Part of the Bay Area News Group

Isn’t this the Legislature’s job?

By Josh Richman
Thursday, October 30th, 2008 at 7:07 pm in Arnold Schwarzenegger, Assembly, California State Senate, Dave Cogdill, Don Perata, General.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed an executive order today creating a bipartisan “Commission on the 21st Century Economy” to “re-examine and modernize California’s out-of-date revenue laws that contribute to our feast-or-famine state budget cycles.”

The 12-member panel — six appointed by the governor, three each by the Assembly Speaker and State Senate President Pro Tem — is supposed to report by April 15 on “changes that will result in a revenue stream that is more stable and reflective of our economy,” according to the news release from the governor’s office.

“Unlike our diverse economy, our state’s revenue system is the epitome of boom or bust and right now we are paying the price,” Schwarzenegger said in this release. “That is why I have worked with the legislative leaders to find a long-term solution to our revenue problem. And today, I am signing an executive order creating a bipartisan Commission on the 21st Century Economy to study our revenue system and help California achieve the long-term fiscal stability our state needs and our people deserve.”

Said soon-to-be-gone Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland: “California’s tax system is antiquated and long overdue for an overhaul. Our state is one of the most advanced economies of the 21st century, but it relies upon an outdated and volatile tax model that no longer makes sense. This commission will examine how to best capture revenue in California’s dynamic economy and put the state’s finances on the stable and sound footing needed to remain a global leader.”

And Senate Republican Leader Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, said, “Keeping California competitive in a global economy is the key to a strong and healthy state budget. I applaud the Governor for working with legislative leaders to address California’s broken budget system and I look forward to reviewing revenue-neutral recommendations from the commission, not just on fixing our revenue system, but also on how the state can adjust its spending levels to come into alignment with revenues.”

But isn’t it the Legislature’s job to be the stewards of California’s long-term fiscal well-being? We wouldn’t need a blue-ribbon commission if our lawmakers weren’t so intransigent, so apt to put ideology over reality. It’s abundantly clear that California doesn’t take in enough money to meet its needs for schools, prisons, health care and the like; we can’t keep cutting our way out of the problem, and claiming that we can is ludicrously irresponsible.

Yet even after the absurd standoff this summer and the resultant massive crap-heap that’s now masquerading as a state budget, it seems lawmakers still aren’t willing or able to do what must be done on their own.

Maybe this commission is meant to give some political cover to lawmakers who still feel their careers are endangered by doing the right thing for California. If so, whatever; just get it done.

But if this turns out to be (to borrow from the words of REM) “a way to talk around the problem,” and we’re still having the same tired ideological debate after this commission’s report has come and gone, it oughta be clobberin’ time for this Legislature. It’ll be a pretty compelling argument for doing away with the constitutional requirement that budget and tax bills need a two-thirds majority in each legislative chamber, a requirement so awesomely effective at bollixing up the works that it exists only in California, Arkansas and Rhode Island.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • Terry M. Barber

    Redistribution philosophy:

    Today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read ‘Vote Obama, I need the money.’ I laughed.

    Once in the restaurant my server had on an ‘Obama 08′ tie, and again I laughed.

    When the bill came I decided not to tip the server, and I explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept.

    He stood there in disbelief when I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to the homeless guy outside. Boy, was he pissed.
    I went outside, gave the homeless guy the $10, and told him to thank the server inside.

    The homeless guy was grateful.

    At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment, I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn.

    I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application.