NVR Logo
Six reasons why California is ungovernable
And promising steps for what is being done about it
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Save and Share Share
California today is ungovernable.

As state and local officials struggle to weather the state’s fiscal crisis, they wield power with the damaged machinery of a patchwork government system that lacks accountability, encourages stalemate and drifts but cannot be steered.
Here is a look at six key factors that have made California impossible to govern.

• Proposition 13: The fiscal effect of Proposition 13, the property tax limit measure passed in 1978, is only part of the damage the initiative did to California. After Proposition 13 passed, then-Gov. Jerry Brown and the Democrat-dominated Legislature realigned — “tangled” would be more accurate — the relationship between state and local governments by effectively shifting control of remaining property-tax revenue to Sacramento. They took power and responsibility for health, welfare, schools and other local services away from city councils, boards of supervisors and school boards, thereby establishing today’s chaotic maze of overlapping jurisdictions.
• Budget initiatives: Proposition 13 also ushered in an era of ballot-box budgeting, as fiscal initiatives became a favored special-interest tool. A series of post-13 initiatives — including measures creating the lottery, financing public schools by mathematical formula and earmarking revenues for special programs, from mental health to medical care — established an exquisitely complex state budget calculus that has hamstrung the rational operations of government.

• Gerrymandering: The once-a-decade process of redrawing political maps based on the census has created an increasingly partisan Capitol atmosphere. Reapportionment has become essentially an incumbent protection effort.
• Term Limits: Despite the claims of backers, the 1990 term-limits initiative did not get rid of career politicians — it simply changed the arc of their careers. Instead of spending decades in the same Assembly or Senate district seat, legislators position themselves for the next office — or job as a lobbyist — as soon as they arrive in Sacramento. The up-or-out system rewards short-term, self-interested political thinking more than long-term policymaking in the public interest.

• Boom-and-Bust taxation: Since Proposition 13, state government has become increasingly dependent on volatile sources of revenue — the sales, corporation and progressive personal income taxes — that correspond closely to the business cycle. When economic times are good, as during the dot-com and housing bubbles, money pours in and there’s little political incentive — in fact, term limits create a perverse disincentive — for long-term financial planning.

• The two-thirds vote: California is one of only three states requiring a two-thirds legislative vote to pass a budget, one of 16 requiring a two-thirds vote to raise taxes — and the only state to require both. The budget requirement has been in the state constitution since the New Deal; the tax restriction began with Proposition 13. In the polarized atmosphere of Sacramento, the two-thirds rules effectively hand a veto to the minority party. Under these conditions, stalemate and deadlock on key fiscal issues have become the political norm.

So what can be done about the dysfunction?

In the next few weeks, a blue-ribbon commission is set to recommend sweeping changes in the tax system to stabilize revenue collections. Voters in fall 2008 approved Proposition 11, which takes away the Legislature’s power to draw its own districts in favor of an independent commission. In 2010, as they elect a new governor, Californians also will vote on a system of “open primary” elections aimed at aiding moderates, and they also will probably decide on one or more initiatives to dump the two-thirds budget vote requirement.

California Forward, a bipartisan good government group financed by major foundations, is crafting proposals to conform government systems and processes to modern management methods. And the business-oriented Bay Area Council is pushing initiatives for a state constitutional convention, the first since 1879, to wipe the slate clean and build a new rational structure for state government.

(Roberts and Trounstine cover California politics at calbuzz.com. This essay first appeared in the Los Angeles Times.)
34 comment(s)

fmmt47 wrote on Jun 27, 2009 6:22 AM:

" Nothing will change. If a Constitutional Convention were held proposition 13 would be done away with. People like my parents who are retired would be paying half their annual income in property taxes and would eventually lose their home. The elimination of the 2/3 majority would put the Democrats in total control of the budget and othe r aspects of State government thus giving you higher taxes, more job killer bills, and more restrictive laws. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jun 27, 2009 6:51 AM:

" Most of the damage to the 'governability' of the State of California have had their genesis in Republican ideology.

Republican Nirvana has come to California, and "We, the People..." are going to have to throw them out and clean up the mess.

