Failure to communicate

“What we have here is a failure to communicate.”  That famous line from the film “Cool Hand Luke” describes California’s political situation.

Voters in the May 19 special election sent a message to Sacramento.  The Legislature didn’t get it.  Or at least what legislators heard was not what voters intended.

People “are tired of partisanship,” said Senator Abel Maldonado. 

Wrong.  People are tired of Sacramento’s tax-and-spend attitude.  If anything, Sacramento needs more partisanship.  We need opposing teams competing to serve voters, not a collection of me-too politicians dedicated to building empires and protecting their own incumbency.

“Reform” seems to be a message also lost in translation.

Assembly Member Anna Caballero sees new fees on oil and gas pumping, on alcoholic beverages and on parks.

Wrong.  Voters are suffering through a recession, worried about how they’re going to pay their mortgages, rent or other bills.  They want less – not more – taxes, even if those taxes are disguised as fees.

Assembly Member Caballero and Senator Jeff Denham both said “reform” proposals might be placed on the ballot to reduce the two-thirds vote to approve a budget, to change term limits, to alter campaign finance rules and to change the initiative process. 

They may be correct that these will make it to the ballot, but the reforms are wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong.

Ending the two-thirds budget vote, which has provided at least some protection for California taxpayers since 1937, would guarantee unbridled tax-and-spend policies in Sacramento.  It would hasten California’s looming bankruptcy. 

Term limits haven’t been the success voters hoped for when the limits were imposed.  Extending term limits doesn’t make the system work better.

Campaign finance reform means making the rules more complex and obscure than they already are.  It challenges the creativity of fundraisers, confuses voters and hides the flow of money.

Initiative reform sounds appealing … but does anyone doubt that the politicians who got us into this mess will do anything but protect their own jobs and power?

None of these -- the two-thirds budget vote, term limits, campaign finance or the initiative process – is the core problem.  It’s the politicians themselves and their insatiable appetite for taxes and spending.

Legislators did get one message right, that there will be cuts in government. Following Governor Schwarzenegger’s lead, they’re picturing the most painful cuts in the most popular and necessary services. Assemblyman Bill Monning said, "It will be absolutely necessary that the pain is shared by all Californians." There’s a term for this: revenge.

Two possibilities promise to take the edge off California’s political extremes.  Voters last year approved redistricting, to take effect after the 2010 census.  And, Senator Maldonado got voters the opportunity to vote on an open primary.

Senator Denham’s proposal to sell off expensive, surplus state property has been co-opted by Governor Schwarzenneger, so maybe it will happen.

Meanwhile, recession-weary voters can hope Sacramento will really cut some government fat by eliminating those unneeded boards and commissions with their $100,000-a-year jobs and by reigning in out-of-control, empire-building government agencies that harass California’s citizens.

Voters said we need less government in our lives, less taxes and fees, and fewer tone-deaf politicians. 

 

May 20, 2009