Opinion> Debra Saunders> The State Budget Mess Continued

	16 Feb 2012 President Obama Punts on US Deficit In February 2009 — having signed into law his $787 billion stimulus package — President Barack … Read More.
	14 Feb 2012 Obama Imposes Will in Contraception Compromise From San Francisco, where I live, the controversy over the White House decision to require church-affiliated … Read More.
	12 Feb 2012 To Make Women Safe, We Treat Them Like Children The domestic-violence case against San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi did not start with a call from wife … Read More.

The State Budget Mess -- Continued

When California voters rejected five measures on the May 19 special election ballot, but passed a sixth measure that barred legislative pay raises in budget deficit years, the message to Sacramento was clear: Voters did not like what Sacramento had to offer.

I thought that the 1990 term-limit measure that restricted Assembly members to three two-year terms and state Senate members to two four-year terms would produce better representation in Sacramento. I thought term-limited lawmakers would pass better budgets. Instead, legislators have passed budgets later than ever and more gimmicky each year — until gimmicks no longer could hide the gaps between income and spending.

The state budget mess has prompted me to rethink term limits. Maybe it's not a plus when roughly one-third of Assembly members and one-half of state senators are no longer eligible for re-election.

State Sen. Abel Maldonado, R-Santa Maria, believes the answer is for voters to pass his open-primary measure on the June 2010 ballot. Primary a la Maldonado would pit the top two vote-getters — even members of the same party — against each other in the general election.

Under the system now, Maldonado explained, Democrats have to woo the hard left to win their party's primary; Republicans likewise have to win the hard right — with the result that most lawmakers are "working very hard making 13 percent of their electorate happy." But if voters chose between the top two vote-getters, lawmakers would have to reach out to all constituents, not just to their party's overly influential base.

I called Bob Stern of the Center for Governmental Studies — my go-to guy on good government — and he suggested that I rethink my rethinking on term limits.

Stern referred me to his center's 2007 report "Termed Out: Reforming California's Legislative Term Limits." It found that term limits brought fresh faces to Sacramento and reduced the potential for corruption — but suggested longer term limits to enhance legislators' expertise.

Rather than term limits, Stern blames the two-thirds vote needed to pass a budget for the state's fiscal woes. He also faulted voters' reluctance to make shared sacrifices. Look at President Obama, Stern added: "Cutting taxes and raising spending. What does that tell people? You can have it all."

Besides, every time I might go for longer term limits, state lawmakers cook up some underhanded scheme like last year's Proposition 93, which would have extended terms to 12 years, while selling it as a tougher measure. Such dishonesty cannot be rewarded with a yes vote.

But if voters think they were voting against Sacramento in May, Stern noted, they should notice that the problem is not "just the people who are there — because you're bringing in new people all the time and they're not doing any better than the people they're replacing."

Maybe the problem isn't term limits, but voters in a state where some oppose spending limits, others oppose higher taxes, but all agree they should not have to compromise.

I've heard from voters who saw their no-on-everything stance in May as a repudiation of politicians who haven't gotten the job done — odd, as passage of the May measures would have encouraged compromise.

In May, we got the government we deserved — and it still wasn't good enough for us.

E-mail Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@sfchronicle.com. To find out more about Debra J. Saunders, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

Comments

1 Comments | Post Comment

The problem is the state's confusion of mob rule with government by democratically elected representatives who can stay on the job long enough to acquire some skill at what they are doing. Every time we put an issue on the ballot that should be dealt with by representatives who at least have a possibility of knowing what they are doing, we turn the whole thing over to a bunch of angry, frustrated people who don't have a clue what the consequences of their vote will be. We might as well rule by writing down everybody's fantasies about how to run government on little pieces of paper, mixing them up in a hat, and having a drawing contest. We have entered a vicious, accellerating state of decline. What was one of the world's best educational systems has crumbled its way to just about the bottom of the heap. That heap sits on a precipice. We are seriously close to tumbling over the edge and into free fall. The stupider we get the more we vote for stupid solutions, and so it goes. Quick everybody, close your eyes, click your heels twice, flap your arms like wings. Maybe we'll fly. But I doubt it.

Comment: #1
Posted by: Masako
Tue Jul 14, 2009 9:07 AM