The latest idea to fix California's budget by lowering taxes on the rich and raising taxes on rest of us are another 'idea' that is transparently bad.

Lotsa good sounding, poll-tested words -- BAD ideas.

~Ruff "

charliesheen wrote on Jun 27, 2009 7:52 AM:

" California "ungovernable"? Hogwash. State government became ineffective when the state began to put it's aparatchiks and their interests ahead of what's best for the citizens.

By far the biggest whopper in this piece is laying blame on the 2/3 majority requirement. Claiming that eliminating this would somehow straighten out the budget process smells to high heaven.

California does not have a revenue problem. It has a spending problem. Plain and simple. "

glenroy wrote on Jun 27, 2009 8:26 AM:

" Oh brother..….this is a classic example of mudding the waters, blaming everybody and prop 13. About the only thing I’d agree with is that gerrymandering has essentially turned this state into a liberal special interest basket case.

The facts aren’t that difficult to obtain, the state budge has grown roughly 10 times faster than the state population and twice as fast as the economy… since prop 13 was passed by the voters…all revenues steams left as they were when prop 13 passed, had prop 13 not passed state revenue would not have been sufficient to keep up with this uncontrolled spending… because it would have bankrupted the wage earning home owners killing the real estate market.

This state is ungovernable because one simple and fundamental reason, we have elected incompetent legislators who have no business experience, no management or leadership skills….with a long history of pandering to special interests. Heck we see it with our Country Supervisors who derive income from public entities and then turnaround and vote on issues related to that entity.

The state doesn’t need another Blue Ribbon Committee….it needs non- partisan social studies taught in every grade and an amended constitution limiting state spending to a flat percent of the state GDP. "

kevin wrote on Jun 27, 2009 8:51 AM:

" I don't believe there is ANYONE in this state who can honestly say they are NOT paying too much in taxes!

If the voters start tinkering with Prop 13 they better realize that the ONLY result will be ever higher taxes.

California ranked #6 in the country for the highest taxes BEFORE the Democrats (and few RINOs) in the Legislature imposed their recent HUGE tax increase!

We don't need more taxes! Which is exactly what will happen if Prop 13 is changed or the 2/3 requirement is eliminated. "

PlasticPinkFlamingo wrote on Jun 27, 2009 11:01 AM:

" The state is ungovernable because of the Democrats and Republicans trying to buy the votes of any special interest group that comes along.

The constant whining that the two thirds requirement is the problem is just standard talking points and smoke screen for Democrat tax raisers. The Republicans get blame too, they have sold themselves out for votes. Used to be when a politician was bought, he stayed bought, but not any more.

And ruff, are only the rich going to pay the higher DMV fees, state park fees, sales taxes and other tax money grabs that the Democrats want? It looks like everyone, especially the low and middle income groups are having their taxes raised by the Democrats. How can you continue writing about how the Democrats are not raising taxes on the middle class, when it is so obvious that is just not true? I suppose you have to stick to that tired old party line, but at the national level Obama has already trashed that campaign promise. Maybe it's time both parties were forced out of power.

It is time to split California into at least two or three states. One California for the socialist program lovers, who can live there and raise their taxes all they want. Another California for those who know how to live within their means and can therefore pay lower taxes.

However, the low tax California will have to build and patrol a border wall to keep the socialists out, once they figure out that their system doesn't work. They keep trying, and the socialist experiment keeps failing. When will they ever learn? "

PlasticPinkFlamingo wrote on Jun 27, 2009 11:10 AM:

" Taxpayer - too true. But you know you stir up the lefty hornet's nest when you say anything good about Palin. They say they hope she is the next Republican nominee and they aren't worried about her. If that's true, why do they bother writing all their lies and pushing their innuendos? "

Raven wrote on Jun 27, 2009 11:24 AM:

" now that you all have vented anyone have any specific constructive proposals for fixing it....or is that too much work for you all...it is really easy to stand back complain that try and be part of a solution. "

freeport56 wrote on Jun 27, 2009 1:17 PM:

" This article smells as bad as the Cap&Trade vote yesterday.

