The scheduled votes Tuesday on two disparate budget plans for California — one put forth by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, the other by legislative Democrats — are fine as far as they go but they do not go far enough. There should be votes on many possible budget plans.
Tuesday’s exercise is designed to consider two different ways to look at spending plans for the state government and to take a measure of where those plans stand with legislators. The outcomes of the votes are obvious.
The Republicans will support the Schwarzenegger plan built around extensive budget cuts to close the $19-billion state deficit; the Democrats will stand behind their own plan, which features far fewer cuts.
As of now, the Democratic leadership does not plan to offer their complete plan for a vote. They are leaving out the revenue portion to balance the budget, probably because Democratic members of the assembly and senate don’t want to go on record for tax increases unless a package is certain to be approved.
Putting these two plans up for a vote may confirm where the negotiations are at present, but that will not offer a path to budget resolution.
More than the two plans should be voted on tomorrow. Legislators should face alternative proposals and maybe even pieces of a budget solution to see how they stand on different approaches to budget compromise.
In that way, we can see what proposals might move legislators toward agreement.
Just voting on the two major proposals that already have been rejected by opposing sides doesn’t move the budget ball forward. Voting on different packages of solutions might show a path to agreement.
Don’t be surprised if there is a little Election Day politicking wrapped up in Tuesday’s votes. Proposition 25 on the November ballot calls for a majority vote budget and is backed by Democratic leaders and public employee unions. On Tuesday, the Democrats can show that if a majority budget law were in place, the budget stalemate would be resolved since one of the two budgets (the plan supported by the Democrats, of course) would receive a majority vote.
However, without dealing with the revenue piece of the Democrats’ plan the budget vote is not real. The Democrats could demonstrate that a majority vote could pass a spending budget, but if it falls short of revenue we won’t know how they plan to fund it. Will they vote for borrowing? Or majority vote fees?
If tomorrow’s scheduled budget votes are truly intended to move us closer to a budget resolution, a better plan is to vote on complete packages and alternative plans to take a true measure of legislators’ thinking. Perhaps we can uncover an opening to escape budget gridlock.