Advertisement

Taming a Nightmare : Statewide Proposition 169--Rx for the budget process

Share

The annual rite of hammering out a state budget does not end once the Legislature agrees on a spending plan for the next year. Implementing a new budget is a complicated, messy process requiring not one but a batch of new bills. Why?

One reason is that the California Constitution does not allow a bill to cover more than one subject, and each year the Legislature typically must modify any number of existing laws to implement a state budget.

Consequently, such changes must be enacted through a series of individual budget-implementation bills--”trailer bills.” Each requires a separate vote by the Legislature and approval by the governor. Passage of the 1993-94 budget, for example, required about 20 such trailer bills.

Advertisement

Under Proposition 169, put on the Nov. 2 ballot by the Legislature, these bills would be consolidated into a single measure. The Legislature typically bundled trailer bills into one budget measure until the state Supreme Court, in 1987, ruled this practice unconstitutional.

Proposition 169 would amend the Constitution to permit one annual budget-implementation bill. Each provision in such a bill would have to be directly related to the spending authority in the state budget. It makes sense to consolidate the components that make up a budget into a single, integrated legislative measure. Too often, special interests hold one trailer bill hostage to get concessions on others. Last-minute horse-trading can undercut the entire budget.

Under Proposition 169, the Legislature would be authorized to approve a single budget-implementation bill and send it to the governor at the same time as the budget. The governor could veto individual provisions in the bill without rejecting the entire measure, and the Legislature could override vetoes individually.

Proposition 169 is tightly written to apply directly to implementing appropriations under the Budget Act. Its passage would not result in any major savings (or costs), but it would streamline what has become a chaotic budget process. Proposition 169 deserves your “yes” vote in the statewide special election.

Advertisement