Lottery

Make That 7 Measures, Over 2 Elections

Joe Mathews — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:11:00 -0500

If anyone needs further proof that California is not quite a republic, look at the budget deal that appears to have saved the state from a fiscal disaster. (At least for now -- we could be at the brink again if the economy continues its downward march and state tax revenues slip even further below the current estimates).

The deal requires citizens to pass judgment on seven related ballot measures (At one point, a possible deal looked like there might be eight ballot measures, but in last-minute negotiations, it was decided that one measure--that would have involved docking the pay of lawmakers when they don't pass a budget on time -- was unconstitutional).

Five of the measures will be on a special election ballot May 19. These are 1. changes to the state's education funding guarantee or Prop 98. 2. Borrowing against future lottery revenues. 3. taking funds that voters approved through Prop 10 for early childhood programs. 4. taking funds that voters approved through Prop 63 for mental health programs. and 5. a new state spending limit, that would try to address California's volatile tax revenues by socking away money in a rainy day fund in years when revenues exceed the average of 10 years. Why are these measures on the ballot? Because the changes are constitutional -- as in the case of the spending limit or the education funding guarantee -- or they make changes to laws that were enacted by ballot initiative. California, alone among direct democracies, does not permit policymakers to change a statute enacted by voters. Only the voters can undo what they have done.

CORRECTED: A sixth measure -- a ban on legislative pay raises that was part of the price of State Senator Abel Maldonado's vote -- is also on the ballot. A seventh measure, a so-called "open primary" or non-partisan primary, will go on the June 2010 primary ballot, which should hurt the measure. The sort of partisan voters who cast ballots in primaries tend to oppose open primaries.

Today's LA Times offers more details on all of this here. The fight to pass these measures is uphill. They were drafted by an unpopular governor and an unpopular legislature.

California News: No Budget Veto, Guards Back Recall, More Measures For Ballot

Joe Mathews — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 21:48:00 -0400

Lots of afternoon news in California.

NEW BUDGET COMPROMISE, VETO AVERTED: Legislative leaders have reached an agreement with Gov. Schwarzenegger on modifications to the budget compromise. The governor won't veto as a result. Apparently, there are stronger protections to prevent untimely raids on the rainy day fund and some differences in the gimmicks used to pretend the budget is balanced. More details to come.

RECALL GOING FORWARD, IT APPEARS: Mike JImenez, the president of the prison guards' union, won re-election during a vote at the group's convention in Las Vegas today. The union also voted, by acclimation, to go forward with the recall of Schwarzenegger, albeit with a few caveats.

WHEN DO WE VOTE ON NEW MEASURES? The budget compromise looks like it will include changes that have to go before voters (among them borrowing against lottery revenues and provisions of the state rainy day fund). But it's too late to add measures to this November's ballot. Can such measures really wait until the next scheduled statewide election in the spring of 2010. This budget deal would seem to clinch a special election in 2009.

In Reversal, SEIU Backs California Lottery Borrowing

Joe Mathews — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:11:00 -0400

Yvonne Walker, president of Service Employees International Union Local 1000, which represents state workers, writes in the Sacramento Bee that her union has changed its mind about Gov. Schwarzenegger's plans to modernize the lottery and borrow against future revenues. Once opponents, she says the union now supports the plan. And she's right. Borrowing against the lottery revenue is not a good thing. But, in the absence of the kind of top-to-bottom tax and budget reform California needs, such borrowing may be the least bad option, as I argued recently in the Los Angeles Times. The lottery, by the way, was established in California by ballot initiative.

Great American Turn-In, Part 3

Joe Mathews — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 23:38:00 -0400

While you were at the beach or barbecuing hot dogs, petition circulators were practicing democracy. The final sigs are pouring in. Four measures were filed at the last minute in Oregon: a measure to devote a percentage of lottery proceeds to crime fighting, a cap on attorney's fees, a measure to reduce the number of lawsuits, and the open primary "top two" measure.

In Arizona and Nebraska, Ward Connerly's local supporters have filed the signatures on their anti-affirmative action initiatives. The Nebraska initiative is the only measure that appears to have the signatures in that state. (Hat tip, Ballotpedia).

Department of Self Promotion: Betting on the Lottery

Joe Mathews — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:01:00 -0400

Here's my piece from today's Los Angeles Times on the idea of borrowing against future lottery revenues. (Gov. Schwarzenegger and the Assembly both have proposed doing it).

Nunez Hearts Gov's Lottery Plan

Joe Mathews — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:32:00 -0400

Former speaker Fabian Nunez, a Democrat, shows up on today's Sacramento Bee editorial page to make the argument for Schwarzenegger's plan to borrow/securitize lottery revenues in order to reduce the deficit and fund a new rainy day fund. the lottery plan would require voter approval. Nunez continues to oppose the spending limitations in the governor's budget reform proposal.

The former speaker's take may explain the governor's recent behavior. He seems detached from the budget, leaving any talks to legislative players. He has sounded very confident publicly that lawmakers ultimately will have to adopt something like his plan. He speaks as a man who has looked at all the other options, and found none.

Voters Being Drawn Into California Budget Mess

Joe Mathews — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:47:00 -0400

It looks more and more likely that California voters will have to bless whatever budget and revenue plans that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state legislature agree upon to deal with the state's rapidly escalating budget crisis. Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders are pursuing a privatization of the lottery in order to produce more revenues, but changes to the lottery, which was established by ballot initiative, would likely require voter approval.