Guest editorial by Ernest A. Canning
Californians are all too familiar with the disturbing image now playing out in DC.
Radical-right ideologues demand extension of the Bush tax cuts, retention of corporate subsidies, deregulation, a squandering of public funds on privatization schemes and pouring what is left of the National Treasury down the economic black hole that is war and the military-industrial complex. Hypocritically, they not only point to the massive deficits they themselves have erected, but hold a gun to the head of government, threatening to shut it down absent drastic concessions designed to extract a pound of flesh from those who can least afford cuts in government services as they target the last vestiges of the New Deal safety net.
In California, a small minority of fiscally irresponsible, radical right-wing ideologues has employed the “give-us-what-we-demand-or-we-shut-down-the-government” tactic for over a decade, with devastating results.
The state’s new (again) Governor Jerry Brown (D) would have done well to have read Paul Krugman’s The Great Unraveling before he re-entered office last January.
Krugman aptly described the radical right that, in 2000, seized the reigns of the federal government as a “revolutionary power” which does not accept the legitimacy of our democratic system and which cannot be expected to negotiate in good faith.
Three months into fruitless negotiations, Brown recently came to realize that even though the state faces a catastrophic $26 billion deficit, CA Republicans would never allow the state’s voters to decide whether to extend the temporary taxes on income, sales and vehicles to help cover the short fall.
After negotiations broke down last month, Brown said: “Each and every Republican legislator I’ve spoken to believes that voters should not have this right to vote unless I agree to an ever-changing list of collateral demands….Republicans demand that out-of-state corporations that keep jobs out of California be given a billion-dollar tax break that will come from our schoolchildren, public safety and our universities. This I am not willing to do.”
While the Governor has openly considered by-passing the Republicans in order to permit direct democracy in which Californians themselves would vote on a temporary tax extension, that approach, even if successful, falls well short of the fundamental problem — that the current 2/3 vote required to pass revenue legislation in the state’s legislature permits an irresponsible minority of right wing ideologues to hold the state hostage as it carries out its democracy-destroying and economically unsustainable, privatization agenda…
Engineering California’s Economic Collapse, revisited
As I observed in a November 2009 article, “Engineering California’s Economic Collapse”, the state’s “looming fiscal catastrophe did not arrive by accident. It is, according to a number of progressive policy experts, the intended product of a Republican-led privatization scheme” which succeeded, in large measure, because California was then “the only state where a 2/3 majority approval is required on all revenue and budget legislation.”
The radical-right agenda, dubbed “starve the beast” by Grover Norquist, is intended to create such a massive sea of red ink that the government “could be drowned in a bathtub.” As Bill Moyers observed in Moyers on America, the radical right agenda is “systematically stripping government of its capacity…to do little more than reward the rich and wage war.”
By coupling the crippling of government with union-busting, the right seeks nothing less than “an atomized society of disengaged individuals who feel demoralized and socially powerless” in the face of unchecked corporate wealth and power.
California’s Democratic mandate for change
With the exception of the race for Attorney General where Kamala Harris (D) narrowly defeated Steve Cooley (R) (46.1% to 45.3%), CA Democrats bucked the national trend and defeated Republicans by a wide margin for every statewide office in 2010.
The Democrat Brown trounced his Republican billionaire opponent Meg Whitman (R) by a margin of 53% to 42%. That, despite Whitman’s having spent a record $142 million on her campaign. Barbara Boxer (D) defeated former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina (52% to 42.6%) in the U.S. Senate race. Gavin Newson (D) defeated Abel Maldenado (R) for Lt. Governor (50.2% to 39%). State Treasurer Bill Lockyer (D) defeated Mimi Waters (R) (56.5% to 36.2%). Secretary of State Deborah Bowen (D) defeated Damon Dunn (R) (53.1% to 38.6%).
Democrats also maintained significant majorities in both houses of the California Legislature. The CA Senate Democrats outnumber Republicans 25 to 15. There are 52 Democrats in the Assembly as compared to only 27 Republicans.
Yet, here we are, just over five months after Californians soundly rejected the radical-right agenda at the polls, and it is the Republicans who are still dictating policy. And we call that democracy?
Democracy is the only real defense to the radical right agenda
In Nov. 2009, George Lakoff, a professor of linguistics at the University of California, proposed a solution — the California Democracy Act; a ballot initiative which read: “All legislative action on revenue and budget must be determined by a majority vote.”
That failed, but not because Californians are adverse to the idea. Lakoff’s cash-strapped, citizens-initiative failed to garner enough signatures to place it on the November 2010 ballot.
California citizens were given the opportunity to vote for a half-a-loaf — Proposition 25, which permits state legislators to pass a budget by a simple majority instead of the two-thirds majority requirement. It was approved by a comfortable margin (55.1% to 44.9%).
But that measure only allows for budget items, in other words, spending matters, not revenue (tax items) to be decided by a majority. Increasing revenue in any way still requires a two-third majority, hand-cuffing the governor and crippling the state legislature’s ability to do so, as Republicans stand firm against any form of responsible taxation to help close the fiscal gap.
It would indeed be appropriate for Governor Brown and California Democrats to by-pass the minority and take their case directly to the voters, but that case should not be a stop-gap, temporary solution of tax extensions. The core of the problem is the undemocratic 2/3 rule. Democratic governance can be achieved only when a simple majority of the people’s representatives are able to pass revenue legislation.
Ernest A. Canning has been an active member of the California state bar since 1977. Mr. Canning has received both undergraduate and graduate degrees in political science as well as a juris doctor. He is also a Vietnam vet (4th Infantry, Central Highlands 1968).
Privatization scheme…sounds like a euphemism for fascism.
Ernest says:
Californians are all too familiar with the disturbing image now playing out in DC.
