Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Saturday, May 02, 2009
Debra J. Saunders :: Townhall.com Columnist
Yes on Five Out of Six Buddy Measures
by Debra J. Saunders
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


I hesitate to hector California voters with the standard line that although Proposition 1A and its buddy measures are truly horrible, Sacramento will fall into the sea if they do not pass. If the five measures fail, the Capitol will survive.

Then Sacramento surely will agree on a worse way to come up with the $20 billion. I've talked to stalwart Repubs who think that if voters reject the Big Five, Sacramento will get the message and balance future budgets with cuts alone. They argue that if Schwarzenegger had reined in spending from day one, there would be no need for extra taxes. They don't notice how amazing it is that the Democratic Legislature agreed to broad taxes that every Californian -- not just businesses, or "the rich" -- will pay, instead of passing more overly progressive taxes that, because they are so volatile, have put the Golden state on a boom-and-bust rollercoaster.

They also do not notice that their party is in the minority.

Likewise, hard-core Democrats seem to think that if the five measures fail, there will be a golden age as Democratic leaders go after the requirement that two-thirds of the Assembly and Senate raise taxes.

Folks, that is not going to happen -- not when the latest Field Poll showed 58 percent of Democrats supporting the two-thirds mandate. Democrats may send big spenders to Sacramento and complain about spending reductions, but they still don't want to pay for all that stuff. They want someone else to pay -- and there aren't enough smokers and millionaires to get there.

Proposition 1D and 1E opponents complained to the Chronicle editorial board that the Legislature was stealing money from funds that exist because authors had the "courage" to ask voters to tax minority groups to fund their programs. Courage? The sponsors only won because they told most voters their programs were free -- while expanding the tax base and further tying legislators' hands. It was easy money -- so of course strapped politicians decided to steer it their way. Let this be a lesson to other interests who want to referendize -- I made up that word -- their own pot of gold.

A sixth measure, Proposition 1F, would prohibit state elected officials from receiving a pay raise when the state is facing a deficit. According to the latest Field Poll, this is the only popular measure on the May ballot. A mere 24 percent of voters oppose it. If I could figure out who they are, I would make a list and sell it.

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Debra Saunders' column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
I'd Vote "NO" On All Of Them...
First of all, I have Asperger's syndrome. I'm the type of person that would be effected by the passage of either Prop. 1D or 1E: As someone who has attended group therapy for the last seven years, these propositions would be a serious hindrance for those of us with mental disorders or disabilities. I particularly feel that these two propositions should be defeated at all costs.

Generally, though, I would vote "no" on every single one of them anyway for several reasons. 1.) The governor is Arnold Schwarzenegger, a.k.a. The Gropenfuher. His administration makes Gray Davis's look like Ronald Reagan's (as much as I despise him.) 2.) I haven't seen George Soros's name attached to any of them. It's usually a good indicator that a proposition might be viable if it has Soros's name attached to it, like the one that would have reduced the prison burden by releasing non-violent offenders. He usually has a good idea of what will help the people and what it won't help. 3.) It's supported by Jerry Perenchio. That name might not seem significant to you until I say this: HE was the one who was responsible for postponing the DVD release of "Blade Runner" for several years. So as a fan of "Blade Runner", I would vote against anything Perenchio supports out of spite.

Why to vote NO on Prop 1F
It is bad for our state AND our country.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the legislature supporting it gave me pause and caused me to investigate it further.

In 1990, didn't we vote for Prop 112 to handle the salary issue? This is another case of passing another law without looking into why the prior law didn't work the way we thought it would.

I do not believe this new amendment will help the situation, and in fact, I believe it will only make it worse for our state and other states.

It appears it was part of the "political blackmail" by Abel Maldonado, who pledged his deciding vote on passing massive tax increases in returns for some "demands" of his own - one of which was the placement of this ballot measure before the voters. I believe he sold us out and therefore I will not give him a victory by voting for it. We also need to keep an eye out for another proposition that will be on the June 2010 ballot. We know this happens all the time, but I believe this time, it is so obvious what happened that other politicians will see how easily it worked and jump on board with this tactic.

I don't doubt for a minute that this happened with Snow, Spector, and Collins - this kind of backroom deal. Voting for 1F, I believe it sets a very bad precedent for states. This could spread like wild fire through other states - ie: "If you agree to vote against what your party and constituents want, you will get rewarded with something you want." All it does is allow a few legislators to pretend that they got something valuable in return for breaking their campaign promises. We get to pay tens of billions of dollars in new taxes while they brag that "future" legislators might not get raises.

I say instead of voting for this, kick them out and get honest people in. Fight them other ways, not by awarding Maldonado a win for what was an obvious backroom deal.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.