Bakersfield.com: Kern County news, events, classifieds, shopping, & search

RSS Feed   Print Story   E-mail Story        

Time to fold tent on this Sacramento circus

Batch Data Processor | Saturday, Aug 11 2007 9:20 PM

Last Updated: Saturday, Aug 11 2007 9:26 PM

What does global warming have to do with the state budget? Not a darn thing. But tell that to 14 Republican senators, including Bakersfield's Roy Ashburn, who are holding up passage of the budget to leverage their power on unrelated issues and to settle a score with the governor.

California is one of only three states that require a two-thirds vote in both houses of the Legislature to pass a budget.

More than three weeks ago, the Assembly slashed its way to a spending agreement, passing a budget by a 56-23 vote, with eight Republicans voting for approval.

But the $145 billion spending plan bogged down in the Senate, where all but one of 15 Republicans voted against the plan, which is one vote shy of passage.

Republicans say they blocked the budget because it proposed to spend money the state doesn't have. But they are ignoring their Republican governor's pledge to veto spending in the budget to achieve the savings they say they want.

What they really want are legislative concessions on unrelated matters. As Lancaster Sen. George Runner, who heads the Senate Republican Caucus, told the Associated Press, "Quite frankly, there are a few places to which we can leverage those kind of policy issues, and this is one of them."

Heading the list of concessions is a Republican demand to block the state specifically Attorney General Jerry Brown from suing cities, counties, developers and businesses for failing to consider the global warming consequences of their development plans.

Confused? You should be. No matter how Republicans twist the logic, there is no connection between the global warming concession they seek on behalf of business and their duty to pass a budget.

The gang of 14 a powerless group at other times can leverage their tiny political clout on global warming and other special deals if they hang together to block the budget.

They also can kick sand in the face of their muscle-bound Republican governor, who they believe spends way too much time cozying up to Democrats and ignoring Republicans.

And who really cares about a budget stalemate? Certainly not most Californians, who over the past three decades have seen only 13 state spending plans approved on time. Their minds are numbed to these fiascos.

Only the most vulnerable among us the poor and elderly, who rely on state programs, and the small businesses that sell goods and services to the state are hurt by the billions of dollars in bills left unpaid while lawmakers play their games.

Don't blame Republicans for this mess, they say, pointing out they offered to approve an emergency spending measure to keep state money flowing, while they fiddle and scheme.

Democratic leaders dismissed the offer and made matters worse by recessing for an August vacation, ending budget talks altogether.

Senators will not return to Sacramento until Aug. 20. And when they do, Democrat Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata vows nothing will be considered in the remaining four weeks of the legislative session until a budget is passed. That likely will derail the governor's agenda, which includes much needed health care and redistricting reforms, and water system improvements.

We can only hope that this latest budget fiasco which exceeds in silliness past years' will motivate voters to reform California's broken budgeting process.

The two-thirds threshold to pass a budget dates back to 1933, when Depression-era voters feared lawmakers would overspend and stick taxpayers with the bill. Initially it took a two-thirds vote of the Legislature only to pass a budget that was 5 percent higher than the previous year's. In 1962, voters extended the requirement to all budgets, creating the fiscal circus and sideshows we have today.

Even conservative Sen. Tom McClintock, one of the 14 Republican holdouts, is fed up with the system. He proposes setting strict deadlines and standards for passing a balanced budget by a simple majority, while retaining the two-thirds threshold for raising taxes.