California’s recent budget stalemate is nothing new to our state. In fact, it’s been happening for years and is the result of an ineffective state requirement of more than a simple majority to pass budgets. California’s two-thirds majority rule produces a drawn out circus of negotiations that lawmakers have forced us to endure nearly every year for the past 32 years. Education suffers annually from the instability and uncertainty of this process and is usually on the chopping block when Democrats make concessions to Republicans in order to win their votes - this year $11.6 billion was cut. Without a better system to pass a budget, how can we hope to address the education problems facing our state?
This year California’s stalemate was record breaking. On Friday, February 19th, lawmakers finally agreed on a combination of tax increases, spending cuts, and borrowing to eliminate California’s $41 billion dollar budget gap - after nearly a week of political horse trading in Sacramento. In the Senate, the two-thirds majority was finally reached after Democrats made adequate concessions to Senate Republican, Abel Maldonado. Maldonado joined two Republican colleagues and the Democrats to hit the needed threshold. In the end, California got a budget that resolves the shortfall but at the expense of crippling cuts pushed by the minority in order to break the stalemate. According to State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Jack O’Connell, the recent budget “essentially transfers our state cash flow problem to local schools and districts.”
Proponents of the two-thirds majority claim it is a necessary safeguard so the minority party is not irrelevant to the budget process. But what does that say about our Democracy? What about the will of the people and the candidates we vote for to represent us at the state level?
Our current system essentially tells California voters that although you elect your representatives, the minority party actually knows better than the voter what is right for California. It is a system that dilutes the power of our elected officials who are in the majority. As it currently stands, Democrats have majorities in both the state Assembly and Senate. They are prohibited, however, from passing a budget without at least a few Republican votes in both houses. Since Democrats and Republicans have very different ideas about what’s best for California, shouldn’t it be that if Republicans want a louder voice, they must win more support from Californians for their way of doing business?
The final budget wasn’t particularly palatable to either Democrats or Republicans. According to Karen Bass, Democratic Speaker of the California State Assembly, who spoke with Rachel Maddow on the eve of the final passage, “California is ready to go over a cliff and that will happen tomorrow because tomorrow, 276 more projects, which will lead to tens of thousands of people being put out of work, will be called to a halt tomorrow if we don’t get that one Republican vote tonight.”
Because of the severity of the situation, our Republican governor and legislative leaders from both parties had spent months negotiating a budget together that would fix the deficit problem and not bring state projects to a costly halt. But even teamwork could not prevent what the two-thirds majority guarantees – an obstructionist minority party has the power to bring the budget process and the state to its knees.
Although I disagree with Senator Maldonado’s need for concessions from the Democrats before doing what is right for California, it certainly took a lot of courage to join the Democrats. Maldonado, like all the Republicans in our state legislature, signed a pledge never to raise taxes. Republicans who break with the party in order to do what is right have literally been threatened by right-wing talk radio shows across the state. In her interview with Maddow, Bass described one station that posted caricatures of Republican legislators’ heads on sticks on its website, and has threatened to have them recalled.
The two-thirds majority debacle is not limited to legislators passing budgets. In 1978, Proposition 13 expanded the two-thirds vote requirement to raising any tax in the state. Last November here in Monterey County, ballot Measure Z won 62.55% of the vote to improve our roads and provide alternatives to driving. Though Measure Z was supported by all five county supervisors, Republicans and Democrats, and all 12 City Councils in the county, it still came up short of the two-thirds majority needed to pass.
Over the years many California communities have faced the same uphill battles to pass school bonds and other initiatives. When a two-thirds majority is needed, the will of the few often supersedes the good of the majority. And, when ideology obstructs logic and inhibits the state’s ability to take care of its people, we clearly have a system that is broken.
It will take a vote before the people to change the two-thirds majority rule in California. Hopefully, after this year’s budget stalemate and subsequent fallout for the state’s most vulnerable citizens, California voters will be ready to take on this campaign and vote to repeal this flawed system.
My blog is part of a month-long series on education in California,
published in partnership with the University of Phoenix and our publishing platform
Six Apart. WIP Contributor Kimberly Chase is also participating.
Be sure to look for both of our articles, as features and Talk blogs each Monday in March.
Thank you, Nusrat. Without all of you, there would be no WIP. Thank you for all of your compassionate contributions over the years!
