You're Viewing the Archives
Return to IVN's Frontpage

Californians Less Sure about Changing Budget Vote Requirement

by Indy, published

The Public Policy Institute of California's recently released "Californians and their Government Survey" has yielded some fascinating information on the current mindset of Golden State residents.

Generally speaking, the poll shows that most Californians aren't happy with Sacramento and may not support several of the ballot measures coming up on the May 19 special election.

The survey, which contacted just over 2000 residents by telephone March 10-17, also showed a couple of other interesting items. One of which is that, oddly, the fervor to repeal the two-thirds state budget vote requirement has slipped 10 percentage points.

The current supermajority vote, required by the California Constitution, has been at the heart of the months-long budget standoff between the majority Democrats and the small handful of obstructionist Republican lawmakers. Those same GOPers ultimately used the requirement (and their votes) to force concessions and other deals. California is one of just three states in the nation requiring a supermajority to pass a budget.

Many Democratic state lawmakers said that as soon as the standoff was over they would immediately go to work on getting an initiative on the ballot to amend the requirement to a 55 percent vote requirement.

Now however the PPIC poll shows that Californians are not as sure about changing the state Constitution as they were a few weeks ago. In January, a majority of likely voters (53 percent) said lowering the threshold was a good idea. Currently, 43 percent of likely voters think it is a good idea while 49 percent think it is a bad one. Broken out amongst political party affiliation, Democrats are strongly supportive of making the change. Not surprisingly, most Republican survey respondents stand opposed.

The reasons for this backslide are not entirely obvious. Perhaps the idea of making it easier for the majority to pass an annual budget on time has given Californians second thoughts. Perhaps, down deep, they want to see their lawmakers struggle to form a spending plan that defacto must pick up at least some votes from the opposition party in order to pass.

Whatever their reasons, the idea of the elected lawmakers the 8th economic power in the world fighting like cranky 4-year-olds over the course of months in order to pass a budget is as damaging as it is embarrassing.

One can hope that Democratic leaders understand that the campaign for this constitution amendment has to be more of a voter educational outreach effort than a traditional partisan effort.

Clearly, the state must change this archaic requirement.

But as noted earlier, most Golden State residents are very concerned about most things coming out of Sacramento these days. In order to get this budget requirement changed, Californians must be presented with a logical and rational argument supporting why this would be good move for the entire state. If the voters get a whiff that this is just another effort to consolidate power for the majority, the measure will likely -- and unfortunately -- be rejected.

Jeff Mitchell is a longtime California journalist and political observer.

About the Author