<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Unions boost measure to repeal 2/3 requirement</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/02/13/unions-boost-measure-to-repeal-23-requirement/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/02/13/unions-boost-measure-to-repeal-23-requirement/</link>
	<description>Politics in the Bay Area and beyond</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 05:06:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike F.</title>
		<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/02/13/unions-boost-measure-to-repeal-23-requirement/comment-page-1/#comment-10887</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike F.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:05:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/?p=10390#comment-10887</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I like the super majority on the budget.  It ensures a healty debate.  Sure its difficult to get everyone to agree, but that is the beauty of it.  A simple majority makes it too easy for any party in power to get to completion, instead of making tough decisions, which is why we voted for our legislators.  Also, this new measure of &quot;on-time budget&quot; is just to put the squeeze on the hold-outs.  I&#039;m sure any &quot;no&quot; voters will become popular with their collegues, especailly when they try to get other legislative biz done.  I agree this is just a ploy to get those easy budgets that promise payouts to Gov&#039;t workers.  Besides this can&#039;t be legal with our labor laws.  Geez, don&#039;t we know about incentives, instead of always punishing people.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the super majority on the budget.  It ensures a healty debate.  Sure its difficult to get everyone to agree, but that is the beauty of it.  A simple majority makes it too easy for any party in power to get to completion, instead of making tough decisions, which is why we voted for our legislators.  Also, this new measure of &#8220;on-time budget&#8221; is just to put the squeeze on the hold-outs.  I&#8217;m sure any &#8220;no&#8221; voters will become popular with their collegues, especailly when they try to get other legislative biz done.  I agree this is just a ploy to get those easy budgets that promise payouts to Gov&#8217;t workers.  Besides this can&#8217;t be legal with our labor laws.  Geez, don&#8217;t we know about incentives, instead of always punishing people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Common Tater</title>
		<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/02/13/unions-boost-measure-to-repeal-23-requirement/comment-page-1/#comment-10776</link>
		<dc:creator>Common Tater</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 06:05:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/?p=10390#comment-10776</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Apologies to John W.  The &quot;dummy&quot; label was truly free-floating and directed at people who want to make it easier to raise taxes in the legislature by lowering the standard.  

The power to tax is the power to destroy, and the Cal-Leg is doing a pretty good job of destruction.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apologies to John W.  The &#8220;dummy&#8221; label was truly free-floating and directed at people who want to make it easier to raise taxes in the legislature by lowering the standard.  </p>
<p>The power to tax is the power to destroy, and the Cal-Leg is doing a pretty good job of destruction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John W.</title>
		<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/02/13/unions-boost-measure-to-repeal-23-requirement/comment-page-1/#comment-10770</link>
		<dc:creator>John W.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 23:48:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/?p=10390#comment-10770</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Re:  #2 Common Tater:   

I guess the &quot;dummy&quot; remark is directed at me.  Ouch!  The things people will say when they are anonymous and not looking you in the eye!

I merely raised the question of what the practical effect would be of lifting the supermajority requirement for passing a budget without also lifting the supermajority requirement on taxes.  Agree with them or not, the Democrats have always insisted that it is impossible to balance the budget with spending cuts alone.  Agree with them or not, the Republicans have insisted on spending cuts alone (but have never specified a package of spending cuts large enough to legitimately balance the budget).  So, to a significant extent, the budget arguments are about taxes.  Hence, my question.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re:  #2 Common Tater:   </p>
<p>I guess the &#8220;dummy&#8221; remark is directed at me.  Ouch!  The things people will say when they are anonymous and not looking you in the eye!</p>
<p>I merely raised the question of what the practical effect would be of lifting the supermajority requirement for passing a budget without also lifting the supermajority requirement on taxes.  Agree with them or not, the Democrats have always insisted that it is impossible to balance the budget with spending cuts alone.  Agree with them or not, the Republicans have insisted on spending cuts alone (but have never specified a package of spending cuts large enough to legitimately balance the budget).  So, to a significant extent, the budget arguments are about taxes.  Hence, my question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Common Tater</title>
		<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/02/13/unions-boost-measure-to-repeal-23-requirement/comment-page-1/#comment-10766</link>
		<dc:creator>Common Tater</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 20:24:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/?p=10390#comment-10766</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Keep note of which groups want to raise your taxes. And why do they want to raise your taxes? It&#039;s to give themselves a pay raise, dummy.

California Federation of Teachers

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

California Professional Firefighters

Hide your wallets!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keep note of which groups want to raise your taxes. And why do they want to raise your taxes? It&#8217;s to give themselves a pay raise, dummy.</p>
<p>California Federation of Teachers</p>
<p>American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees</p>
<p>California Professional Firefighters</p>
<p>Hide your wallets!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John W.</title>
		<link>http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/02/13/unions-boost-measure-to-repeal-23-requirement/comment-page-1/#comment-10733</link>
		<dc:creator>John W.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:09:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/?p=10390#comment-10733</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Even if this passed, there would still be the supermajority requirement for taxes.  Since most budget disputes are about taxes, what purpose is served in eliminating the supermajority requirement for just the budget and not the taxes?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Even if this passed, there would still be the supermajority requirement for taxes.  Since most budget disputes are about taxes, what purpose is served in eliminating the supermajority requirement for just the budget and not the taxes?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using apc
Page Caching using apc
Database Caching 5/14 queries in 0.004 seconds using apc
Object Caching 209/213 objects using apc

Served from: www.ibabuzz.com @ 2013-05-19 10:22:34 -->