The verbage is definately Democrat, attacking the 2/3 majoreit vote and Prop 13. Broken Record Ruff is lost in progressive land blame the Republicans for the overspending of the Democrats. Reality for some is their own tiny world.

So I can assume that this disguised attempt by the Democrats is to do way with the safeguards that have always protected the minority voices in the legislature. Who else would cook up such outrageous statements without pointing out the real iussues. Over regulation of the market place, too m,uch spending without any returns, no programs to encourage a better business climate, environmental laws to destroy business and industry, and an ever growing thirst to control our lives.

The Deomcrats must sure think we are stupid, not to see through their game. I for one do not my state and country turned into a third world nation by the Fascisit State of CA or our NEW Central Government!

Ruff you really actually address the issues and stop the name calling. It is after all part of the rules. "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jun 27, 2009 3:54 PM:

" Evidently, the moderator thinks I am following the rules on my post.

I discussed Republican ideology and it's failure to bring good government to California.

That is within the rules, even if some Republicans consider a little truth-telling to be name-calling.

As an aside, I would consider it to be an answered prayer to see Sarah Palin at the top of a Republican ticket in California.

~Ruff "

kdbk wrote on Jun 27, 2009 4:39 PM:

" Ruff, I doubt I'm the only one who noticed the obvious absence of any fact in your comments. Nothing but a rhetorical diatribe with no substance at all.

Tens of billions of dollars spent on services for illegal immigrants is the primary culprit in the California budget debacle, as it is in other western states too. Liberals like YOU have supported the cause of mass illegal immigration at every turn. Your absurd attack on Republicans is empty rhetoric.

Increasing burdens on private business has been a legislative habit in California for decades, supported by LIBERALS like you all the way. The exodus of business from CA has had devestaing effects. Liberals bid them farewell and care nothing for the impact on communities and lives.

General waste and abuse of public monies to fund one of the world's top ten welfare agencies has further driven California to the brink. Liberals like you have pushed for as much spending on social programs as possible, WITHOUT regard for the consequences you were warned about.

Sorry, Ruff, pack an extra sandwich in your lunch pail next time you come to play here. "

Enlightened Coelacanth wrote on Jun 27, 2009 5:22 PM:

" This is about the third or fourth piece I've run across just today blaming California Armageddon on Prop 13 (as if that were all that's wrong with the way the state's been run). But the state simply cannot live within it's means and doesn't even try. You do away with prop 13 and it would just be a matter of time before the socialists in Sacramento had burned through that money too.

You've had a Democratically run state for decades (despite some tepid rhino governors) who have treated California and it's resources like the proverbial golden goose that can never die.
The leftist ideologues have bankrupted the state with their bankrupt political philosophy but they will never admit it because they seem literally blind to the truth.
The body politic, state and national, is dying from the disease of leftism that has been injected in the system.
Perhaps we should create a red and blue California. I'd surely rather live in a state run by adults than pie in the sky dupes who have run this state in the ground. "

skeptic wrote on Jun 27, 2009 5:34 PM:

" let's celebrate the fact that anytime some "foundation" tries to get rid of prop. 13 , both democrats and republicans, capitalists and socialists, right and left , unite to say with one voice , "hands off prop. 13". every attempt to overturn it has been defeated by the voters.
when homes were $600,000 it meant the people who "bought " it actually had to pay $500 rent to the state every month in addition to their payments to the original owner or bank.kind of like never really owning a home since the rent goes on forever.
of course those numbers go down in a depression as do payroll taxes. everybody has to cut spending when there is less money .
sacramento is beginning to get that message.
increasing taxes on homeowners will only cause more foreclosures.
that's all we need at a time when they are increasing like crazy already. "

Raven wrote on Jun 27, 2009 7:42 PM:

" so now that everyone has had their chance to vent, anyone care to address the actual points discussed in the letter? "

PlasticPinkFlamingo wrote on Jun 27, 2009 10:19 PM:

" raven, there is nothing hard about addressing actual points. Why don't you come up with some? We know your game, you bait someone into saying something so you can make fun of it. Well there's no respect unless you come up with ideas too. I'd like to read them.

