PDA

View Full Version : Back story on backroom deal behind Prop. 14



Norman Solomon
06-04-2010, 09:12 AM
Here's an article I wrote that was printed today -- Friday, June 4 -- in the Marin Independent Journal.
-- Norman

California's Prop. 14: A Bad Deal for Democracy

by Norman Solomon


In this state, the Democratic and Republican parties rarely agree on anything -- but both oppose Proposition 14. Although its misleading ballot title promises to increase the "right to participate in primary elections," the measure actually imposes major new limits on voters.

By eliminating party primaries, Proposition 14 would deny all political parties -- and their voters -- the right to choose a nominee to run in a general election.

Instead, the top two vote-getters on a single all-inclusive primary ballot would square off in the general election, regardless of party affiliation.
In the process, the measure -- an amendment to the state constitution -- would exclude small parties from the November ballot.

As debates over Proposition 14 heat up, a stark reality shouldn't get lost in the rhetorical shuffle: This measure is on the June 8 ballot only because the state legislature put it there.

Most notably, Proposition 14 owes its existence to many Democratic lawmakers who are now denouncing it.

This ill-conceived ballot measure was born 15 months ago, when a few top-ranking legislators met in the dark and then laid an egg -- a budget package with draconian cuts. Applauding the deal, Democrats in Sacramento touted it as the best possible outcome under the budget-crisis circumstances.

But it was a lousy deal. Although its boosters were apt to present themselves as savvy political strategists, the electorate had different ideas.

Months later, in the May 2009 statewide balloting, voters rejected most of the budget deal.

But that wasn't the end of it.

In their eagerness to approve the package, lawmakers had signed off on a provision that automatically placed the "top two primary" proposal in front of voters in June 2010.

The Democratic Party is second to none in condemning Proposition 14. Yet it's a proposition that would not be on the ballot if Democrats in the state capital hadn't succumbed to blackmail from a lone Republican state senator, Abel Maldonado (who recently became lieutenant governor).

In the midst of fiscal chaos, Maldonado was able to push the "top two" scheme through the legislature in exchange for his decisive vote in favor of the budget deal. He exercised huge leverage, which existed only due to the undemocratic requirement that revenue and budget laws must gain two-thirds approval in the legislature.

So, we're now confronted with Proposition 14, a highly dubious measure -- with dire implications for democracy -- hotwired onto the statewide ballot via an undemocratic process.

The take-home message should be that a bad process is very likely to result in bad decisions -- especially when there's a terrible shortage of sunlight and an overabundance of hubris.

In Sacramento, we get very negative results when just five legislative leaders hammer out portentous budget deals behind closed doors -- and then get pledges from legislators to rally 'round the party line.

Democracy would be damaged by voter approval of Proposition 14. But the origins of the proposition already make it a grim monument to secretive deal-making in high governmental places.

Days ago, a statewide opinion poll released by the Public Policy Institute of California showed Proposition 14 ahead by a wide margin.

If it becomes part of the state constitution, Democratic lawmakers in Sacramento will have no one to blame but themselves.

_________________________________

Norman Solomon, an author and activist who lives in Marin, is the founder and coordinator of North Bay Healthcare Not Warfare.

Hotspring 44
06-04-2010, 09:45 AM
...the undemocratic requirement that revenue and budget laws must gain two-thirds approval in the legislature.
Who is going to repeal that?... ...Bring on the initiative for 50% + 1 vote for State f/y budget to pass! I will sign the petition and vote for it so long as it is straight forward with no B/S included in it.

Norman Solomon
06-04-2010, 09:53 AM
The state Democratic Party is pulling together an initiative for the November ballot -- for only budget going to 50% + 1. Not "revenue."

Hotspring 44
06-04-2010, 02:13 PM
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CSH%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->

The state Democratic Party is pulling together an initiative for the November ballot -- for only budget going to 50% + 1. Not "revenue."

So in other words, a governor can (and invariably will) still screw up the revenue side of the equation, so therefore there is not necessarily a “budget” with enough in it to work with.
At this point in time, huge cuts in spending will still inevitably have to be made.
So my question would be to the Democrats; where are the cuts going to be made and how much?

Without a change in the (state) tax schedule what's the point?... ...There is still a monstrously huge deficit here in California!

There are two sides of the coin, the unemployed will work. How come the rich won't pay?

My personal opinion is that this a shame that the Democrats are doing things so Half-assed, they could do better, but for some reason, just like in Washington DC, it seems to me that the big money has corrupted the system here in California too.


<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]--><o:p></o:p>