Absentee

Posted at 8:07 pm on Sunday, May 10, 2009, in Politics, and tagged california.

For the first time in my voting life, I will be voting absentee. I do have the option in California to permanently vote absentee, but I have never been an outright supporter, so I rely on the practice on an as-needed basis. In comes the California special election in two weeks, where six highly-contentious measures are on the ballot. I will be on holiday with my wife in Europe, so I sent in my application for an absentee ballot. The whole idea is both foreign and exciting.

As for the measures — which were forced to be put to the voters as a result of the seemingly endless budget negotiations between the state assembly, senate and the governor’s office — all of them sound reasonable on paper. But most polls show all except one failing. (The one that passes, and by a wide margin, limits pay raises for elected officials in years with budget deficits. I think that everyone believes paying our representatives in Sacramento less is a good thing. The truth is, the collective individuals that make up the state’s assembly and senate lead what should be considered the most dysfunctional government in the United States. And that is saying something. More on this later.) There is also a lot of campaigning against the measures — in fact, usually billed as a complete rejection of the “first five” — by the unlikeliest of allies: taxpayer groups and unions. Something has to give.

Measure 1A establishes a rainy day fund. I have a rainy day fund (it’s not much, but it is what it is, and it does exist); so should the state. Taxpayer groups suggest that this is a stealth tax; unions say this will hurt education. Meanwhile, teacher groups are for it.

Measure 1B requires payments to schools. Taxpayer groups say we cannot afford this. Unions say it actually hurts education. And teachers are obviously for it.

Measure 1C allows for the state to borrow against future lottery revenues and guarantees education spending from such revenues. Taxpayer groups are against it; unions say it hurts education, nurses and firefighters. Teachers support it.

Measures 1D and 1E temporarily reduce spending in children’s services and mental health funding to reduce the current deficit. Taxpayer groups and unions are both against it, but for completely different reasons.

Measure 1F, as I mentioned earlier, prevents pay increases for elected officials in budget deficit years. Surprisingly, both taxpayer groups and unions are against this, which almost tips the scale for both with regards to what their true allegiance is. Is it smaller government, protected workforces, or the status quo of lobbying influence?

Whenever polar opposites are unified — in this case, taxpayer groups and unions — a flag is raised, and I need to look closer, because something doesn’t make sense. Measures 1A, 1B and 1C all seem reasonable. 1D and 1E unfairly punish funding for children’s services and mental health, but as a deficit hawk, it may be necessary. (That is, I guess. I’m not aware of what other services were considered to be cut, if any. These seem to be an easy target by the right, but the California legislature is strongly democratic, so I’m not sure what to think about why these two programs are threatened.) And 1F is a no-brainer, just like our legislature in Sacramento.

I was speaking in jest with a local political reporter about possibly throwing my hat in the ring for a very rare open seat in the House delegation (since almost everyone has voiced interest), and very much to my surprise, she believed me. She asked me what my strategy would be running in a primary against the presumed front-runner, a popular member of the state senate, and I told her that I did not think that a debilitated and ineffectual Sacramento should be emulated in Washington, that what we need in Congress is not just another democrat (or in the very extreme case, a mild republican), but someone that will actually make a difference, and not just fall in line with every other democrat in Washington.

Over the past few years, I have found myself growing despondent with the Sacramento legislature. It is clearly dysfunctional. Part of the problem is the requirement for sixty percent to pass a damn budget, but most of it is simply partisan politics, and the state can not afford the bullshit. State politics in Sacramento is ten times more incestuous than in Washington, I swear, and it is absolutely frustrating to watch them do absolutely nothing to change what is so obviously wrong. Sure, the legislature will pass bills making California the first state for this or that, and a lot of that is good, not just for the state, but in the mindset that the state is leading the revolution. Unfortunately, the state cannot afford much of anything these days. Education is plummeting and, unlike our current recessionary economy, shows no signs of bottoming out. The prisons are over-populated; the state continues to trend towards welfare; we will very soon run out of water. And a long-expected earthquake on the Hayward Fault may very well shake my house to pieces, maybe even while I’m away on holiday.

So fuck it. I’m voting ‘yes’ on all the measures.

No related posts.