Now that California's embarrassing budgetspectacle is thankfully over, it is reassuring that many of the GoldenState's elected officials and opinion leaders seem to be on the samepage about one thing -- doing away with the state Constitution-requiredtwo-thirds majority vote to approve budgets containing tax increases.
For more than 100 days -- California, the 8theconomic power in the world -- was held hostage by a small handful ofRepublicans who vowed not to vote for any budget plan thatcontained tax increases. They took this position knowing that in order toclose the gaping $42 billion deficit they eventually would be put inthe proverbial cat bird seat to provide the constitutionally-requiredtwo-thirds majority to pass any budget package.
Unfortunately, most of these ideologues heldtheir destructive ground. Fortunately, however, after some last-minutedeal-making, three GOPers from the Senate and three from the Assemblycrossed party lines and voted for the package, ending the standoff.
But now that the deal is done, it is good to knowthat getting rid of this onerous state constitutional amendment,created in 1933 and reaffirmed by Prop. 13 in 1978, is high on manyagendas.
"InSacramento, it's not majority rule, but minority rule. We've tiedourselves in knots with the two-thirds rule, so it's time to go backand move to a simple majority rule for everything," Lt. Gov. JohnGaramendi said this week as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle.
Mind you, this is not about partisan posturing. No, getting rid of this requirement simply means a return tocommon sense that essentially would be good for any party that's inpower -- Republicans and Democrats alike. Moreover, it's about restoring fairness to the budget process.How is it acceptable to anyone to have the Legislature's voting minority hold extraordinary power and authority over the voting majority? Short answer: It's not.
Restoring the voting requirement to a rational and simple majority(50 percent, plus 1) or even 55 percent assures the public that statelawmakers won't be able to approve something as important as a statebudget or a tax increase on a whim.
Inthe coming weeks you may well be stopped at the grocery store or malland asked to sign a petition to qualify a ballot proposition that putsthe question of doing away with the two-thirds requirement before allCalifornians. It deserves a minute or two of your serious consideration.
While many would think such a ballot measure would cruise to an easy victory, history says otherwise. In2004, Prop. 56, also known as the Budget Accountability Act, receivedonly 34.3 percent of the vote suffering from well-funded conservativeopposition and an overall low voter turn-out. This timearound, such an initiative, which will likely qualify for the ballotlater this year or early next, deserves to be passed. After all, itwould be downright anti-democratic (and, mind you, that's the small 'd'kind) to do otherwise.
Jeff Mitchell is a Bay Area-based journalist and longtime political observer.
