I see that only ONE of Arnold's proposals passed in last night's Special

[napi21]

Election in California. Sp what happens now? I don't know a lot about what's going on in Ca. but I got the impression from the talking heads that the State was in really deep "Sh**" if these proposals failed.

Sorry, forgot the link.

http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/props/59.htm

[Gormy Cuss]

1. The state's in deep trouble anyway.

Had Arnold's proposals passed the budget deficit would have dropped by about one quarter, but either way it's a serious deficit -- 21 billion without the Props,and 15 billion dollars had they passed.

[pnutbutr]

2. repost of my post in another thread on this

Californians shooting themselves in the foot

We won't pay any more in taxes to reduce the $21.3 billion deficit but go ahead and cut hundreds and even thousands of firefighters which we rely on every year to put out our wild fires and save our lives. Lets cut the police who deal with the violent gangs and dangerous drugs like crack and heroin which always go up during recessions and hard economic times. Lets cut access to healthcare despite the healthcare crisis the entire nation is feeling right now. Lets cut the school budget despite it being severely underfunded already. Lets just make our state the shittiest in the nation even below fucking Texas.

WTF is wrong with Californians?

[lunatica]

4. Hey, no cuts are necessary if Ahrnuld stops the tax cuts to the wealthy Republicans

Californians are tired of bailing the state government out while the wealthy get tax cuts. It's that simple. We're tired of the partisan politics and the fact that our legislators refuse to try to work together to fix the problems and then just put the false fix on the people.

Both our feet are already shot. You want us to do it again? Every time we've bailed the non bi-partisan legislature out we've shot ourselves in the foot. No more.

Remember, where California goes so goes the nation. This is the people saying it's enough. Force the legislators to stop expecting the citizens to bail them out while they do nothing to put yet another temporary fix on the problems with more bailouts. Ahrnuld always borrows like this and promises to pay it back to the state coffers and then when the time comes he says he actually needs more and can't pay anything back. He loves to take it to the people while begging for bailouts. It's just not working anymore. It's happened too many times and nothing ever gets fixed. Things actually get worse.

[pnutbutr]

6. gotta ask

for a link to tax cuts for wealthy republicans. The proposals that got voted down would have been temporary tax increases on all Californians.

[Luminous Animal]

15. In 1996

the 2 top tax brackets were eliminated. Now someone making $40,000 a year is in the same bracket as someone making $4 million a year.

In California the bottom 20% pay 12% of their income in sales & income taxes. The top pay 7% of their income in sales & income taxes.

[pnutbutr]

19. uh

Looks like you need to do a little bit of research on that subject.

tax rates in 1995
http://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/95_forms/95_resSch.pdf

tax rates in 2000
http://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/00_forms/00_resSch.pdf

tax rates in 2008
http://www.ftb.ca.gov/forms/2008/08_540tt.pdf

[Luminous Animal]

21. Actually I was pretty close.

Your tax schedule for 1995 clearly show two top tax brackets of 10% & 11% and the top bracket of 11% in 1995 for those making $219,872 and over.

The 2000 tax schedule shows that these the 10% & 11% brackets were eliminated and the top bracket was now 9.3% for those making over $35,826. That means that someone making $1 million in 2000 is in the same tax bracket as someone making $35,826.

In 2008, the top bracket is still 9.3% after $47,500.

[anigbrowl]

22. And besides, the governor doesn't have the power to just raise tax rates

Like him or not, Arnold does not have a fiscal magic wand. Thanks to the various ballot initiatives (going back to the 1930s!), the governor actually has very little freedom to rewrite the budget or the tax code.

[Luminous Animal]

26. And this:

That report gives the state's progressive income tax structure its due. It notes that a single mother with one child in California last year did not pay any income taxes if she earned less than $39,283. A married couple with two children paid no taxes on its first $49,083 in income.

Most would agree it's a good thing that the people who struggle hardest to make ends meet get a pass on having to pay state income taxes.

The problem, says the Budget Project report, is that sales taxes, gasoline taxes, property taxes and all the rest take a very big bite out of the incomes of poor and middle-income Californians. The bite is so big that it more than makes up for the break on income taxes.

