Replies

Prop 25: Out of the Frying Pan and Into the Fire. NO. This changes the 2/3 vote requirement for the state budget to a simple majority – a reform I have long supported. Experience has shown that the current 2/3 vote requirement for the budget does not restrain spending and it utterly blurs accountability. But such a reform MUST repair the 2/3 vote requirement for all tax increases and restore constitutional spending and borrowing limits. Without these provisions, Prop. 25 would be a disaster for taxpayers and a recipe for bankruptcy.

What the heck is he saying there? Does he believe in majority rule or does he believe in a need for 2/3? He says the 2/3 requirement does not restrain spending and "blurs accountability." So, if he's against the 2/3 requirement, is he in favor of 50%, which would be a Yes on 25 vote?

What the heck is he saying there? Maybe McClintock hasn’t had a chance to actually read all these propositions.

Apparently McClintock can read and understands the difference between supporting a proposed budget, or an increase in an existing tax, or a newly proposed tax. He also apparently recognizes that administrative fees are simply taxes.

I don't want to misstate McClintock's position so I am searching for his original article (in about 2007, iirc) that laid out his beliefs. Basically, he thinks the super-majority should be dropped for budgets, but kept for raising taxes AND fees. Accountability would lie with the party that passed the budget.

Below is from an article quoting him... I'll keep looking for the article I remember.

“A perverse result of the supermajority requirement is that it does not constrain state spending,” McClintock says. “What it does is bid up the cost of the budget with each additional vote. Every additional vote comes with louder calls for higher spending.
“You hear, ‘This program is really, really important to me and I’m not going to vote for the budget unless it’s thrown in, plus a park in my district.’ ”
… Moreover, McClintock contends, allowing the majority party to pass a budget on its own would pinpoint blame. “Voters deserve to know which party is responsible for the budget and hold it accountable,” he says.

He’s in favor of 50% only if Constitutional limits are restored. Otherwise, 50% will lead to bankruptcy. Prop 25 gives us 50%, but does nothing to restore limits. That’s my interpretation.