3 ms·
> To be fair, prop 25 was very astutely designed, with the simple majority budget on one hand and not paying legislators when the budget is late on the other ha
by anamax 16y ago
> To be fair, prop 25 was very astutely designed, with the simple majority budget on one hand and not paying legislators when the budget is late on the other hand.
What makes you think that legislators care about their pay? (Note that salaries are a small part of their govt income.)
Note that CA's balanced budget reqt doesn't mean that income equals outgo, that is, what the rest of us think that "balanced" means. CA's balanced budget reqt means that a model, which isn't tweaked when it fails to match reality, has equal income and outgo. It's accounting theater.
- freiheit 16y agoI didn't say anything about legislators caring about their pay. I think the pay thing in prop 25 was a smart way to write a proposition to get it passed, because many people were expressing unhappiness that legislators were getting paid while there was no budget, especially when many of the legislators were doing nothing about it. In other words: if you'd split that proposition into the two different main things, it's likely neither would have passed.
- anamax 16y ago> if you'd split that proposition into the two different main things, it's likely neither would have passed. I disagree. Pretty much anything "punishing" CA legislators would have passed. It's unclear whether replacing the 2/3rds reqt with a majority vote would have passed on its own.