Letters

Re “Voters kill budget measures,” May 20, and “Process is part of the problem,” May 20

You know those little stickers given out at the voting precincts that say “I Voted”? I think this election they should have read “I Vetoed.”

It’s time to stop sticking fingers in the dike year after year; it is time to tear the dike down and build a new one.

Darryl Dickey

Porter Ranch

::

One ballot measure that I could support: a proposition to get rid of propositions. Too much analysis, including that of The Times in its voter guide, treats them as inevitable. We can and should get rid of them.

If we don’t like our legislators’ budget decisions, the solution is to vote them out of office -- not micromanage an already complicated process.

Daniel Allen

Claremont

::

Why did the propositions fail? I’m sure there will be a lot of ink used to discuss the will of the people, but in my mind, it is simple.

The problem with the budget is not that the people of California are under-taxed. It is because the elected officials in Sacramento are spending too much.

Joseph Areeda

Los Angeles

::

Before we voted Tuesday, California had among the worst business climates in the country and among the highest taxes.

What do we get for the money? Traffic, failing schools, gangs. And we -- the people -- are the problem? Because we won’t give the incompetent politicians more money? Are you kidding?

You folks at The Times need to step out into the real world once in awhile. You are seriously out of touch.

Mark Bedor

South Pasadena

::

Although I also voted “no” on all the propositions, I think Californians cut off a foot to save a leg.

In the past, we have voted on various bond measures and propositions, not really understanding what we were voting for. I’m as guilty as the next person; things I thought were “no” ended up to be “yes” and vice versa. Propositions are not written so the average Californian can understand them, so we tend to listen to those who are touting the proposition.

Didi Paano

Lakewood

::

We rejected the self-serving propositions, trying to make it clear that there’s no more money and that Sacramento better get the picture.

But watch: The cuts will not come from the hundreds of useless, overpaid boards and committees that are used as rewards for political favors. Not from the rampant waste, corruption and fraud. No, Sacramento will show us. They’ll cut the things we would prioritize, then claim it’s our fault because we didn’t vote their way.

Mike Gorman

Glendale

::

Your article implies that it’s feckless, tax-hating voters who have put the cherry on top of our state’s budget mess. I voted “no” on almost every proposition because I voted with the League of Women Voters’ recommendations -- not a group known for fecklessness.

As for taxes, I’m willing to pay for the privilege of living here. But I say if California’s going to burn, let it burn. Maybe out of the ashes we’ll get a state that functions. For all my life, we’ve lurched from incompetent legislators to emotionally provoked voters, each making bad problems worse. We need legislators who can think, keep their hands in their own pockets and lead this state. We need a total, radical overhaul.

Renee Leask

Glendale

::

All right, I’ll say it and take my lumps. I’m a liberal, and I voted down the propositions. Why did I do that? Because the budget process is broken beyond all repair and needs to be overhauled. I don’t know if the state will have to go into bankruptcy or not, but I do know too many friends and family members who are hurting from job loss, reduced hours and foreclosures.

I’m sorry, but the state is going to have to make some difficult decisions. As much as I believe in safety nets and many worthy programs, we need to prioritize; there is simply not enough money for all the worthy things we want.

Helen Hill

Los Angeles

::

I write this just minutes after voting -- a job that I may actually take more seriously than “our state servants” who foisted all the hard work off on the voters.

Forget Arnold; our California needs a real action hero. And that will be the someone who puts on the next ballot a measure to allow a 55% majority for passing a budget.

Ed O’Brien

Los Angeles

::

Republicans must realize that taxes must be raised and raised fairly.

Democrats must understand that cuts in spending must be made and made across the board.

It is not rocket science. I am a moderate-liberal Californian who has had enough. The propositions offered no serious solutions, just more of the same patchwork, temporary “fixes.”

The voters were not rebelling from tax increases or spending cuts; it was a collective cry for some serious reform. Hey, Sacramento, did you hear us?

Robert Schwartz

Chatsworth

::

Most of my friends and I are left-leaning Democrats who voted against the propositions because they were badly constructed and because we are tired of the constant balloting required by our dysfunctional system.

In this Democrat-leaning state, there is no way the measures would have been defeated so soundly without a large proportion of Democrats voting against them, and not necessarily for the same reasons as Republicans.

The message I am sending to Sacramento is a call for major changes in our system: a reduction in ballot measures and special elections, an end to the two-thirds majority requirement for budgets and tax increases, and a major modification of our term-limits requirements.

Deborah Robbins

Los Angeles

::

Let’s not overlook the obvious here. As voters, we know “pork” when we see it, and we shouldn’t have it slipped into legislation. That’s been done so many times that it just doesn’t inspire trust and confidence.

Dan Mariscal

Montebello