California - Illustrates The Need For Representative, Not Direct Democracy

[Median Democrat]

California, which requires a 2/3 vote to support tax increases and pass budgets, has this morning failed to adopt a budget to avoid the shut down of its government. In addition, to the 2/3 vote requirement, which is makes California one of the states to have such a requirement, California voters also adopted term limits, which ensures that California legislators have no vested interest in the ongoing solvency of the State. Republicans simply sign their no-new tax pledges, and Democrats never deal with whether the mandates they pass will impact local governments. California's constitution is replete with voter adopted propositions that take away the discretion of legislators on matters of both spending and taxes. The sad thing is that as a result of this crisis, voters will probably pass some additional propositions that further limit the discretion of elected officials, which will make future crises even worse.

The fact of the matter is that government is very complex, and you can't expect the average voter to pour through these huge bills, and vote "yes" or "no" on each item. Indeed, as Proposition 8 showed, the process can often be hijacked by well funded special interests.

California really needs to start from scratch, ditch term limits, and give elected the responsibility and the accountability to get things done. As things stand, there really is not much California legislators can do within the narrow parameters of discretion accorded to them in the California Constitution. Indeed, with term limits, by the time a state legislator has managed to become familiar with California's laws and agencies, that legislator is termed out. Also, ditch the 2/3 vote requirement for budgets and taxes.

My take is that our votes for legislators should count for something. If they screw up, then we can vote them out. However, as things stand, with the annual number of ill-concieved propositions that are passed in California, Californians have no one but themselves to blame. With a direct democracy, the voters have to be held accountable.

[Cant trust em]

1. I totally agree.

Not every decision needs to be made by every person.

[Frances]

2. Agree

Except I would argue that government by proposition is very UNdemocratic.

The huge majority of propositions that get on the ballot are funded by people or organizations with deep pockets (for example, the gay marriage prop). After a prop gets on the ballot, it's hugely expensive to advertise in this state to persuade people to vote for or against the prop.

As a result, the people with money have much more power to get what they want through the prop process than they do through the legislative process where representatives are accountable to fewer people.

In other words, I, as a California resident, would have a much greater chance of influencing my representative than I would in getting a prop on the ballot and then getting that prop passed.

Also I think the 2/3 requirement gives too much power to the obstructionists.

[Median Democrat]

3. Great Point - Californians Have A Better Chance Of Influencing Their Local Rep...

...than sponsoring or opposing a statewide ballot proposition, which requires millions of dollars to pass or oppose. However, with term limits, legislators barely figure their way around the State capital before they are termed out. Worse, there is a terrible disincentive to actually deal with problems, because you can just defer the issue. Thus, Republicans can sign no-new tax pleadges with impunity, because they never have to deal with the consequences of a future financial collapse. Likewise, Democrats don't make the hard choices regarding what programs need to be cut in order to stay within budget. Both Democrats and Republicans simply kick out the decisions to the next legislature after they have turned out.

On top of all this, the 2/3 requirement allows the Republican minority to attach unrelated conditions to the passage of a budget. California's propositions has render California state government entirely un-democratic, because no one is no longer accountable. How can you vote people out when they are termed out anyways? How can hold Democrats responsible when they need the consent of a Republican minority due to the 2/3 rule? How can you hold Republicans accountable, because they are in the minority?

There is individual downside to any legislator, because they are already on their way out the moment they arrive in the State capital. No one has a vested interest in ensuring that California does not collapse financially.

There is a reason why California, one of the largest and most prosperous states, has the worse bond rate of any state in the nation, and its because you have a screwed up system of government that electorate has adopted, which sharply curtails the discretion of elected officials. In all likelihood, this crisis will cause the electorate to adopt a series of additional contradictory mandates and proposition, which will further screw up California government, and render it inherently un-democratic.

We could push a Proposition to fix it all, but who has enough money to campaign for it.

[Frances]

5. Excellent points

The bottom line is that Repubs control this state through the propositions and the term limits and the 2/3 rule. And CA is in a mess because of this.

[Median Democrat]

6. Actually, They Helped Create A Tangled System That Is Unworkable

What they created is a system that simply does not work. This is what happens when you have a political party dedicated to giving truth to Reagan's admonition that "government is the problem." You now have a party invested in making sure government does not work. The California Constitution is a morass of inherently contradictory mandates that paralyzes the government during times of crisis. For example, the GOP is votiing en masse against tax increases, but now there is now way to simply pass on the issue by borrowing our way out of this crisis.

The problem is that no Republican has the guts to deal with the ramifications of trying to address a $42 billion deficit without tax increases, which was made worse by a failure to address the situation in the past.

To balance the budget without tax increases, California would need to close the UC system, Cal States, and layoff all members of the California Highway Patrol. Even then, the deficit may not be closed. This is the intellectual dishonesty of the California Republican party. No one honestly deals with the ramifications of their dogmatic stands.

[omega minimo]

4. and roll back lawmakers' pay to pre-1992 levels, when a series of huge raises began, the same time

term limits were installed

[BlooInBloo]

7. Tim Eyman in WA illustrates similarly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Eyman

[Romulox]

8. You can hardly argue that a government in the hands of lobbyists and corporate donors

produces more responsible legislation.

[Median Democrat]

9. You Are Arguing That CA Government Is Not?

:rofl:

Sorry, you just lost all credibility (again) by defending the current state of government in California.

[slackmaster]

10. In spite of the 2/3 requirement, we still have THE HIGHEST taxes of anyone in the USA

Personal income over about $44,000 is taxes at 9.3%. The only state with a higher rate is Vermont, where your earnings over $375,000 get taxes at 9.5%.

Californians pay the highest taxes on retail sales and motor fuels. Our taxes and registration fees on cars are also among the highest in the states.

As things stand, there really is not much California legislators can do within the narrow parameters of discretion accorded to them in the California Constitution.

Nothing in the state Constitution says the legislature has to spend every dime it receives in revenue, even when that exceeds budgeted expenditures.

I'm tired of the same sorry excuses being thrown around, when the real problem is a government that couldn't budget its way out of Fort Knox.