Posted by Kate Daniels | January 3, 2012 7:27 AM
Paro, thank you for bringing Sjogren's to our attention. I only learned about it when Venus pulled out of the Open and I am glad you were able to shed more light on the subject. I too have an autoimmune disease. For years I went to specialists who knew nothing about what I have and for that reason my diagnosis also took over a decade. It is so frustrating to read that first-year medical students only started learning about Sjogren's last year. I don't think there is anything trivial about that - it is called priorities and, unfortunately, diseases that affect primarly women are not high on the list.
Posted by Kate Daniels | October 14, 2011 7:36 AM
Congratulations on finishing graduate school. Looking forward to more posts from Medellin!
Posted by Kate Daniels | August 29, 2011 9:16 AM
I am glad The WIP has been able to contribute to the publicity of this film. Anna Politkovskaya's assassination has disturbed me continuously since the day I read the news. And to think that one writer interviewed in the film believes that by virtue of Anna's passionate female concern for Chechnya, she lost her objectivity. You are right, the notion that “a woman cannot remain objective in a war due to her feminine nature” is absurd. It is also completely backwards. What the world and all its warfare needs is a whole lot more of that "feminine nature"!!!
Posted by Kate Daniels | August 23, 2011 1:51 PM
Dear Joyce - I recently read on Global Voices about Ruyati, a 54-year-old a migrant worker from West Java who was beheaded in Saudi Arabia last month. Ruyati was found guilty of killing her employer, who she claimed had abused her. The post I read included Indonesians reactions to the beheading as Saudi Arabia aparently didn't feel it was necessary to let the Indonesian government know in advance. After reading your story, it is possible to see what Ruyati may have endured prior to her decision to murder her employer. I believe that a legal system that condones beheading says it all. This is a very sad situation indeed. Fortunately, Indonesia has banned domestic worker migration to Saudi Arabia until an agreement is in place to protect the rights of migrant domestic workers. I hope Kenya follows suit. Thank you for your story.
Posted by Kate Daniels | July 18, 2011 1:09 PM
Jessica, I found myself thinking about this film and the concept of 'radical life extension' all weekend while on a family camping trip. Would I want to live longer than my natural life expectancy? At my current age, the answer is 'no.' But when the end of my lifespan draws nearer and I have to think about saying goodbye to my loved ones, I could very well think differently. But, the fact that not having to say goodbye to the people I love is the only reason I would want to live longer provides a valuable lesson in how to live today. It is not surprising that what you found was consistent throughout the centenarians interviewed was "a positive attitude and appreciation for this fleeting life." BTW, what about you? If you could take a pill that would let you live for another 500 years, would you do it?
Posted by Kate Daniels | July 11, 2011 11:11 AM
Thank you for sharing this project with us. Please keep us posted!
Posted by Kate Daniels | June 23, 2011 7:11 AM
This article was an interesting read for me. As an environmentalist, my instincts tell me to protect the water tower and the forest and that deforestation is bad. But to read about the actions the Kenyan governement has taken to protect the forest, at the expense of its people, is disheartening and sad. Thank you for the images of the children and young Daniel. A picture is often what it takes for the reality to sink in - in this case, that children who were living comfortably and in school just two years ago are now working for food while dreams of an education vanish. It is a government's responsibility to care for both the land and its people, a responsibility the government is apparently failing on both accounts in the Mau Forest.
What is the government saying about their MDG and Vision 2030 pledges for education as the year 2015 draws near? Is there any chance Kenya will meet its MDG for education?
Posted by Kate Daniels | June 20, 2011 1:07 PM
I just read on Global Voices about 25 formerly wild bottlenose dolphins that have been captured by Resorts World Sentosa. They plan to keep them in their spa! This is a horrendous atrocity to top off the human rights and environmental abuses Katie has already mentioned in this article. Two dolphins have already died in capitivity. You can learn more on Global Voices. There is also a 'Save the World's Saddest Dolphins' campaign listed on the site for you to join.
Posted by Kate Daniels | June 14, 2011 11:48 AM
We are incredibly lucky to have the Aquarium here - for their vision, research and leadership. But you are correct, marine conservation is not as prevalent in other areas, although I did find some excellent resources while researching this article. (One that comes to mind is the Algalita Marine Research Foundation.)
While Sarah-Mae did tell me public awareness is increasing in regards to marine debris, most people do not realize their role in plastics pollution - including myself before writing this article! Living away from the coasts it is hard to imagine that a plastic bottle cap left on the street may wind up in the stomach of a sea bird or turn ocean water into a toxic soup.
An interesting point I did not include in this article is that no one I spoke to while researching this article eats fish from the sea. Too much plastic was the reason...
Posted by Kate Daniels | June 13, 2011 10:04 AM