California Propositions Are a Bankrupt Idea

Quite a few years back, I had a debate with a friend. I disliked California's Proposition system, he thought it was great.

I am here to proclaim victory in the debate.

The Proposition System in California, while noble in theory, is an ill-thought out disaster. Somewhat like New Coke, the Edsel and Viet Nam. Miserable failure was the only likely outcome.

It was based on the premise of full-participation democracy of an informed citizenry, but even the Founding Fathers understood that that had its limits. America is not a democracy, it's a representative democracy. This is the concept that most people just want to know where the On switch is for their computer, not how electronics works. When it comes to laws, just pass the things, and if we don't like them, we'll vote you out.

However poorly one thinks of politicians, the Proposition System is worse. It starts with the faulty premise that the voting public is going to willingly study a thick guidebook. The voting public didn't willingly study even thin guidebooks when they were in high school and required to. Instead, with propositions, they turn to watching 30-second TV ads to learn what the laws are about.

Watching 30-second TV ads to learn what a law is about is like reading a fortune cookie and believing that you now understand Eastern Philosophy.

Initially, the Proposition System had its successes mixed among warning signs. That's when the legal equivalent of the San Andreas Fault hit in 1978. Proposition 13 - the most appropriately-numbered law ever. This wasn't just bad luck, this was The Big One.

For years, a crotchety coot named Howard Jarvis would annually try to get some loony proposition passed against having taxes. It was wildly entertaining, though a bit annoying, like watching a rapid dog yowl nightly at the moon. But in 1978, the moon yowled back, and his co-sponsored Proposition 13 actually passed. And the joke was on California.

On the surface, Proposition 13 appeared to be about limits on property taxes. What it actually did was send California crashing to ruin. It wasn't just that revenues plummeted, but that Proposition 13 required a "supermajority" of two-thirds vote in the state legislature for any tax increase.

The resulting problem is that the public keeps voting proposition initiatives to improve the state - yet they vote against bills to pay for it. And the state itself is unable to raise revenues to make up the difference.

(Side note: in the comedy, "Airplane!", a passenger gets in Robert Hayes' cab, just as the cabbie leaps out. That's actually Howard Jarvis. He sits in the taxi the entire movie, the butt of the joke, as the meter keeps running. Alas, talk about a prescient metaphor. California's meter has been running ever since.)

The additional problem with the Proposition System is that, unlike when a legislator puts himself on the line when passing laws, there is no one to vote out of office if a proposition screws things up. No one is responsible. So, the death spiral continues.

The result is that the California budget deficit is now $26.3 billion. The state sent out IOUs last week.

Certainly, there are many causes for the problems California faces today. But the root of the problem is that the California Proposition System is a system that allows reckless action without accountability. And worse, it's a system that increasingly does the very opposite of its original intent of full democratic participation of the public: the more propositions, the less the public wants to study them all - and the fewer people who vote. In the most recent special election this past June, specifically to deal with the state's budget crisis, voter turnout was a paltry 28.4 percent.

Worse still, because of another proposition - term limits - representatives know they have no political future, regardless of what they do in office, so there's no need to work out issues in the state legislature with your opponents, but just vote in self interest. The result is gridlock.

When you let politicians do what you elected them to do - for all the good and ill - at least you are getting 100% of the electorate represented in the results. And if you don't like those results, you can vote your officials out. But with the Proposition System, a mere quarter of the public is at times deciding how the state should be run. Based on watching 30-second TV ads. With no accountability.

How can anyone be shocked to discover that people vote for things they like, vote against paying taxes - and a $26.3 billion deficit is created because a near-impossible two-thirds supermajority is needed to fix things?! And you throw out your leader to bring in an movie actor with no political experience to get you out of the mess.

This is no way to run a democracy.

Make no mistake, it crosses all parties.

In California, majority doesn't rule. It's the tyranny of the minority, but worse it's too often the tyranny of the irrational. The California Proposition System may have begun with a noble intent, but it was ill-conceived, and has become selfish, greedy, mindless, unworkable and a disaster.

There is only one proposition worthy of having on the ballot and voting for. A proposition that would get rid of the California Proposition System.

Comments

[econ1]

Total tax revenues didn't plummet after Prop 13 but the rate of increase in property tax revenues did drop, and it did allow some people to stay in their homes (like the couple across the street from me).

