Next Tuesday the voters of California will go to the polls in a special election which offers us one of the wonderful benefits of democracy: a choice between two absolutely horrible options. The election offers us five propositions, numbered 1A-1F and is the result of the recent budget agreement which took about 100 days to reach.

The basic choice is between supporting the proposals which would cure the problems in the short term but do nothing to fix things for the long term. In addition the tax hikes and spendng cuts would also cause problems.

On the other hand rejecting them would put the state in serious peril right now. The budget is so tight already that rejecting the proposals would force drastic cuts in vital services.

So it amounts to having something sort of bad happen now and continue for many years or to have something completely horrible to happen right now and last until we are forced to fix it.

Proposition 1A would increase the rainy day fund reserves from 5% to 12.5% and would impose new restrictions on how the funds were spent. To fund this increase it would extend current tax hikes for several more years.

Proposition 1B would restore about $ 9 billion in funding to schools ovet the next several years but only if Proposition 1A passes.

Proposition 1C would allow the state to borrow $ 5 billion which would be repaid out of revenues from the state lottery. Since all lottery funds currently go to schools, the $ 5 billion would have to be made up from somewhere else in the general fund.

Proposition 1D would cut funding for early childhood development programs by about $ 1.7 billion over the next five years.

Proposition 1E would cut funding from mental health programs by about $ 200 million a year for the next 2 years.

Proposition 1F would prevent pay raises for legislators and state officials in recession years.

PATRICK EDABURN, Assistant Editor
Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2009 The Moderate Voice
  • Dr J

    So how should I vote, Patrick? I’m staring at the mail-in ballot and don’t know what to do.

  • yikes123

    Here’s a one shot summary of everything that is 100% verifiably TRUE about First 5 and Prop 1D (from IRS docs, state audited financials and the First 5 databases)

    For starters:

    First 5 has $2 BILLION+ ONLY because it took 2 years+ for most of them to do their strategic plan AND they were not allowed to spend the funds coming in until they did.

    It was NOT due to good planning! They were forced to save it and spend it slowly per their strategic plans. There is NO budget impact because they will use what they have in the bank to fund the 5 years of temporary sharing that they are being asked to do.

    So, who can a person believe at FIRST 5 ?

    1. Not First 5 commissioners, since IMO they “self deal”. For a clear example, check out Riverside First 5, whose Commissioners raked in 75%+ of all program funds in FY 07/08 – at least one resigned – and they had to restructure! See for more info. Julia Glick was the reporter. Check out your local First 5 to see just how true this is!

    2. Not the First 5 lobbyist, Sherry Novick. She received over $1 MILLION of First 5 funds – $200K of which went into her pension account – IRS Form 990s say so! If Prop 1D passes, it cuts her off from receiving any new funds.

    ALSO – audited financials show that First 5 does NOT spend responsibly:

    1. First 5 spent over $100 MILLION on private evaluation consultants!

    They are on track to spend $500 MILLION on evaluation within 15 years

    And $1 BILLION+ within 25 years! Where’s the beef? Where’s the results? Nada!

    Even WORSE:

    First 5 spent $500 MILLION+ on ADULTS in a program called CARES.

    They gave Master’s degree holders up to $5,000 just to stay in their jobs!

    Not a documented penny went to children 0 to 5! This money went up in smoke?!

    Can anyone say POOF?

    Google “lakin ventura Star deception 1d” OR “melissa prop 1d baby killer smokers” for links to data and more in depth discussion.

  • troosvelt_1858

    I can’t really tell you other than to say either vote for em all or against em all.

    But both choices stink