I'll start. My plan is "Cut state spending". Maybe not original, but catchy, doncha think? Sounds better than "Enormous Tax Increases on Everyone for Nothing".

First we stop the "we have to fire teachers, firemen etc." argument. There are hundreds of state agencies that do little but overlap with other state agencies. Get rid of them.

Cut the overhead in the departments, the huge number of 'management' employees that do little and get six figure salaries. Have an independent audit of management performance vs. money spent. That should be interesting.

Cut legislator salary and staff allowances. They should only meet every other year, we already have enough laws from them.

Find some way to undo the dedicated spending for special interest groups that has been passed in the last 20 years in California. Have a rule that any ballot initiative funding scheme can be authorized for only two years and cannot be renewed without an independent audit showing taxpayers how the money was spent. If voters like it, they'll vote for it again.

Redistrict the legislature using natural community boundaries. Get rid of gerrymandered districts, some of them just thin little strips holding together areas to create safe political fiefdoms. That is not fair representation, and we haven't had fair representation in CA for decades.

These are just a few and there's lots more. Anyone else with ideas of where to "Cut state spending" without using the words "Tax Increases"? "

John Richards wrote on Jun 27, 2009 10:53 PM:

" Raven wrote: " any specific constructive proposals for fixing it....or is that too much work for you all..."

That topic has been discussed here several times already. A good start would be to eliminate all benefits for illegal aliens. I don't see your recommendations here, Raven.
'Pot -- kettle -- black' comes to mind. "

Madison Jay Hamilton wrote on Jun 27, 2009 11:28 PM:

" Who supports illegal immigration? The liberals who support social services for all residing in California (legal and illegal) or the corporations who employ (i.e. exploit) them? "

Ruff Limblog wrote on Jun 27, 2009 11:59 PM:

" You can not 'cut spending to prosperity' any more than you can 'lay off workers to full employment'.

We've been seeing stagnant wages for working class America since Ronald Reagan, and falling wages since George W. Bush.

Folks with peon wages, or worse, no jobs at all, can not buy goods and so the downward spiral continues...

"Cutting government spending" is what made the First Republican Great Depression such a fearsome monster. A Republican president named Herbert Hoover tried cutting spending and balancing budgets until the American people threw the Republicans out of office.

Republican Nirvana in California.

It's not going to end until Republicans are reduced below the 1/3 level in the state senate.

~Ruff "

PlasticPinkFlamingo wrote on Jun 28, 2009 11:20 AM:

" ruff, you can't tax yourself into prosperity. That just does not work. You can, however, cut spending to more closely match revenue. Then you don't have deficits. It wasn't so long ago that ruff and the other Bush bashers were criticizing the Bush administration, now that Obama is doing it (and more of it) we have no criticism for deficits. Only complaints about Republicans, and no concrete ideas put forward from them.

Seems like hanging on to political ideology and throwing blame at others is more important than solving the problem. "

kevin wrote on Jun 28, 2009 5:43 PM:

" Yearly unemployment rates:

2001 4.7
2002 5.8
2003 6.0
2004 5.5
2005 5.1
2006 4.6
2007 4.6
2008 5.8

2009 unemployment rate is currently running 9.4%.

Welcome to Obamanomics... "

John Richards wrote on Jun 28, 2009 7:57 PM:

" MJH wrote: "Who supports illegal immigration?"

Right now it doesn't matter who supports it. What matters is what can be done right now to cut state spending. "

Alter ego wrote on Jun 29, 2009 11:33 AM:

" Even Governor Schwartzenegger admits that illegal immigrants cost the state $5 Billion annually.

