The Perils of Giving Public What It Wants

This was the year voters got what they asked for from the Legislature. And it brings to mind the old adage about being careful what you ask for because you might get it.

Californians likely will be paying the price well into the next century because in 1994 they tended to intimidate groveling politicians.

This might seem ironical and incongruous, given the Capitol’s pre-1993 history of gridlock and frequently ignoring voters. But these days officeholders are running scared.

There’s a delicate balancing act at play here. On the one hand, this is what democracy is about. The citizens elect representatives to reflect their views in government, to do their bidding. On the other hand, they also elect them to lead, to analyze complex details and make informed decisions on legislative options that puzzle most people.

The public may have shown common sense in asking for certain things. But in the politicians’ haste to please, they sometimes acted with little thought--and no courage--in the delivery.

Voters didn’t get everything they asked for, of course. Election year politics interfered with some desires, such as education reform.

But on the mega-issues--crime, taxes and spending--the Legislature and the governor scurried to follow the electorate, marching lock step in the direction they perceived it to be heading.

There wasn’t much reflection on where they’d all wind up. And it will be years before anybody really knows.

*

“Three strikes and you’re out” is the classic example. It’s a compelling concept with a catchy name. Combine that with the gripping kidnap-murder of a 12-year-old, Polly Klaas, and you’ve got a political stampede. No legislative leader was about to stand in the way. Not only Gov. Pete Wilson, but Treasurer Kathleen Brown endorsed it.

As the “three strikes” initiative headed toward the November ballot--with polls showing overwhelming public support--legislators stumbled all over themselves to enact an identical bill. Never mind that Polly’s father, Marc Klaas, and many district attorneys preferred another, less costly version--one that committed to life imprisonment only felons whose third strike was violent.

Under the enacted law, any third felony--for example, shoplifting--will send the culprit to prison for 25 years to life if his first two strikes were serious. So we’ll be housing septuagenarian snack thieves at $25,000 per year. The Department of Corrections estimates that the new law will require the state to build 20 additional prisons by the turn of the century and spend $2 billion a year to operate them. The construction cost is estimated at $21 billion over 30 years.

Voters asked for a “three strikes” law and they got the most expensive version. They also ultimately got a ton of other tough sentencing acts. Many may be long overdue, but they’ll add billions to prison costs and Californians will pay. If taxes aren’t raised, other programs will suffer, including education.

*

But voters--the polls reminded politicians--also oppose higher taxes and bigger spending. Except don’t cut back on schools or universities, don’t close any more parks or libraries, and be sure to take care of the poor who need medical care.

So, if you’re a cautious politician getting mixed signals from the electorate while facing a $7-billion budget deficit, what do you do? You don’t raise taxes. You don’t cut programs. You borrow the $7 billion. That’s the least painful solution for politicians and the public. But it will cost $500 million in interest and only delay the reckoning.

People aren’t always easy to read. A big earthquake hits and they tell pollsters that their least favorite way of paying for repairs is to borrow through bonds. They’d much rather raise the sales tax temporarily, maybe even the gas tax, and finance repairs on a cash basis.

But the governor and Republicans don’t believe it; there’ll be no tax hike this election year. They push through a proposed $2-billion bond issue, which the voters promptly reject--along with bonds for school construction and university facilities.

Sacramento gets the message. The voters are demanding no more bonds. (Annual bond interest already is $2.2 billion.)

The Legislature obliges on the final night of the 1994 session by killing all its new bond proposals for the November election--$2 billion for schools, $100 million for libraries and $1.1 billion to build prisons for those three-strike felons.

California, however, still must build new schools and prisons. How? The voters in November will elect a new team of representatives to figure it all out. And in 1995, a non-election year, the politicians hopefully will be more courageous and contemplative.