California is having a special election May 19th. I've run into a lot of people who either 1) don't even know it's happening, or 2) don't know very much about it. This post should serve as a basic guide to people who haven't been following things closely. Please feel free to leave comments if you disagree (or agree) on my take of things.
I'm going to discuss the current mess first, and then I'm going to go into deeper background later.
Over the past few budget cycles the State of California has basically had a broken budget. Instead of fixing the budget, the legislature has papered over the problem using various accounting gimmicks. This culminated in the budget that was passed last October for the 2008-2009 budget year (that started in July of 2008).
The budget that passed was a farce, both because it was based on completely unrealistic estimates of revenue and also because it used more accounting gimmicks to hide the broken budget. Predictably, a few months later, during the mid-year budget review, it was discovered that there was a projected $40 Billion hole in the budget. This hole has since grown to $48 Billion.
To solve this problem, the legislature debated and finally passed a new revised budget that gets us through the end of of the 2009 fiscal year. This budget relies on a lot of cuts to important services, a few temporary tax hikes, and $8 Billion from the ballot initiatives on the May 19th election.
My quick answer on how to vote on these - NO on all of them. Here's my explanation:
1A: The California budget cap.
Prop 1A would cap California's budget based on a trend-line of revenues going back for the past 10 years plus inflation and adjustments for population growth. It would require that any revenue that came in above that trend-line be placed in a "rainy day fund," but it wouldn't let the rainy day fund be used to get us back up to the trend-line. In fact, even in years where we didn't make it to the trend-line, we'd still have to put more money in the rainy-day fund. This might sound like a good idea - force Sacramento to "live within it's means," but over time it would force cuts to every aspect of State government and destroy essential services. It is basically a rehash of Prop 76 that voters rejected in the 2005 special election. It has a bunch of other nastyness in it, but I'm trying to keep this short. If you want a more detailed analysis, go look at the California Budget Project Writeup.
1B: Bribe the Teachers Unions
Prop 1B is nothing but a naked bribe to the teacher's union. It was placed on the ballot because back in 2005, the teacher's union was the most effect opponent of Prop 76. In return for them supporting 1A in this election, they get 1B, which only goes into effect if 1A also passes. 1B sets aside part of the 1A "rainy day fund" to force the state to live up to it's obligations under Prop 98. There's a whole post to be written about how the teacher's union has thrown everyone else under the bus on this one. It's a pure example of how progressive politics are broken in CA and need reform. We have too many special interest groups that only look out for themselves and don't work together for all Californians.
1C: Payday loan from the Lottery
Prop 1C makes up the largest chunk of the $8 Billion the state is trying to raise with this budget - $5 Billion worth. Basically, it borrows against future revenues for the lottery and then tries to make up for it by increasing the future earnings of the lottery. The increased earnings are far from guaranteed, it doesn't solve the structural problems in the deficit, we'll be paying off the loans for years and it will be mostly marketed to poor people.
1D: Steal money from the kids
Prop 1D steals money from children's services and puts that money in the general fund.
1E: Steal money from the Mentally Disabled
Prop 1E steals money from the fund created a few years ago for mental health services.
1F: Stick it to the man!
Prop 1F would prevent pay raises for the legislature and other constitutional officers for years when the budget is in deficit. This is a stupid, vindictive ballot initiative that will do nothing to solve the structural problems, and it won't even save much money. If we don't pay the people in government, only rich people will be able to serve. Do we really want a state government that is only comprised of wealthy people?
Update: Changed "Mentally Handicapped" to "Mentally Disabled" - not sure what the current PC syntax is for this.
