Senate OKs Bid for Majority Vote on State Budget : Legislature: Voters would be asked to lower the two-thirds requirement for approval of the spending plan. Bill’s sponsor predicts tough going in Assembly.

The Senate on Thursday approved a proposal that could allow California voters to determine whether the two-thirds vote now required for the Legislature to pass the state budget should be reduced to a simple majority.

Proponents of the proposed constitutional amendment argued that reducing the vote requirement would make it easier for the budget to be enacted by the June 15 constitutional deadline, which is routinely ignored by lawmakers.

The measure also would require the governor and legislators to forfeit their salaries for each day that the state goes beyond the deadline without adopting the spending plan.

On a bipartisan 27-9 vote, the exact two-thirds required in the Senate, the measure by Sen. Quentin L. Kopp, a San Francisco independent, went to the Assembly--where a similar proposal is pending. Kopp forecast a difficult struggle for his plan in the lower house.

If approved by both houses, the measure would be subject to voter ratification, probably in June, 1994. As a constitutional amendment, it is not subject to action by the governor.

Since 1970, the Legislature has been required by the state Constitution to approve the budget by June 15, a demand that the lawmakers have met only five times. There is no penalty for failure to meet the deadline and efforts to impose penalties have always been snuffed out.

But Kopp noted that the Legislature routinely enacts hundreds of laws imposing penalties on citizens for errant behavior and told the Senate it is “only fair and right that we have the same kind of standard for our own conduct.”

Further, he said, “there should be no excuse or alibi for us not passing a budget when a simple majority is required.” He said California is among only five states that require a super-majority to enact a budget, with the others being Arkansas, Illinois, Mississippi and Nebraska.

Various unsuccessful plans have been offered for years, chiefly by Democrats, that would reduce the two-thirds vote rule to pass a budget. Unlike past proposals, Kopp’s plan would require the Legislature to enact a budget that is balanced and set aside 3% of the key general fund in a reserve for unexpected contingencies.

Although Democrats have been the majority party in the Legislature for more than two decades, they must recruit minority Republican support to achieve the two-thirds vote necessary for passage of the budget. This has caused years of partisan gridlock with the GOP often using its minority leverage to extract concessions and to buffer Gov. Pete Wilson and former Gov. George Deukmejian from Democratic initiatives.

The Senate vote on the Kopp plan occurred against a backdrop of mounting public disgust with the failure of the Legislature and governors to adopt budgets on time. Last year, they went a record 63 days into the new fiscal year without a budget. This time, they are three days beyond the June 15 deadline.

Veteran Sen. Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles), said she favors reducing the vote required for passing the budget, but she complained that it is unfair that she should lose any of her $52,500-a-year salary if other legislators act irresponsibly and block the budget.

“This is my only income,” she told colleagues. “I cannot compete with a lot of you in terms of your income, but you could probably hold out for weeks and weeks without a check coming in. I cannot.” She voted for the measure.

Sen. Nicholas Petris (D-Oakland) said he, too, opposes docking the pay of legislators and lamented that “in the current climate, the public doesn’t distinguish between the good guys and bad guys, those who try and those who are not trying.”

But on balance, Petris said, he supports the plan because allowing passage of the budget by a simple majority would move California closer to a parliamentary system in which the majority party is held responsible.

In addition to forfeiting their salaries for each day a budget is not enacted, legislators would surrender the $101 a day they receive in an income tax-free expense allowance while they are in session.

Senate staff researchers have estimated that Wilson and legislators collect about $30,000 a day in compensation, excluding benefits. The researchers said that if the state went 20 days without a budget under the Kopp measure, Wilson and lawmakers would forfeit $600,000.

For the past couple of years, lawmakers have voluntarily suspended receiving salary and expense payments while the state was without a budget, but they received them retroactively when a budget was in place. The loss would be made permanent by Kopp.

All nine “no” votes against the proposal were cast by Republicans, including freshman Sen. Phil Wyman of Tehachapi, who was the only member to defend the two-thirds vote requirement. He called the budget the biggest and most important spending bill in the Legislature and deserving of special status.

However, Kopp recruited Senate GOP leader Ken Maddy of Fresno and Sen. Frank Hill (R-Whittier), a pragmatic fiscal conservative, to support the program.

Hill called the proposal’s requirement for a balanced budget and a special reserve “critically important” to fiscal stability of government in California. Hill said he and Kopp will develop another provision aimed at keeping the budget in balance by linking spending cuts to any unforeseen shortages of revenue.

State Budget Watch

Fourteen days before the end of the fiscal year, the deadline for enacting a new state budget, there were these key developments in Sacramento:

THE PROBLEM

The state will end the fiscal year on June 30 with a $2.9-billion deficit and faces a $9-billion gap between anticipated tax revenues and the amount needed to pay off the deficit and provide all state services at their current levels for another 12 months.

THE LEGISLATURE

In a symbolic slap at Gov. Pete Wilson, the Senate turned down what Democrats characterized as Wilson’s plan to take $2.6 billion from local government. Senate Minority Leader Ken Maddy said the vote was meaningless because the bill did not fully reflect the governor’s concept. Maddy urged Senate Republicans to abstain, but six joined Democrats in voting 30 to 0 against the legislation.

The Assembly-Senate conference committee on the budget jousted over a move by Assemblyman Jan Goldsmith (R-Poway) to abolish mandates on local government, including one requiring counties and cities to pay high prevailing wages on public works projects. Noting that the wage structure benefits organized labor, committee member Sen. Alfred Alquist (D-San Jose) tried to silence Goldsmith, declaring that he had listened long enough to “this right-wing ideology.” The panel chaired by Assembly Ways and Means Chairman John Vasconcellos continues to meet today.

GOV. PETE WILSON

In informal remarks to reporters in Los Angeles, Wilson renewed his support of a shift in property tax receipts from local governments to education and also sought to prod the Legislature into working harder to come up with a budget compromise. He was in San Diego to attend a ribbon-cutting with the Chamber of Commerce and in Los Angeles for a farewell luncheon for retiring Mayor Tom Bradley.

KEY DEVELOPMENTS

* Wilson scheduled separate meetings for today with Assembly and Senate leaders. He was to meet in the morning with Democratic Assembly Speaker Willie Brown of San Francisco and Assembly Republican Leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga. He is scheduled to meet in the afternoon with Maddy and Senate Leader David A. Roberti (D-Van Nuys).

* Adding to the pressure to resolve the gridlock, Burton Oliver, executive director of the Board of Equalization, told lawmakers that if they intend to extend an extra half-cent sales tax beyond its June 30 expiration, they must act by Sunday. Oliver said the lead is necessary to notify merchants. Oliver’s statement contradicted what Board of Equalization Chairman Brad Sherman said Wednesday--that lawmakers could wait until June 28 to act.