Initiative aims for budget accountability

Opponents say proposition could lead to tax increase

By Laban Pelz

If a March 2 initiative passes, students will be more likely to receive their financial aid on time and colleges will be better able to plan their programs.

This is the argument given by supporters of Proposition 56, the Budget Accountability Act. Opponents say the passing of this initiative will only allow lawmakers to increase taxes.

“ When budgets are late, schools can’t plan for the upcoming year,” said Robin Swanson, a Proposition 56 spokesperson, in a news conference held by the California Faculty Association Tuesday. “There are layoffs, and students can’t get their financial aid. Meanwhile, the legislators still get paid, and even go on vacation. They aren’t held accountable. This proposition requires legislators to be serious about their jobs.”

The California legislature has not met the annual June 15 passage deadline for the state budget since 1986. Budget passage in the past few years has typically been delayed until August or September.

Proposition 56 proposes to penalize the State Legislature and the governor for any overdue budgets in the future.

According to the initiative, if the state budget is not passed by the deadline, the legislature and governor will not receive their salaries and the legislature must remain in session until the budget is passed.

“ School administrators are planning right now for the fall semester, figuring out how many students can be admitted,” said Kim Geron, CFA treasurer and a political science professor at CSU Hayward. “The administrators’ thinking is, ‘If we don’t get the money for the fall, we’ll just cut classes in the spring,’ and that’s what has happened.”

Schools, law enforcement, health care and companies that do business with the government are all harmed by late budgets, Swanson said.

The penalties suggested are only one element of Proposition 56.

A two-thirds majority vote in both houses of the legislature is currently required to pass the annual budget bill and to raise taxes. The initiative proposes to bring the needed percentage of votes down to a 55 percent majority.

“I think it’s undemocratic,” Geron said of the two-thirds requirement. “Here we are, in California, the fifth largest economy in the world, held hostage by a handful of people. The League of Women Voters says 55 percent is still too much. They say it should be 50 percent plus one.”

California is one of three states in the United States that has a two-thirds requirement.

Along with the CFA and LWV, some other supporters of Proposition 56 are:

• The California Nurses Association

• The Teacher’s Federation

• California Community Colleges

• The California Teacher’s Association

• PG&E,

• AFL-CIO

Some opposing the proposition are:

•The California Chamber of Commerce

• More than 75 city and county chambers

• The California State Sheriff’s Association

• More than 15 taxpayer’s associations

• AAA

• State Farm Insurance

• ChevronTexaco

• More than 100 small businesses

Those who oppose Proposition 56 call it the ‘Blank Check Initiative,’ saying the lowering of the majority vote required would make it easier for the legislature to raise taxes.

“ This initiative covers a lot of ground, and tries to address the need for accountability,” said Nick DeLuca, communications director for the ‘No on 56’ campaign. “However, its supporters never talk about taxes, and I think it’s dishonest. It is ironic that this proposition tries to hold our legislators accountable, but then turns around and gives them more power to raise taxes.”

Supporters of the initiative claim the two-thirds requirement holds up the system.

“ This need for a ‘super majority’ gridlocks the process,” Swanson said. “This happens under Democratic and Republican legislatures, and under Democratic and Republican governors.”

Deluca cited a Public Policy Institute of California poll, which reported that 73 percent of Californians liked the two-thirds majority vote requirement.

“ The people want a process,” DeLuca said. “They want bipartisan consensus and thoughtful discussion.”

Those who oppose the proposition oppose it primarily for the voting element.

“ The problem with initiatives is that you can’t choose. It’s all or nothing,” he said.

Other portions of Proposition 56 include the creation of a Web site so people can see how their legislator voted on certain issues, the formation of a ‘rainy day fund,’ where California’s surplus revenue can be stored during good economic times and the formation of an ethics committee to look into claims of partisan coercion.

Proposition 56 will be put to the vote March 2.