And in reality probably much, much more. "

Raven wrote on Jun 29, 2009 1:40 PM:

" I have made mine JR...remove prop 13 protection from commercial property...end the 2/3 requirement, do away with term limits, two-year budgets, reform the initiative process, how is that for a start JR... "

John Richards wrote on Jun 30, 2009 10:37 PM:

" Raven, I like your list, except for "reform the initiative process." How does that help the current budget dilemma? Also, the 2/3 requirement should be eliminated for passing a budget, but not for raising taxes. The power to tax is the power to destroy.
I'm afraid your list will come nowhere near closing the $40 billion budget shortfall. "

5th generation napan wrote on Jul 1, 2009 7:36 AM:

" Hands off prop 13. If eliminated we'll see tax increases like, well like it was before prop 13, unbelievably out of control.
Two problems exist, #1 tell me which legislature or senator has a financial background. The percentage is miniscule. #2 Govenor S, hit the nail on the head. California should hold off one year and base the budget on its "known income in the coffers", and not on speculative guesses of what we think will come in this year.
Its total idiocy and crystal ball wishing making a budge guessing at how much they think we have to spend.
But that would take too much power of lying away from the senate. They could no longer say 'gee we didn't anticipate that'. "

Raven wrote on Jul 1, 2009 9:10 AM:

" Many of the spending initiatives we are dealing with were a result of budgeting through initiative ... and we were talking about why the state is ungovernable, the current budget crisis is a different ball of wax. dropping the 2/3 for the budget without dropping it for taxes is a waste of time....you have the same net result...

I see the GOP has yet to even submit a proposal that meets their criteria, seems all they know how to do is say no....they seem to be unable to even present an alternative budget and because of their disapproval and gov's veto yesterday the deficit is now 2 billion more....at 26 billion and we're are issuing IOUs which no bank has said they will accept yet.

That will really help the small businessmen that do business with the state, a supposed concern of the GOP. "

Mr4 wrote on Jul 2, 2009 11:18 AM:

" Raven,

I actually agree with you on the initiatives. The system is creating too many unfunded mandates and generally serves only special interests.

Beyond that, California's biggest problem is its explosion of Administrative Law. There are far too many regulatory agencies adding too much cost and complexity to living and working in California. I recommend a constitutional amendment sunsetting (terminating) every administrative agency after a set period of years. In order to continue, each agency should be required to re-justify its existence and it should be required to re-write its administrative code to clear out the dead wood. "

post-it wrote on Jul 2, 2009 11:27 AM:

" Single pensions for state employees. Many workers work for an agency til retirement, then work for another and collect a pension from both. at the end of the day they could be making more from both pensions than they did working.

Or better yet, eliminate pensions altogether and let state and federal workers save into a 401K like the rest of the working stiffs do. "

Raven wrote on Jul 2, 2009 11:51 AM:

" don't have a problem with that Mr4....many state agencies should have to justify their existence after a number of years, to see if the original purpose is still needed. but the devil would be in the details. "

Mr4 wrote on Jul 2, 2009 1:31 PM:

" No doubt. The bureaucrats will not go gently into that goodnight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTv1Dmu5CYc "

post-it wrote on Jul 2, 2009 2:52 PM:

" Why not just select assembly members like jury duty. At least there is no funny business about campaign contributions. The citizens couldn't do much worse. Shoot, a couple years pay, car allowance, junkets, lobbyists to give me a job afterwards, sign me up.... "

notalwaysright wrote on Jul 4, 2009 2:07 PM:

" Simple solution, don't raise taxes on people that already can't pay their bills. The wineries and restaraunts, construction companies, etc.. need to pay taxes on their illegal immigrant work forces. Why should the rest of us cover the billions they dont pay in taxes and then give them welfare and food , medical, housing and not to mention the Cadillac Escalade so many of them drive while living off welfare or in low income housing. And prisons are way to high class. It's prison, not Embassy Suites!!!!!!!!! So there is your solution ... RAVEN.... And it will work, wether you agree or not, you don't have all the answers like you seem to think you do. And NVR please print this one. Raven rips everyone else, The only comments from Raven are ripping someone else on their opinion or belief, not on the topic. So be fari about waht you allow... "

notalwaysright wrote on Jul 4, 2009 2:09 PM:

" Yeah post-it, that would be representing the people, it will never happen, as great an idea it is...
Wealthy people would never let us have a voice...
They're going to here mine though anyway. Every chance I get! "

NVR Brian Kennedy wrote on Jul 4, 2009 5:29 PM:

" RE: notalwaysright

Just a reminder - If you see a comment that violates our guidelines please email online@napanews.com. We read all the comments, but things still slip through. "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy