My friend and former LA Times colleague Matt Welch, writing on his blog at Reason, the libertarian magazine he edits, makes a very good point about media commentary, particularly from our former paper, that voters are responsible for the state's fiscal fix because they vote for so many ballot measures that boost spending.

I think the line of commentary is right. But it's also new, and it's more than a little disingenuous for the LA Times to be making this argument. Welch looked back and discovered that the LA Times endorsed 20 of the last 22 bond measures on the statewide ballot. Patient, heal thyself. 

Welch also reveals that one of the two non-endorsements happened only becasue of his own work inside the editorial board.

Richie Ross, the Sacramento power broker, lays out his plan for fixing California's budget system -- the baseball arbitration system is his model -- in George Skelton's column in today's Los Angeles Times.

The gist: just as players and teams submit salary proposals to an arbitrator when they can't agree on a contract, Democrats and Republicans would submit their own budgets to voters. Whichever drew more votes would become the budget.

Problems with this idea? Several. But given the fondness California voters have shown for spending far more than they're taxed, it's a good bet that voters would choose -- over and over -- the more fiscally irresponsible of the two budgets they were presented.

Angry about special elections and long ballots full of confusing propositions? In today's LA Times, I suggest the solution may be... more regularly scheduled elections. Specifically, a strict system of quarterly elections that the state and all local governments in California would follow. The story is here.

Anyone interested in the politics of Los Angeles and California -- which are increasingly the politics of labor -- should read Harold Meyerson's piece in today's Los Angeles Times. He lays out one of the internal struggles within labor, involving both SEIU and Unite Here. Meyerson has limited space here, and doesn't draw detailed connections to the state's politics. But he makes the point that the fights (and I blame SEIU for much of the internal strife, which is essentially a policy of self-sabotage) could be very bad for reform in the city and in the state.

In this one passage, he draws a link to how the fighting could spoil an opportunity for crucial budget reform in the state:

Your blogger's expression of support for Props 1D and 1E -- two of the six measures on California's May 19 special election -- was so back-handed that the headline writer on the Internet version of my piece in today's LA Times seemed to think I'm against both propositions.

I'm not. Given the state's budget problems, the repurposing of money from early childhood and mental health programs makes a ton of sense. But the unintended consequences worry me. These two measures effectively take away -- temporarily -- tax money that was raised by voters through two ballot initiatives, Prop 10 and Prop 63. Such fiscal responsibility in ballot initiatives is rare. By making targets of those measures (albeit for the good reason of a budget crisis), lawmakers have eliminated whatever incentive there was fiscal responsibility among initiative sponsors.

The good news; there's an opportunity to fix the problem. State Sen. Denise Ducheny, a San Diego Democrat, and Sen. Roy Ashburn, a Bakersfield Republican, have drafted a constitutional amendment that would require future initiatives to be self-funding -- that is, to provide revenues to cover the costs of whatever programs or mandates they create. 

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).

Your blogger has done quite a bit of non-blog work lately on California topics. Here goes.

-On the LA Times and its problems, here's a piece called "The Morgue" (I didn't write the headline--the LA Times isn't going to die) from The New Republic and on the cancellation of the local news section from Fox & Hounds Daily.

-Here are my radio appearances this week on the Los Angeles NPR affiliate's show "Which Way, LA?" on the state's cash crisis and the ballot measures that will be needed to clean it up. Here's Monday's and Tuesday's. Both appearances came near the end of the broadcast.

-And I've become one of the cast of dozens contributing to Politico's In the Arena. The first post is here.