Time for change in California, but is it ready?

Written by Byron Williams

Wednesday, 24 February 2010

For years, I have bemoaned the dysfunctional manner in which state government operates.

I have put forth my own ideas for reform. I supported the proposed constitutional convention and have been an ardent critic of the initiative process.

In my opinion, ballot-box legislation over the decades has let the people make major decisions while holding the Legislature responsible for the unintended consequences of those decisions.

So it might seem somewhat paradoxical that there is a grass-roots initiative that I have actually decided to support. It's called the California Democracy Act.

Sponsored by Californians for Democracy, the act reads very simply: "All legislative actions on revenue and budget must be determined by majority vote."

These 13 words — which supporters hope to place on the November state ballot — if passed, would be the first step to returning California to the path of normalcy.

Chaired by University of California linguistics professor George Lakoff, Californians for Democracy is a coalition of concerned Californians working to change the vote requirement for passing tax increases and the budget in both houses of the Legislature to a simple majority.

California, the state with the eighth largest economy in the world, is the only state in the union stymied by requiring two-thirds majority to pass a budget and to raise revenues.

The origin of requiring a the two-thirds majority to pass the state budget dates back to the 1930s, when the state was in the throes of the Great Depression, and the voter-approved Proposition 13 in 1978 is why California requires a two-thirds majority of the Legislature to raise taxes.

The California of 2010 is not the California of 1978, let alone the 1930s. Why would we continue to operate as if the state has magically remained stagnant for decades?

The two-thirds requirement is not democratic because it places the Legislature under minority rule. One-third plus one — only 34 percent — of either the Assembly or Senate can, and so often does, block the will of the majority.

The current system begs for gridlock and dysfunction. Moreover, it allows a minority in the Legislature to control key issues ranging from the budget to infrastructure to higher education.

Few welcome tax increases, but it is a vital tool for governing just as much as tax cuts. The two-thirds majority erroneously portrays the tax cut as inherently good and the tax increase as its antithesis.

As long as this sophomoric oversimplification has traction within the public discourse, the California electorate will continue to be a distrustful, apathetic lot, who feel they can do a better job making uniformed decisions in the voting booth than the men and women they send to Sacramento who represent them.

Even Republican Senate candidate Tom Campbell, who studied economics under Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago and whose libertarian bona fides are second to none, stated during his brief run for governor that California must raise revenues.

If the California Democracy Act is placed on the November ballot and is passed by the voters, it would represent the beginning of the necessary reforms that California so desperately needs.

But adding these 13 words to the state Constitution will not solve the myriad problems facing California.

We the people also have created a system that discourages sending good people to Sacramento.

Not that those who currently serve aren't good people, but the egregious term limits do not allow for them to gain the necessary institutional memory or the trust of their colleagues from the opposite party, which is critical to make deals.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I have agreed to serve as a nonpaid speaker on behalf the California Democracy Act because I believe the state cannot sustain its status quo.

Though it has been fashionable to complain about the state's obvious fiscal and political problems, I question whether there is an equivalent desire for authentic change.

There are three things we must always remember about change. First, the speed at which it occurs seldom corresponds with the time frame of those who seek it. Second, change invariably begins as the minority opinion. Third, rarely do change and comfort exist simultaneously.

Only time will tell if California is ready for change, especially in lieu of the latter point, but the California Democracy Act might be a good place to start.