Radical-right ideologues demand extension of the Bush tax cuts, retention of corporate subsidies, deregulation, a squandering of public funds on privatization schemes and pouring what is left of the National Treasury down the economic black hole that is war and the military-industrial complex.”
Then I say God bless Californians … (or evolution bless Californians, or whatever bless Californians) if ya know what I mean Verne.
But let me say this without any treasonous cells in the blood that flows through my never thirsty veins:
Democracy depends upon votes in order to exact accountability.
Votes are the expression of the voters.
When that expression is not understood by those who count the votes, change is in order.
At that point the votes must change their method of voting in order to change their expression of democracy.
Some will have to vote with their feet, others with their guns, others by withholding their tax dollars.
I mean, if Egypt, Libya, and your home town is an example of votes.
V for Voting!!!
oops,
“At that point the votes must change their method of voting in order to change their expression of democracy.”
should be:
At that point the voters must change their method of voting in order to change their expression of democracy.
It is the spending stupid!
I’ve lived all over the U,S, and I can assure you that the Tax Payers of California are in no way being under taxed. There is so much waste of Tax Payer’s money it’s not funny anymore.The loony lefts “social justice” programs were laughed at in the rest of the country.The welfare for illegals $$$$$ ,tax payer paid for sex changes for the confused $$$$$,Calif. provides translators in approx 50 languages at tax payers expense.Vote in seven languages,$$$$$$, In state tuition for illegals $$$$$$.
plus all the other feels good programs for the unwilling to work crowd.
They have taxed business out of the state.Destroyed huge tracts of farm land to save a small fish.Won’t pump or drill our own oil.and on and on.
It’s the spending and high taxes that got us here. Thank God or what ever they need 2/3rds to pass these bills.
Can you guess who the ignorent troll that is posting bullsh!t is?
I won’t feed, can’t correct liars and those that want to be ignorant, but the smell of lies and repugs is definitively awful!
EddyJames’ comment @4 typifies the impact of right-wing propaganda upon what has become the ‘Tea Party’ generation.
Let’s examine just one of James’ multiple points of disinformation.
As revealed by Sunshine for California: Shining Light On Corporate Tax Secrecy For Healthier State Budgets, Investments and Markets, the question is not whether the average citizen is “under taxed”, but the burden placed on ordinary tax payers by tax dodging billionaires and the corporations they run.
The report goes on to note:
• A study by the Multistate Tax Commission, a joint agency of state governments, estimates that by 2001 the growth of corporate tax sheltering accounted for $12.4 billion in lost annual revenue beyond what occurred during the 1980s. According to mid-range estimates, California corporate tax revenue was 19 percent lower than it should have been.
• A study of 252 Fortune 500 companies between 2001 and 2003 found that they paid state taxes at only a third of the statutory rates and 71 of them paid no state taxes at all during at least one of these years.
Then, of course, at the national level we have GE who “earned $14.2 billion in profits in 2010, but it paid not a penny in taxes because the bulk of those profits, some $9 billion, were offshore. In fact, GE got a $3.2 billion tax benefit.”
Of course, why would we want to tax billionaires who invest in such worthy things as oil, coal, nuclear power and toxic waste? Why spend public monies on police, fire, health care, education or what the U.S. Constitution refers to as the “general welfare” when we have this opportunity to fatten the wallets of health care insurance CEOs who strive to deny authorization for vital, life saving care in order to protect their bottom lines?
Why have a single-payer health care system in which everyone has a right to medical care, the cost is approximately half of what we pay and overhead of running it is between 1 to 2% when you can have a for-profit system that kills some 45,000 Americans each year simply because they can’t afford coverage and 31% of every health care dollars goes to for profit insurance companies, their CEOs and Wall Street investors? After all, using tax money to prevent the deaths of 45,000 Americans — well, that’s socialism!
Far better we keep those billions in the hands of the people who were born into wealth, right EddyJames?
Please, earnest, can we stop giving credibility to a faux movement. I see you did use quotes – so perhaps you are acknowledging this simple fact:
There actually is no tea party – we are just seeing a clever marketing campaign and rebranding of the republican party – they were heading for oblivion, just like the Wigs were in the Mid 1800s.
The wigs were rebranded and remarketed as republicans.
FACTS:
Madison WI regularly have spontaneous protests that greatly exceeded ANY faux “tea party” event. In fact, virtually ALL of the protest in Madison for the first 3+ weeks exceeded virtually EVERY tea party event.
When we are ready to call the faux “tea party” what it is – the republican party deflecting attention from its total failure under chimpy when repugs controlled everything in DC!
Rich people will always be able to hire people to do what they want – including busing folks to faux “tea party” rallies. This didn’t create a “tea party”.
People are susceptible to propaganda. A multi-BILLION dollar advertising industry is built on this.
The hostility directed towards Washington, the prime purpose of the faux “tea party” serves a purpose – it disengages people. They become low-information voters. They actually tune out, making the propaganda even more effective.
Not attacking you, Earnest, you write great stuff. I just have to get this off my chest:
THE TEA PARTY IS A MEDIA CREATED SHAM AND WE REALLY NEED TO STOP PLAYING INTO THE REPUGS HANDS HERE!
Oh – and thanks ernest. I believe the best way to handle the ignorant trolls (paid proganda shills perhaps?) is to have the person the created the post respond, being sure there is truth in the threads.
If I were to present the same ideas, I am feeding the troll. If only the poster (in this thread you) clarifies the thread, the troll is not being fed and the thread is not hijacked.
Danny, I think the regulars have proven themselves capable of handling the trolls. Brad’s policy is to allow them to say their piece… but then insist that the troller acknowledge any replies and critiques.
And if a troll persists in posting deliberate misinformation after repeated exposure to facts to the contrary… then Brad has a way of dealing with that as well.