states in the above-referenced article: "They clamped down on spending by putting public works projects on hold, withholding payments to counties for social services and postponing tax refunds." That's the equivalent of you or I saying we will cut down our monthly expenses by stopping payments to our water, electric and credit card bills.
The biggest problem, though, goes beyond the simple act of raising taxes. We live in a state with a graduation rate of only 70% (and just 57% for African Americans), per the Alliance For Excellent Education, who also note that "Dropouts from the class of 2008 will cost California almost $42.1 billion in lost wages over their lifetimes."
We live in a state full of traffic congestion, yet the best our elected officials can offer is nebulous bond measures that lead to more confusion and no less traffic.
We live in a state with struggling or failing public hospitals.
We live in a state ranked with the 17th highest murder rate in America and an illiteracy rate higher than any other state.
Surely, before they increased taxes the politicians must have found ways to address these and numerous other problems, right? Not quite. Truthfully, real government reform was never even addressed.
The battle of the budget centered around spending cuts (favored by Republicans) and tax increases (favored by Democrats). Unfortunately, neither party focused on attaching real accountability to the taxpayers' money, aka the state's budget.
For programs or services to be successful, they need to have power, responsibility and accountability over the funds allocated to them. For example, when I was working my way up towards producing, there came a time when I was given responsibility over production budgets. But, I wasn't given the power to make changes I deemed necessary. I explained that I needed that power - willing, of course, to consult others - in order to fulfill my responsibility. I was given that power, and the projects came in on time, under budget, and creatively successful. I also had accountability. If the projects were over budget, I would likely lose my job.
The days of funding programs and services merely because they received money the year before have to end. Handing out dollars without clear instructions of what is expected in return must no longer occur.
California needed leaders who could reform government and improve our state. Instead, our politicians pushed through a sham of a budget that gives us the same old failures with one exception: THEY COST MORE!
Our elected officials failed, and will continue to fail as long as we keep subsidizing their efforts by sending our money into the state's piggy bank. The time has come to Can The Lottery.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Good News, Bad News
First the good news....
The California State legislature did not pass the "compromise" budget as expected this past weekend. That means, for the moment, Californians are spared an increase of $14billion in increased taxes, part of the planned budget.
Now the bad news...
We are also no closer to having a state government that respects its constituents and their tax dollars.
As has been stated here before, this isn't just about money. It is about the job performance of our elected officials and the quality of services provided by the state.
In "Annie Hall", Woody Allen recalls the following joke:
Well, our state politicians are trying to push the same joke on us, but are telling it with a straight face. Too many public schools are failing the students, traffic remains gridlocked in our cities, unemployment is on the rise, etc etc etc. So, what is their solution? Throw more money at everything!
We need leaders - not just politicians, but LEADERS - who will take a hard look at every service provided by the government and decide two things: 1 - Do we need this service or not (or, is this a service that should be provided by government or the private sector)?; 2 - If we do need the service, how can we improve its quality and efficiency?
For example, in regards to education, we need to cut the red tape and mounds of paperwork local schools must deal with just to get access to money. Get the funds directly to the local schools for them to spend as they best see fit (working with PTA's and local school boards). Not only does this provide vitally needed local control, it also cuts time and wasted money.
The same can be done for all government programs that are not cut. Give them power and responsibility over the money, with very clear instructions on what the state expects to receive for that funding. No more spending on vague transportation bills that promise improved infrastructure, yet lack in details on how or where the money will be spent. No more giving funds to failing government programs solely because they received money the year before.
State politicians must stand up for the taxpayers' money, and they should provide us access to what we are getting for our dollars. Every organization that receives state taxpayer funding should have to fill out a three page report (no 50 page reports filled with graphs and pie charts). Page 1 should outline their successes during the past year. Page 2, their failures. Page 3 would state how they plan to build on their successes and rectify their failures over the next year. Then, it would be very clear to elected officials how much (if any) of the tax dollars the organization should receive. Of equal importance, those short reports should be posted on a state website for all Californians to see.
Priorities, responsibilities, accountability and specificity. That is how most of us run our personal and business budgets. It must become how California runs our state budget.
The tax hike may have been staved off for another day, but beast remains alive.
CAN THE LOTTERY...Feed the hungry, Not the Beast!
The California State legislature did not pass the "compromise" budget as expected this past weekend. That means, for the moment, Californians are spared an increase of $14billion in increased taxes, part of the planned budget.
Now the bad news...
We are also no closer to having a state government that respects its constituents and their tax dollars.
As has been stated here before, this isn't just about money. It is about the job performance of our elected officials and the quality of services provided by the state.
In "Annie Hall", Woody Allen recalls the following joke:
Two elderly women are at a Catskill mountain resort, and one of them says, "Boy, the food at this place is really terrible." The other one says, "Yeah, I know; and such small portions."
Well, our state politicians are trying to push the same joke on us, but are telling it with a straight face. Too many public schools are failing the students, traffic remains gridlocked in our cities, unemployment is on the rise, etc etc etc. So, what is their solution? Throw more money at everything!
We need leaders - not just politicians, but LEADERS - who will take a hard look at every service provided by the government and decide two things: 1 - Do we need this service or not (or, is this a service that should be provided by government or the private sector)?; 2 - If we do need the service, how can we improve its quality and efficiency?
For example, in regards to education, we need to cut the red tape and mounds of paperwork local schools must deal with just to get access to money. Get the funds directly to the local schools for them to spend as they best see fit (working with PTA's and local school boards). Not only does this provide vitally needed local control, it also cuts time and wasted money.
The same can be done for all government programs that are not cut. Give them power and responsibility over the money, with very clear instructions on what the state expects to receive for that funding. No more spending on vague transportation bills that promise improved infrastructure, yet lack in details on how or where the money will be spent. No more giving funds to failing government programs solely because they received money the year before.
State politicians must stand up for the taxpayers' money, and they should provide us access to what we are getting for our dollars. Every organization that receives state taxpayer funding should have to fill out a three page report (no 50 page reports filled with graphs and pie charts). Page 1 should outline their successes during the past year. Page 2, their failures. Page 3 would state how they plan to build on their successes and rectify their failures over the next year. Then, it would be very clear to elected officials how much (if any) of the tax dollars the organization should receive. Of equal importance, those short reports should be posted on a state website for all Californians to see.
Priorities, responsibilities, accountability and specificity. That is how most of us run our personal and business budgets. It must become how California runs our state budget.
The tax hike may have been staved off for another day, but beast remains alive.
CAN THE LOTTERY...Feed the hungry, Not the Beast!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
