2014's Boring, But Important California Ballot Initiatives
While in most states elections just feature candidates, in the Golden State, voters also have to wade through a host of ballot initiatives. This November, California voters will face six boring, but important propositions; boring because none have a large and vocal voter constituency on both sides, making the campaigns either non-existent or one-sided. Yet, they have important ramifications if they pass or fail.
This first segment will examine the four propositions that are important to pass and on October 23rd, the second part will look at the two that are important to reject.
Proposition 1: "Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014"
Proposition 1 replaces the $11 billion water bond that was originally slated to be on the 2010 and then, the 2012 ballot. No one in Sacramento was happy with the pork-ridden bond and at the absolute last minute, both Democrats and Republicans, with the support Governor Brown, agreed to this $7.1 billion bond.
Why it's boring: Besides some fringe environmentalist and anti-spending groups, there is a consensus that this bond is better than both its predecessor and nothing at all. As of mid-September, the "yes" side had raised $2 million - fifty times the "no" side.
Why it's important: California's water storage infrastructure is woefully inadequate for its population growth and distribution. This most recent three-year drought has highlighted the state's water vulnerabilities. Roughly one-third of Proposition 1's total price tag is earmarked specifically for water storage infrastructure. This is a long overdue investment in a crucial utility for the state.
Proposition 2: "Rainy Day Budget Stabilization Fund Act (2014)"
California currently has an inept general fund reserve account. Proposition 58's "Budget Stabilization Account (BSA)" allows for the Governor to suspend or reduce transfers at any time by executive order - it hasn't received a transfer since FY 2007-2008 and currently is depleted. Proposition 2 revamps the reserve transfer formula and requires both the Governor and the legislature to approve of suspending or reducing transfers.
Why it's boring: Proposition 2 isn't perfect (a CTA-endorsed provision limiting school district reserves defeats its intent), but regardless, basically no one opposes it. Indeed both gubernatorial candidates - Jerry Brown and Neel Kashkari - support it, as do both state parties. And as of mid-September, the "no" side has raised no money.
Why it's important: California's budget, particularly the general fund, is notoriously volatile. An overreliance on a massively progressive personal income tax means general fund revenues are precariously sensitive to economic changes. And general fund expenditures are very sticky; for instance, from FY 2007-2008 to FY 2008-2009, general fund revenues fell 22%, but general fund expenditures only dropped 15%. If adhered to, Proposition 2 will help alleviate the budget pains caused by California's structural budget inadequacies.
Proposition 47: "Reduced Penalties for Some Crimes Initiative"
California has over 127,000 people in its in-state prison system, and on average, there are around 220,000 felony convictions in California each year. Both Texas and South Carolina have recently reclassified some of the non-violent and non-serious felonies to misdemeanors much like Proposition 47 would do (it would also allow re-sentencing for those currently serving time under felony convictions).
Why it's boring: California's get-tough-on-crime focus appears to be waning. In 2012, voters passed (69% to 31%) a modification of the state's "three-strikes" law reducing its strictness. Also in 2012, California was just 4 points away from abolishing its death penalty. Unlike in the past, the get-tough-on-crime crowd isn't as vocal, well-organized, or well-funded, while the proponents of Proposition 47 are. Even many on the right view this as a practical reform to California's expensive prison system.
Why it's important: California spends almost $47,500 per inmate in its prison system, about $18,000 more than the national average and has a three-year recidivism rate of 65%. California's prison system is over-populated and fails to rehabilitate its inmates. By taking petty criminals out of the felony system altogether, California can save money and prevent small-time criminals from being mixed in with serious offenders.
Proposition 48: "Referendum on Indian Gaming Compacts (2014)"
In 2011, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians received federal approval to acquire land for the purpose of building a casino; in 2013, Governor Brown signed AB 277, which approved a compact between the North Fork tribe, the Wiyot tribe, and the state to open and operate a casino on the land. Proposition 48 aims to reject that compact (yes = ratify AB 277; no = reject it), which some fear is an opening for non-reservation Indian casinos.
Why it's boring: No one has heard of AB 277 and more importantly, it doesn't truly impact many voters, if any at all.
Why it's important: It boils down to property rights and following the rules. The North Fork Rancheria purchased the land properly, followed all state and federal rules appropriately, and entered into a profit-sharing, mutually agreeable compact with both the Wiyot tribe and California. As long as crony capitalism or back-room deals weren't involved, so what if this means tribes can build casinos off reservation land. Let's remove the Indian and casino provisions; would anyone rationally think it would be okay for voters to undo a contract negotiated in good faith that followed the letter of law? Nope. Plus think of the economic advantages for Madera County, which as of August 2014 still had an unemployment rate of 9%.
Propositions 1, 2, 47, and 48 will all work to improve California's financial and economic status in some manner. None are perfect, but in the initiative system, perfect is the enemy of the good.