Given that the rise in state spending has been greater than the inflation adjusted increase in population the problem is more with spending than not taxing enough. Unfortunately we depend on very few people to pay much of the taxes and those people aren't doing well enough or have moved away.

The politicians love to blame the propositions but people don't want to waste their time on propositions...they did them out of frustration with the politicians. Perhaps the redistricting will help. Let's hope so.

[FreelanceMinion]

I had a family member who used to say exactly these things, and just before I left California (just ahead of the train wreck) I came to the same conclusion.

When I first moved there they made elections kind of fun; I'd get my absentee ballot and sit at a coffee shop with the voters guide and go through them. And after a few years I'd notice that all the laws would cause all sorts of legal headaches while the elections passed most of the proposed spending and NONE of the proposed revenue gathering (taxes, fees, etc.). This was not a problem of an uneducated electorate, because the info was out there, it was bad decision making. Then there was the fact that every other week there was another special election in this district or that.

Then special interests would rig the Propositions, most notably the power deregulation which promised lower rates and directly allowed Enron to rob the state. I hate to get within a mile of conspiracy theory, but this use by special interest forming phoney grass-roots organizations to pass their chosen legislation is a big part of it. Elect good people, or even average people, and keep track of them. Use your right to contact them and gather petitions, form PACs, donate money to your favorite causes. But the proposition is actually a bad deal.

[GardenerNorCal]

Proposition 13 happenned in 1978 it didn't bring California down it's kept the elderly and poor in their homes. Local governments tightened their belts but they continued to provide services.

I think we should really look at what brought California down: Enron and the special election of Arnold.

[rip]

You have got to be joking. I'm sick and tired of the old saw about elderly and their homes. Every time they try to change Prop 13, they trot out some grandmother.

Let me put it to you this way. Are you suggesting that the elderly and poor in the 49 other states are all homeless and destitute? I think not.

Prop 13 has been a blight on California. It has destroyed revenue, causing regressive income and sales taxes to make up the difference. It has destroyed the normal market turnover of homes, creating insane property values from lack of supply. A byproduct of that is creation of housing sprawl with new homes in every more outlying areas, creating more environmental and infrastructure strain.

Perhaps it is nice that an 87yo widower gets to stay in her home by paying $1000/year in taxes. But not so nice for the 30-something couple with a newborn that is forced to live in a rental apartment.

And finally, do you realize that Prop 13 also applies to COMMERCIAL real estate? Which means companies like BofA, Wells Fargo, IBM et al. also pay severely under-market property taxes?

[lvtfan]

Well said, rip!

Two quotes I stumbled onto earlier today are relevant here:

"'Property tax relief' for the orphaned blind widow in the ivy-covered cottage is a popular theme, but that means sloughing the social obligation of property onto others – how? Sales taxes hit the poor. What we fondly call the income tax has degenerated into a payroll tax primarily, because property has learned to duck it, in a thousand clever ways. "Social security" is a slick name for another payroll tax, the most regressive one going. The corporation income tax can't touch unincorporated property and is full of loopholes that corporations can use by misallocating their resources."

and

... stay tuned!

[lvtfan]

Here's the second one ...

"To the best of my knowledge and belief, heavy taxation of land is the only kind of taxation that actually results in increasing the available supply. You put heavy taxes on production and you discourage production. But you put heavy taxation on land and the land comes out of cold storage.

Please don't underestimate for a minute the millions of acres that are being held off the market in this country right now in anticipation of the enormous investment of other people's money and other taxpayers' money. This investment of others' money in nearby land, combined with inflation, will multiply its price. The tax structure on land, the undertaxation of land values, is such that it is not very far from standard that one can hold a million dollars' worth of land off the market for a year at a net tax cost as low as $5,000, while inflation of this investment and investment of other people's money to develop the community around it is increasing its value of $60,000, $70,000 or $80,000."

These come from 1970 ... before Prop 13, but made even more relevant by Prop 13.

For solutions to the "poor widow" problem, google "poor widow solution."

[FreelanceMinion]

While certain adjustments WERE needed in the property tax laws for CERTAIN taxpayers, Prop 13 slowly eroded the tax base by disallowing the rise in rates for people who could well afford to pay, particularly corporations with property interests.

The point is Propositions usually have SOME good ideas, but always have loopholes by design or by accident that end up doing almost more harm than the original good.

