Should Arnold and the Legislature give up their pay...
...if they're late on the budget? Don't they do that already?
In case you missed it, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger included in Thursday's State of the State address a pitch for a new law that would require him and members of the Assembly and Senate to give up their pay permanently for every day they run past the constitutional June 15 deadline to pass a budget.
They almost always blow that deadline. They've nailed it only four times in the last 20 years.
When they're late, though, don't they always bend over backwards to point out that they're not getting paid? What's the deal?
Here's how it works now....
The state controller has to send them their paychecks whenever there's an appropriation, so that generally means through the end of the budget year -- June 30. They also get a $170 check daily for expenses, regardless of whether they have any (it's known around Sacramento as the "per diem," which is Latin for "entitlement"). When there's no budget and no appropriation, there can be no pay or per diem for elected officials or their staffs. Once the budget is finally adopted and signed, though, they get all their back pay.
Schwarzenegger has something different in mind. Under his suggestion, they would lose that pay permanently.
There have been numerous initiative petitions to make the governor and members of the Assembly and Senate lose their pay permanently for every day they are late on the budget, but those measures haven't made it to the ballot. Most recently, Brad Morisoli of Livermore has proposed an initiative that would go, ahem, a step further: If no budget has been passed by June 15, terms would simply end for the governor and lawmakers.
Read last week's Times editorial on Morisoli's proposal. We said ballot measures like these are part of what got us into trouble in the first place, and we don't really take this one seriously -- but that in the absence of a budget, in the midst of a fiscal emergency, it's starting to look not so bad.
Take a look at the 99 reader comments as well. Many do take Morisoli's plan seriously and say that it's a great idea. Many raised practical objections -- who would run the government?
The editorial focused on just one part of Morisoli's proposal. Here's the rest: 25% of the Legislature's and governor's pay is held back each year, and doesn't get released until the following year's budget is adopted. If they haven't passed a budget by June 15, their terms end. If the budget isn't legally in place by June 30, their terms end. They can't hold office again for at least two years. The previous year's budget will roll over to the current year, adjusted to reflect any changes in revenues.
By comparison, Schwarzenegger's proposal is tame. My main criticism is that it deals only with the kind of money you and I use. Elected officials thrive on something entirely different: political money. If they were banned from raising, seeking or accepting political donations while the budget is late, well, that may begin to catch their attention.
Photo: Rich Pedroncelli/AP
I am amazed how naive people are.
They after day we are watching the largest power grab since 1900 and people are distracted by details.
This is not about the budget.This is about permanent transfer of power from the voting electorate to the hands of rich, or rather extremely rich, who will use the service of purchased government officials with unlimited powers to decide such as the governor.
We do not want roads in our parks, power lines in preserves and new,overpriced housing in high danger areas.
We want health care, schools and living pay jobs.
The businesses want none of the above.
Hence the state is financial crisis for which amazingly only the moat vulnerable will pay: personal tax returns are witheld, students will not receive loan they have to re-pay, the disabled, elderly and poor will not have shelter and food but business, say oil companies, profits will not be taxed at higher rate, nor will luxury taxes return, nor will second, third..homes be taxed along with polluting vehicles luxuries of any kind.
If the electorate will not obey the mighty, it will be punished.
Think of this as blackmail. On state level as well as federal. Because we are now 1,000 billions into saving banks and their friends and the only visible effect is transfer of most of the financial a power to two banking houses. That means that never mind who we elect, we will always be run by the same, small, powerful group of white men.The same one that send our people to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Posted by: Linda Winsh-Bolard | January 17, 2009 at 09:14 AM
Let Mexico have California. Last one out turn off the lights.
Posted by: Ted Froncus | January 16, 2009 at 03:56 PM