5 ms·
> But then Ronald Reagan (as governor of california) cut state mental illness funding. > Now clearly mentally ill people - who needed help - were turned away u
by throwawaylinux 3y ago
> But then Ronald Reagan (as governor of california) cut state mental illness funding.
> Now clearly mentally ill people - who needed help - were turned away unless they were clearly "a danger to themselves and others".
It's been 50 years between then and now, so... why has no other politician increased it if the funding cut was the problem?
- wetpaws 3y ago[dead]
- bandrami 3y agoBecause of a ballot initiative that essentially made it impossible to raise taxes.
- throwawaylinux 3y agoThat is not the reason that spending on mental illness can not be increased.
- bandrami 3y agoI mean, yes it is, unless you have equivalent cuts somewhere else you're willing to make that can get through the legislature.
- throwawaylinux 3y agoI know what you mean, it's just wrong. Spending on mental health is not tied to tax rates constitutionally such that politicians can't change it. They're probably glad not to change it because misinformed voters think it's still Reagan's fault.
- firesteelrain 3y agoProp 63 did raise taxes and a budget proposal worth billions is now weaving its way through the legislature. So not true that they couldn’t raise taxes because they did