How did Enron ruin California-- The energy utility privatization forced by a proposition. That created energy crisis also was the reason for a recall election (lets call that a special type of proposition) which then brought us Arnie.

Even YOUR examples prove his point

[Mercedes Beene]

All I can say is, if California is still seen as a "belwether" state...then I fear greatly for the rest of us in the other 49 states.

[TrekBear]

Sounds like it's time for California to call a Constitutional Convention and reform its governing structure.

[GardenerNorCal]

If this were to happen the republican corporatists would own us. Not that they don't already. With the election of Arnold and all his subsequent expensive special elections California has gone deeper into debt. Californians are just pawns. We have been since GW and Cheney allowed Eron to pull their scam and told us we would have to solve our own problems. Then we re-elected Davis but that didn't work for them, so we had to hold a special election forced on us with huge amounts of outside money. We were given the Governator he was going to fix all things. Didn't work well for me how's it working for the rest of California?

[goldcoastsailor]

We could easily have a direct democracy with the communications and internet facilities of today. In the founding father's time transportation was primitive. Just because you don't like the results of a direct democracy is not a reason to champion representative government/

[Skepticat]

The prerequisite for a direct democracy is a well educated electorate. After a presidential election based on endless repetition of 30 seconds of Reverent Wright, Pallin around, fake birth certificates, secret muslim etc. I suggest that a large segment of the present electorate - not to mention many of the politicians - need far more education if they are to choose anything more complicated than fries versus onion rings.

[FreelanceMinion]

No, government requires details to minutia you and I don't have time to attend to. Its not just about the communication, its about knowing the details to make good decisions. I don't have time to bake bread, even with a shelf of recipe books, so I go to a store where someone else has time to. I don't know if that pain in my arm is the onset of serious problems, even with all the online references, so I go to a doctor. I'd rather elect people who have time to attend to all the details and periodically hold their fee to the fire.

[Romeover]

The stance taken by most of the posters seems to be either:

A. The public is too stupid to be entrusted with making policy decisions, or
B. The public is too stupid to elect representatives to make policy decisions for them.

Perhaps the real problems are that:

1. Most members of the public don't have time to spend analyzing the difficult issues involved in governing, in order to arrive at a reasonable compromise of conflicting interests, and
2. Many members of the public are unwilling to accept the compromises (and sacrifices) necessary in a democratic community.

[JailNeoconVicts]

So...stop talking and put together a proposition to end all propositions! I'll sign it.

[Tsckey]

The irony is that the initiative system is in fact a system of MINORITY rule. A small cadre of non-representative individuals trot out their favorite interest and through the application of a lot of money, induce a majority of those voting -- not a majority of those registered, or eligible, but of those actually casting a ballot -- to pass it. The net effect is that a small minority of the populace actually imposes its will on the vast majority of the citizens.

By contrast, the legislative system, as horrific as it is, involves the actions of those who represent all of the citizens, young and old, voting and non voting. This is so by the nature of their duty and the structure of the government, not merely the result of who voted for them in the first place. The initiative system should be repealed or heavily modified to avoid the abusive, minority-centered, disaster that we have now.

[Calinative]

Initiatives only pass with a majority vote. So how again is it the will of a minority group?

The basic message of this article implies that voters are too stupid to be allowed to vote.
Maybe our politicians are too cowardly to get anything done.

So you need a 2/3 vote to pass it. So what? If you can't convince two out of three that something is a good idea, maybe it's not.

[Mark Mack]

California's Proposition System is irresponsible. It removed the elected Gov. Gray Davis, gave us Arnold Schwarzenegger, and the Tea Bagging of California. Now no-one takes responsibility.

[Calinative]

Gray Davis let Enron rip us off for $12 Billion and floundered like an idiot with his rolling blackouts, all the while we were getting scammed.

[jbatch]

Sorry, dude, but Enron's scam was a direct result of Phil Gramm -- Republican -- and his extension of the RonnieReagan deregulation fanaticism. Gramm rolled back regualtions and led the fight against regulating derivatives, which was the instrument of Enron's assault on America and California.

By the time Grey Davis showed up, the ice berg had struck, the ship was sounding, and there was nothing he could do but take the fall.

RonnieReagan and his twin myths -- the myth of the magic market, and the myth of the bumbling bureaucrat -- are what brought this country and the state of California to the brink of chaos and failure.