"Measured as a share of family income, California's poorest families pay the most in taxes," the report says. "The poorest fifth of the state's households, with an average income of $11,100, spend 11.7 percent of their income on state taxes. In comparison, the wealthiest 1 percent, with an average income of $1.6 million, spend 7.1 percent of their income on state taxes."

http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/apr/16/where-the-money-really-is/

[pnutbutr]

27. Every state has that problem

That is mirrored in every state. Maybe not to the extent you see in Cali but it is there. Good reason to oppose a flat tax.

[Luminous Animal]

28. I do indeed oppose a flat tax.

Californians are subjected to too many flat tax schemes... sales taxes, property taxes, vehicle taxes, gas taxes, cigarette taxes, alcohol taxes...

[pnutbutr]

29. Same as most every other state

California is not special.

[Luminous Animal]

36. You've mentioned that twice.

So what? I have no clue as to the relevance of what most states have or do not have.

[Dreamer Tatum]

20. You think the rich people in CA are Republicans?

You have some learning to do. The only populous wealthy + Republican stronghold in CA is Orange County.

[cabluedem]

7. Firefighters: YES. police: No. We already pay them too much to collect fines from motorists to pad .

...the coffers of their counties. They waste a lot of fuel with all the needless patroling by car when they could be walking the beat and become part of the community again, not strangers. The cops in my county are getting brand new patrol cars as I write this. Its cheaper to run their three year old cars another three years like the rest of us do. Phooey on that needlass expenditure.

[ComtesseDeSpair]

8. The Public Has Too Much Power There...

which may sound backwards, after all isn't that democracy? But any state that makes it possible to amend the state constitution with a simple majority vote, that allows tax increases to be decided by popular vote, that makes it easy to recall their governor, that sets term limits on their representatives so that the committees are constantly being run by novices etc. is setting themselves up for failure. People are selfish bastards who will not vote for propositions that hurt them, no matter how much they are needed. I saw it repeated all my life: everytime there was a local measure that increased taxes by even the tiniest fraction of a percent but brought about a greater public good, such as funding libraries or parks or other public services, I would vote Yes and 80% of my fellow citizens would vote HELL NO! This pattern has been repeated for years - ever since Proposition 13 and its disastrous legacy. California is so dysfunctional. I live in Illinois now and I am amazed to see how much power the government has to make changes without consulting the public at all. They don't even have propositions here. It's quite the opposite of California - and it is ripe with its own abuses and frustrations. I think California has a better approach, overall, but they need to fine tune it so that they can actually accomplish things.

[Johonny]

9. I agree

The voters are to blame for the current budget mess. They're the ones that passed horrible proposition laws that hamstring the current California Government and make it impossible to handle either surpluses or deficits.

[anigbrowl]

23. Yep. I support the idea of a constitutional convention.

[pnutbutr]

12. that happy medium n/t

[Occam Bandage]

32. It does. Direct democracy is a terrible idea.

It ironically places power not in the hands of the people, but in the hands of corporations and interest groups capable of bankrolling enormous PR campaigns. Representative democracy is the best system.

[Throd]

11. I voted no on all those bullshit measures.

[pnutbutr]

13. may I ask why? n/t

[Throd]

18. There was no true reform in them

This state needs an enema. These measures were written to kick the can down the road a bit more.

[Occam Bandage]

33. So long as you recognize you were voting to bankrupt your state in hopes

that doing so might lead to greater reforms down the road. Personally, I think it's rarely a good idea to fix something by breaking it as thoroughly as you can first, but you're of course entitled to your vote and I'm glad you cast a conscientious vote, as much as I might disagree with it.

[XemaSab]

35. I haven't talked to a single person who was planning on voting yes on any of it

:shrug:

[Occam Bandage]

37. Indeed. CA voters continuously prove themselves incapable of governing their state directly.

Direct democracy is a noble but failed experiment.

[Kerrytravelers]

3. I think a lot of people were so confused by all the props, they didn't bother.

I can tell they were confused by looking at 1A and 1B.

1A had to pass for 1B to kick in, if passed. However, more people voted for 1B to pass than 1A. If people understood what was going on, the YES and NO vote should be identical, or, realistically, far closer in numbers.

