The 2//3 Rule

by Dennis Green

This year, California voters and legislators have an opportunity to make some very significant choices. There’s the race for Governor, the legalization of Marijuana, and perhaps most importantly, for the legislators, a choice between “Feed the Beast” or “Starve It.” The perception of runaway government could easily stop here.

It’s been stopped in its tracks in the U.S. Senate, where the two-thirds rule has become the norm. With the increased use of the filibuster, by both parties, it now takes a supermajority of 60 votes in the Senate to get anything done. Considering the mischief that body is usually up to, I believe that’s a very good thing.

The use of the parcel tax initiative to get around the will of the people in California to limit property taxes with Prop. 13, is compromised by the requirement of a 2/3 majority voter approval. That compromise has not prevented the passing of a bundle of parcel taxes in Alameda, including five for the public schools, to supplement the $80 million a year they receive from regular property taxes.

But that 2/3 majority also saved us from Measure E, the most recent, and most horrendous demand from the schools, to preserve their status quo while unemployment, foreclosures, defaults and deficits characterize this recession for the rest of us. Even so, only 35% of registered voters said “Yes on E,” but with a turnout of barely 50%, one more percentage point, a democratic minority of 36% could have put it in force.

That means, with a 50% passage, only 26% of registered voters could pass any initiative. We’ll see how that plays out in Sacramento and then express our own views in November.

Legislators can vote for the “Passing the Budget on Time” initiative, which would eliminate the 2/3 requirement for all California initiatives, or for the “Stop Hidden Taxes” initiative, which would impose the 2/3 requirement on virtually all state and local government fiscal initiatives. I know how I’m telling my representatives to vote.

Much of the anger toward government — coming not from just the Tea Party but from those of us who see its bureaucracies as bloated and overpaid and in cahoots with multinational corporations — is the perception that civil servants hardly serve, and haven’t taken the hits from the recession that workers in the private sector have.

Much of the money from the $800 Billion Stimulus package have gone to saving the jobs of teachers, police and fire, or creating many new public service positions. The problem with that: product and manufacturing innovation, creating new value, happens only in the private sector. In the public sector, only “services” are provided, often of a dubious nature. Many taxpayers don’t benefit from such public services at all.

Moreover, those public payrolls are bloated. Fire and police unions resist layoffs, or the closing of precincts or fire stations of doubtful usage. Reading the local fire report or police blotter, we see many activities that hardly justify those generous salaries and retirement benefits. In Alameda, police and fire personnel can retire at age 50 with 75% of their final year’s salary, often over $100,000.

Liberals say “Raise taxes,” or “Do away with Prop. 13,” and those sentiments make me loath to be in their camp on those or other issues. Nor am I in sympathy with so-called “conservatives,” who defend hundreds of billions of wasted tax dollars in “Defense” spending. I’m just an old tax resister. Curmudgeon? Or Wise Old Tribal Elder…?

But when I see how our government spends the billions it already gets, I’m glad the 2/3 majority rule is a possible hedge against them taking even more.

©2010 Dennis Green