Yes on Proposition 56

The state’s lawmakers got us into a hideous fiscal mess, so why should voters make it easier for them to pass a budget? The answer lies in accountability and clarity in the budget process. Both would be encouraged and deadlock would be diminished by Proposition 56, allowing a state budget to pass on a legislative vote of 55% instead of the current two-thirds.

The origin of the constitutional two-thirds rule on all spending measures was a mess even worse than today’s. The Legislature in 1933 was faced with $151 million in planned spending, but estimated revenue was only $92.5 million. A plan concocted that year by the state controller proposed limiting annual budget increases to 5%. If lawmakers wanted to spend more, it would take a two-thirds vote. This happened so often that the two-thirds rule was adopted for all budgets. But the change failed to solve the state’s deficit problem, David R. Doerr of the California Taxpayers Assn. wrote in his history of the California tax system. The eventual result was the first state sales tax.

The two-thirds rule did not fix the budget problem 70 years ago, and it did not prevent the state from digging itself a $30-billion-plus hole in the last three years. What it has done is produce constant budget deadlocks between liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans. California should not be so out of step with the 47 other states that pass budgets by a simple majority vote.

Proposition 56 is an initiative constitutional amendment supported by the state PTA, the League of Women Voters, the AARP and labor organizations. It would lower the threshold both for passing the budget and increasing state taxes from two-thirds -- in practical terms 67% -- to 55%.

Opponents say Proposition 56 would make it easier to raise taxes. To some degree, they’re right. If it had been in effect the last two years, the governor and Legislature would have been more likely to solve the fiscal crisis with a responsible combination of budget cuts and temporary tax increases -- just as GOP Gov. Pete Wilson and a more moderate set of lawmakers in both parties did a decade ago. The minority this time around refused to consider any tax increase, and deadlock ensued.

Ideally, this measure would be part of a reform package that would give the state a less-polarized Legislature. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and others need to push reforms to the redistricting process and legislative term limits that would foster more responsible and centrist legislators.

In the real world, Proposition 56 would be most unlikely to produce a big crop of tax increases. California governors have a line-item veto power that requires a two-thirds vote to override, and Schwarzenegger would no doubt demonstrate how to use it liberally. Proposition 58 on the same ballot, if it passes, will also help limit spending. Without Proposition 56, even Schwarzenegger may not be able to muster the two-thirds vote needed to pass his budget this summer.

The two-thirds vote requirement has certainly failed to keep spending down, and a 55% rule would be more honest and encourage moderation. Vote yes on Proposition 56 on March 2.