About this Blog
Direct democracy -- the Switzerland-inspired system of initiatives, referenda and recalls that allows voters to make and repeal laws in 24 states -- is poorly understood. It isn’t even very direct. Direct democracy has become blockbuster democracy: a half-billion-dollar international industry of signature gatherers, consultants, and election lawyers who use ballot measures less as a method of making law and more as a tool of mega-communications to boost some politicians, hurt others, and supplement lobbying campaigns.
Blockbuster democracy is a decentralized business that practices wide-open politics. This blog aims to provide a center of news, analysis and conversation for and about the industry. We will report from blockbuster democracy’s capital -- California -- but we’ll monitor ballot measures from across the country and around the globe.
Your Blogger: Joe Mathews is an
User login
Governor: Two Revised Budget Proposals Coming Thursday
Gov. Schwarzenegger said this morning that he's going to release two revised budget proposals on Thursday so that voters understand the consequences of their vote in next Tuesday's special election.
Traditionally, governors release a "May revise" -- a revised version of their January budget -- but Schwarzenegger's announcement, made after a meeting with local officials at a senior center in Culver City, was a bit of a surprise. (Some of his own aides hadn't known this was coming). The governor had previously said he would release a May revise after the election, on May 28. Your blogger was there, along with a surprisingly small number of TV and radio reporters.
Schwarzenegger didn't offer a long explanation, but apparently, he wants to give voters a "Door #1" or "Door #2" approach. One revised proposal would show what Schwarzenegger contends the budget will look like if the special election measures, Props 1A thru 1E, pass next Tuesday. The other would show what he contends the budget will look like if the measures fail. The governor said he wanted to make sure that voters have "a clear understanding" of what their vote will mean.
Schwarzenegger also expressed some frustration that voters seem to be prepared to vote "no" to send a message of frustration about their elected leaders. The trouble, the governor said, is that voters will be the ones hurt most if the measures pass. He raised specifically the possibility of borrowing local government moneys. That prospect drew a pointed rebuke from a city councilman from the east Los Angeles county suburb of Whittier (Richard Nixon's hometown), who said that municipalities shouldn't to make "sub-prime" loans to the state, which he called not a credit-worthy entity.
Update Monday afternoon: a friend of the blog points out correctly that with Prop 1C almost certainly going down to defeat, there may not be that much difference between Door #1 and Door #2. In terms of upfront budget savings, Prop 1C accounts for $5 billion of the approximately $6 billion. in terms of long-term budget help, Prop 1A, however, is a big deal, producing an estimated $16 billion in taxes (albeit two years from now) by extending new temporary taxes from two years to four years.
- Login to post comments
It hardly matters what he
It hardly matters what he says on Thursday, because the governor has lost credibility with voters. For instance, if there is a huge budget crisis, why did the governor and the legislature approve a billion dollars in a corporate tax cut as part of this year's budget package? Why are they refusing to look at the most obvious ways to save money, such as alternatives to incarceration for non-violent offenders? You can't back the state into a corner by your own bad policy choices, and then beg the voters to bail you out.
To Answer Those Questions
I agree that the governor has lost credibility with voters, but not for the reasons you suggest. He's looked at every conceivable way of cutting the budget. In fact, he's led on arguing for alternative to incarceration for non-violent offenders, but has been blocked by the prison guards' union, Republicans and even some Democrats, who at various times have tried to argue that he's soft on crime. These measures were produced by negotiation, which is what is required to pass a budget. And in legislative negotiations, each side demands goodies. This happens whether there's a huge budget crisis (as there is) or if there's not. 1B, for example, was a demand by Democrats that adds more than $9 billion to education. GOP members and the governor wanted the change in how corporate tax is calculated. (They think it's good policy--and produce data that purports to show that there's a net gain for the treasury for keeping more jobs in the state. I'm skeptical, but they're sincere.) Bottom line: whether these measures go down or not, the state is in a world of hurt, and bad things -- cuts, a cash shortage, and (I believe) more tax increases -- are coming. These measures make things a little bit better for the next two years (not insignificant given the state's budget and political challenges), though their long-term impact could slightly add to the structural deficit. Joe Mathews Irvine senior fellow, New America Foundation www.newamerica.net/blog/blockbuster-democracy/