And when the anti-tax, but give me great service idiots have a vehicle like the proposition system to hawk their wares, furhter disaster is inevitable.

There is no informed citizenry, because there is no functioning free press -- they abandoned truth, context and accuracy in favor of "balance," stenography and sound bites, and so simplistic nonsense and gibberish like RonnieReagan's "philosohy" get serious treatment long after they've proven themselves to be poltical weapons of mass destruction.

[bannorhill]

Prop 13 is not the problem. Califirnia has the 6th highest tax rate in the nation. The problem is not the State's income. It is the spending!!

[PunKinPai]

I beg to differ. Prop 13 and its descendents have crippled our legislature's ability to raise money or to shift it around to make ends meet. Couple that with a divided legislature composed of individuals who are driven by either ideology or self-interest and you've got economic chaos.

[bannorhill]

43 states in the US have LOWER overall tax rates than California and they are not looking at bankruptcy.

They seem to be able to live on less money than California.

[Skepticat]

Even with the best cost control and purchasing practices in the world the cost of everything has gone up in the 30 years since proposition 13 while the money available to pay for it remained fairly stagnant. California with a population around 40 million had a GNP and first world quality of life superior to many well off countries. However if you want quality you have to pay for it. The voters didn't want to pay - but wanted to keep the benefits. This of course is not sustainable.

[glginsf]

Fantastic post, and well put.

[SeeJaneRunning]

I guess you don't visit here often. The author's post is a regurgitation of about 30 other posts that essentially say "those stupid little people are to blame for all this -- if only they would leave it to the leftists in Sacremento".

[Robert J. Elisberg - Huffpost Blogger]

Of course, I don't say any of that at all, but then you know that.

[iblogleft]

What a cop-out. We call it failed leadership. The proposition system is a last ditch effort for the people to get laws that make sense, not more cash for the rich, and cuts to programs for the poor.

What happens when propositions are gone? Political elites disallowing even having conversations about changes that people want.

The latest example is here: http://blog.norml.org/2009/07/08/see-no-evil-hear-no-evil-speak-no-evil/

[IowaOrganicCattleman]

Nonsense. The public is influenced heavily by the money spent on advertising, as the enormous Mormon contributions managed to pass the anti-gay CA Prop 8. There are too many propositions to study. They are often badly written and nearly impossible to modify. The elite writing these propositions and funding their advertising is far less democratic than the unquestionably flawed legislative process. (I lived in California from 1974-2006.)

[bannorhill]

The opponents of Prop 8 spent more to defeat Prop 8 than the supporters spent to pass it.

The Mormon Church is not listed on the Californian's against hate hall of shame where contributors are listed.

Prop 8 does not cost the state money. If anything it saves the state money.

[PunKinPai]

Maybe propositions once were "last ditch" efforts, but over the couple of decades they've mushroomed like disgraced Republican politicians. Now every special interest group, from progressive to uber conservative, begins with the initiative process rather than by by getting an actual bill passed (which is darned near impossible with our divided state legislature). Check the following pdf document, starting on page 16, to see the history and number of initiatives in CA. http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/init_history.pdf

[bannorhill]

So what do the propositions that passed cost per year? Many of them INCREASED taxes like the cigarette tax.

[Robert J. Elisberg - Huffpost Blogger]

Given that the proposition system has been going in California 98 years ago, that Proposition 13 has been law for 31 years, and that the state is bankrupt and $26.3 billion in debt -- how is that whole "last ditch effort" working out for you?

[KoolAidAmerica]

For all the flack Prop 13 gets the liberals activist judges overturning Prop 187 has caused us much more pain. If it had been upheld we wouldn't be bankrupt paying for the welfare of illegals and their anchor babies.

[infmom]

Any nut with enough money can get just about anything on the California ballot, and with enough money, plenty of fools will be suckered into voting for just about anything.

Unfortunately, the suckers far outnumber the people who actually read the propositions.

I refuse to sign petitions, and say so. I vote no on nearly every ballot proposition, because inevitably they're to advance some crack-brained agenda at the expense of everyone in the state.

Ballot propositions: JUST SAY NO.

[CrzyRussell]

Why should the voters read the propositions when congress and the senate don't bother to read the bills they vote on or push them through so fast that we can't even read them first?