The state of California went to the polls yesterday to vote on a number of measures which were designed to halt the state’s spiraling our-of-control budget deficit. All but one were soundly defeated as California voters blatantly rebuked lawmakers’ attempt move money around without actually cutting any wasteful spending. Of course, the one measure which passed was aimed at prohibiting lawmakers from taking a pay increase during a recession, something the federal government needs to entertain.
Golden Gate Xpress reports:
California voters have officially voted no on five of the six propositions in Tuesday’s special elections, according to the results provided by California’s Secretary of State’s official website.
Proposition 1A through 1E were critical in seeking to change the state’s budget system, but the five propositions received over 60 percent of voters saying no.
Prop. 1A was to limit state spending and increase the “rainy day” funds from 5 percent to 12.5 percent.
Prop 1B would have given supplemental payments of $9.3 billion to schools and community colleges, if Prop. 1A had passed.
Prop 1C would have modernize the state lottery and allow the state to borrow $5 billion against future lottery revenues.
Prop 1D would have moved $1.6 billion in tobacco taxes from services for children five and younger to the state’s general fund, where it would be spent on other children’s programs.
Prop 1E would have revised 2004’s Prop. 63 to temporarily allow tax money earmarked for new spending on mental health programs to be moved to the general fund to help balance the state budget.
The only proposition voters approved of was Prop 1F, with about 75.5 percent of voters saying yes. Prop 1F prohibits government officials to receive a pay raise during a deficit.
Since the first five propositions did not pass, California will expect more budget cuts.
The special election was aimed to close a gap of approximately $42 billion and now will mostly likely face a growth of $21.3 billion shortfall this summer.
The people are clearly clamoring for budget cuts, not increases in borrowing and spending. The state has threatened things like releasing prisoners and cutting fire departments, however, that is absurd when the state is still spending billions on other completely useless projects like eco-friendly school buildings.
I don’t know but maybe it’s just me. I’d be canceling the $25 million for a eco-friendly school building before I release rapists. I’m just sayin’, that’s all. Then again though, California applies the liberal Democrat prism when deciding what to cut first. Wasteful environmental studies are at the bottom of the list compared to teachers, firemen and keeping prisoners in jail. So long as we keep the sea otter study going, the state will be fine.
Glenn Beck elaborates:
No doubt, the tax dollars from fiscally sound states will be used to bail out Democrat-controlled states like California and New York because they have employed too much tax-and-spend liberalism and, not surprisingly, it has failed.
Also not surprising is that, when polled, a strong 72% of voters feel that voting against these spending propositions was a way to send a message to Sacramento about it’s incompetence.
So hooray for California and I hope the rest of the nation continues to follow in rejecting lawmakers’ attempts to cover their own incompetence and inability to manage their respective state’s financial resources.