2009 California Election Results in Rebuke to Political Class
Tax and Spend Propositions Go Down to Defeat
The only proposition to pass was one that would forbid pay raises during times of budget deficits.
California's nominally Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger had threatened to cut education and health funding, release some state prisoners, and cut stipends to local governments that would in turn lead to cuts in police and fire fighters. The voters of California were not impressed, however.
California's legislature is dominated by Democrats with a reputation from profligate spending. Partisan ranker and an antiquated budget system have combined to foster huge increases in spending and taxes (sometimes disguised as "fees") in California. Attempts to rein in spending over the past decade or two have, so far, failed.
The results of the California special election indicate a number of things. Even in blue state California, which went overwhelmingly for Barack Obama in the last election, the political class has lost credibility and the trust of the people they were elected to serve. Even Californians were unwilling to see their taxes go any higher, even in the face of threats to cut essential services.
This development in turn should serve as a national wakeup call for President Barack Obama, who seems bent on following California's example of high spending and high taxation. Eventually people in even the most liberal of states will revolt if governments tax and spend too much.
Several questions arise as a result of the California special election and the defeat of the tax and spend propositions.
Will the California legislature get serious about budget reduction or will it attempt an end run around the will of the people and try to raise revenues anyway? The California Constitution requires a two thirds majority to raise taxes, which made necessary taking tax increase propositions to a popular vote to start with. There is already a story that some California law makers may try to raise gas taxes, calling them "fees" to get around California Constitutional requirements/
Will California voters take the next step and start voting out tax and spend legislators next year? Meg Whitman, the former CEO of Ebay and a true fiscal conservative, is running for Governor of California next year. Will Californians' discontent with tax and spend policies in Sacramento translate into votes for Ms. Whitman?
If California's budget crisis causes a shift from blue toward red, it would be one of the most significant American political developments so far this century. For the past twenty years, California has been a reliable Democratic state and both parties have had to factor that in their calculations. If that state of affairs changes, the development will have profound and lasting effects on the American political dynamic.
Source: California voters reject budget crisis measures, CNN, May 20th, 2009
Published by Mark Whittington
Mark R. Whittington is a writer residing in Houston, Texas. He is the author of The Last Moonwalker, Children of Apollo, Dark Sanction, and Nocturne. He has written numerous articles, some for the Washington... View profile
- Election of 1968: A Country in CrisisAn overview of the 1968 presidential election, a resounding victory for Richard Nixon and a major defeat for liberal Democrats.
- Election of 1856: Buchanan and the Point of No Return for the Status QuoAn overview of the presidential election of 1856, in which Democrat James Buchanan defeated Republican John Fremont.
- Election of 1980: The Reagan RevolutionAn overview of the 1980 presidential election, in which Ronald Reagan defeated incumbent Jimmy Carter.
- Election of 1948: Truman and the Divided ElectorateAn overview of the 1948 presidential election, in which Democrat Harry Truman defeated Republican Thomas Dewey, Progressive Henry Wallace, and Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond.
- Election of 1912: The Return of the "Bull Moose" and the Divided Republican PartyAn overview of the 1912 presidential election, in which Democrat Woodrow Wilson defeated Republican William Howard Taft and Progressive Theodore Roosevelt.
- Where to Vote in California
- Underestimate the Impact of California Propositions at Your Own Risk
- The Election of 1992: Recession and the Perot Factor
- Election of 1920: America's Return to "Normalcy"
- Election of 1984: The Test of the Reagan Revolution
- Election of 1972: The Nixon Landslide
- Election of 1852: Franklin Pierce and the Crossroads Before the Civil War
9 Comments
Post a CommentWow, this article is very poorly written and heavily slanted to favor the Republican party. I wonder, have you noticed that our Governor has been a Republican for quite some time?
All I wanted, when I searched for election results, were the results. I didn't need, want or care for this editiorial slant.
I can figure out what all of this means, without the talking heads or biased reporters telling me what THEY think it means, thank you.
Can you just report the facts, please?
Doesn't anybody in California know that raising taxes stunts state tax revenues? When California taxes its citizens and businesses, Californians move to Montana and its businesses just move out period. It's good to see the voters are sending a message with their votes to the political class.
Even Californians were unwilling to see their taxes go any higher, even in the face of threats to cut essential services.
When was the last time you cut "essential services" when ballancing your househould budget?
We're being "gutted."
I also voted against all of those measures, but I did so because I felt that they would have handed too much power over to Mr. Schwartzenegger in addition to raising our taxes. If, however, SB 810 passes in 2010 then I would be happy to pay an additional amount in taxes to cover my share towards a Universal Single Payer Healthcare system. That amount will no doubt be far less than any premium i would pay to the for-profit-insurance companies. A Single Payer Healthcare system is NOT socialized medicine. With socialized medicine the government both owns the hospitals and hires the doctors. With a Single Payer System the government pays for the services, but they are provided by private doctors who own their practices; publically funded, privately provided. We do not need the for profit health insurance industry stealing from us any longer.
Paul, I don't understand your comment about, "Except us idiots who do something stupid like join the Armed Forces." I say joining the Armed Forces is honorable and necessary so as to protect citizens of these United States, as well as people in need around the world.
i agree with Gregory. people who try to blame it only on the governor is making it a partisan issue. the bottomline is that too many californian's are not willing to have their taxes raise in this very poor economy where people are losing their jobs left and right. anyone not preparing for this is asking for trouble unless they are already well well off. this no is about the economy and yes it is indeed something the federal government should look at. i am a strong obama supporter however as this article says people are only so willing to let their government go crazy spending--that was not what obama had promised when he campaigned. he promised to try to be in the middle. california legislator also gets a warning--not just arnold. this is about their out of control spending as well. anyone who denies that i beleive is just playing partisan politics--my opinion.
I, for one, am tired of having over half my income extorted from me by a government that feels free to put in place more and more ridiculous tax subsidized plans. The problem is partially mismanagement of funds, but it is mainly an unwillingness on the part of the state legislature to cut ANYTHING from their budgets. It is foolish that the rural residents of Northern California should have to subsidize inner city programs in San Francisco and Los Angeles, and it is long past the time that the state be split in two.
I agree with Paul that Mark got this all backward.
I live in California and I would have no problem paying higher taxes. It's amazing how many people just can't digest what Prop. 13 really did to this state all those years ago. "Seemed like a good idea at the time" is all I ever hear...
I am more than willing to pay higher taxes. The problem is not the taxes. The problem is the party at the top of our state and how they manage money. Or mis-manage...
I think you've got in in reverse Mark. You look at what just happened in California and think it's going to spread to the rest of the Nation.
I look at what just happened and see a state reacting to another Republican who can't seem to add and fear of more damage from the the right.
Everyone wants to play, but no one ever wants to pay. Except us idiots who do something stupid like join the Armed Forces.