N 1A "Rainy Day" Budget Stabilization Fund YES 1,327,400 34.1% NO 2,555,519 65.9%
N 1B Education Funding. Payment Plan. YES 1,452,535 37.4% NO 2,421,906 62.6%

(Numbers were taken from this link: http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/props/59.htm )



And according to the AP, only 19% of registered voters bothered to vote.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090520/ap_on_re_us/us_california_special_election

The majority of registered voters didn't bother to vote at all. Partial results from nearly 70 percent of precincts reporting late Tuesday showed only 19 percent of voters had cast a ballot, according to the secretary of state's office.


This summer in California will be a waiting game to see what the poor loses this go-around.

[Frances]

5. My local paper recommended No on all amendments

and a convention to write a new Constitution

As it is now, a minority of Republicans control the legislature. The majority has no power.

Also, the initiative process allows corporations to write the laws in the state. It takes HUGE money to pay people to gather enough signatures to get an initiative on the ballot. And it takes HUGE money to buy advertisements to get people to vote on the issue. I think there was an analysis showing that the way people vote on an initiative is directly related to how much money is spent advertising the issue.

In a small state, initiatives might work because people dedicated to a certain cause could collect enough signatures themselves. And the dedicated people could use word of mouth to get people to vote for their cause. California has too many people and too large an area for this to work.

I feel that I could best get my views represented by contacting my local representatives in the state legislature--IF that representative had any real power. But corporations would not be happy with that scenario because they would lose power.

[Merlot]

10. Some voted Yes on 1B knowing it wouldn't pass without 1A

It was a symbolic vote saying that we wanted to fund schools.

That's why it's lopsided.

[Kerrytravelers]

16. Ok, that makes sense.

I think the numbers reflect both my idea and yours. Symbolic and confused!

[NV Whino]

17. And then there was another factor involved. At least in my county.

I didn't get the voter pamphlet until waaaay after I got my absentee ballot.

[sojourner]

14. and you sure can trust those talking heads, right!

yes the state's in deep doo-doo. but the propositions were NOT written to help people. they were stealing from the poor to help other, more "popular" pockets of poor. they actually intended to cut services to the disabled, and to foster children! and boo-hoo! the legislature now has to "make do" with their salary when the state's in deficit. no 5% raise each and every year (while rest of the state -- workers AND programs, continue under freezes instituted eons ago! ask a state worker when he/she last got a COLA).

[anigbrowl]

25. oh yeah, that's really gonna show 'em

If you think that pay freeze legislation is going to make any difference to anything you are a sucker. The other propositions were a mess, but even to the extent that they made some fiscal sense, they would have got voted down. Hell, you could pass a proposition saying it was all the fault of the tooth fairy and get is passed here if you threw enough money at it.

[Occam Bandage]

34. The pay freeze is a feel-good sop that won't affect anything.

It's the kind of bullshit non-solution that direct democracy effects.

[frylock]

24. both calitics and courage campaign recommended NO votes on all props

[AngryAmish]

30. What is California going to do?

Will they go bankrupt? If so, that will make borrowing more expensive for everyone in the US.

Will they go begging to the federal government? Probably, but why should everyone else who has properly managed there state pay so you guys don't have to pay for your own services?

California did this to themselves.

(And while you think I am on a high horse --and I think I am -- here in Illinois we are in largely the same boat. Not so bad but getting there.)

[Occam Bandage]

31. CA voters are often idiots. Good luck in the future, guys,

and glad I got out of there.

[sojourner]

38. here's another californian's take on the thing...

California Voters Don't Want Dire Cuts; They Want Leaders to Get It Right -- by Phil Angelides

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/phil-angelides/california-voters-dont-wa_b_206586.html

a snippet:
It was clear the ballot measures would not solve California's chronic budget woes -- we would be facing a $15 billion deficit even if the propositions had passed. And it didn't help that the budget deal gave billions in tax breaks to big corporations while working families were stuck with a bundle of regressive taxes and cuts to education and other critical services.

and this:
...Although the governor and his allies outspent opponents about 10 to 1, California's electorate made a reasonable judgment that the budget package was the wrong prescription for the state's fiscal ills. Years of fiscal chaos and repeated broken pledges to balance the books left the voters wary of a new set of election promises.