Majority Vote? Not so simple.
Legislative Democrats and their allied interest groups are pressing the case to reduce the budget vote to a simple majority to avoid future standoffs. But be careful what you wish for.
In Washington, House Democrats are giving their majority vote authority the cold shoulder. As of Thursday night, the financial rescue deal is reported off track because House Republicans are insisting on a very different approach. Democrats could have approved the deal, reportedly signed off by the Senate and the White House, with a simple majority of the House, including about 50 Republicans. But instead of voting for it along mostly party lines, Democrats are insisting on a broader consensus that includes a majority of Republicans.
Would that circumstance never arise in a California budget debate?
Reform…Reform…Reform
Following a frustrating and record setting period before an unsatisfactory budget was signed, the Sunday papers were full of reform ideas on how California should change its governmental process and even the structure of government itself.
Fox and Hounds Daily preceded the Sunday discussion with a piece on our site Friday
by Jim Mayer, Executive of Director of California Forward. Mayer offered readers a glimpse into the dialogue his organization hosted last week on the budget process and governance problems and setting an agenda for reform.
In the “Conversation” section, Daniel Weintraub oversees for the Sacramento Bee, Weintraub and guest writers discussed different options for reforming government in California. Weintraub also listed an array of government reforms that have gained support in some quarters during the time of the stalled budget negotiations including majority votes for the budget, open primaries, changed term limits, and an expanded legislature.
The Pink Elephant
It was a shocking phone call. I had just finished speaking with a mortgage specialist at my credit union just over a year ago, and couldn’t believe what I was being told. My wife and I were looking at the possibility of buying our first home in West Los Angeles, and the dream that seemed so far out of reach suddenly looked realistic. “Are you sure we qualify for that much?” I asked the agent. “Yes, absolutely,” was her confident reply, “with your credit rating it should be no problem.” I had to go over the numbers several times to make sure she realized the mortgage she was offering would take nearly half of our combined salaries. The agent understood, but I still don’t.
As many know the current financial crisis finds most of its origins in the mortgage crash of the last couple years. Of course, those “Wall Street Fat Cats” share some of the blame, operating within a system that rewards risky investments (like packaged mortgages) when they pay off, but never penalize for a loss. In a recent radio interview, financial “talking head” Larry Kudlow put it this way: “A guy can make $20 million one year for making much more than that for his company, but nothing happens to him when he loses $50 million the next year.” He proposed a salary structure that would be computed over multiple year periods as a way of solving this perverse incentive scheme. This risk/reward scenario is obviously absent for most homeowners who are suffering under the weight of depressed housing prices and imminent foreclosure.