U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-07-2010, 04:35 PM
 
Location: SW MO Aux Arcs
19,219 posts, read 16,572,878 times
Reputation: 17345

Advertisements

For SoCal35, two other states require a super majority to passed their budget. Arkansas' legislature must obtain a three-fourths majority on appropriations for all purposes except education, highways, and paying down the state debt. In Rhode Island, appropriations for local or private purposes require a two-thirds majority vote. Because the state typically drafts all main appropriations bills for operations into a single budget bill, a two-thirds vote has been effectively necessary for all appropriations.

As many as 16 states have a super majority requirement for tax increases, either statutory or constitutional in nature. Most of these states--Arizona, California, Colorado, Louisiana, Nevada, South Dakota, and Washington--have opted for two-thirds requirements. Others--Delaware, Florida (for corporate income tax increases only), Kentucky, Mississippi, and Oregon--require a three-fifths majority.
The most restrictive requirements exist in Arkansas and Oklahoma, where any tax increase must be approved by a three-quarters majority of members of each chamber.

Michigan requires approval by three-quarters of the legislature on any adjustment to the state property tax assessment. Missouri's constitution mandates that all tax increases exceeding the revenue limit first achieve a declaration of emergency by two-thirds of each of the legislature's two houses.

For the OP, as I've posted many times before, this is only a part of the problem in CA, although a major one. The rest of the madness hampering the state comes from several sources. Probably the top of the list is the idiots otherwise intelligent people keep re-electing to office in the Legislature and when they term out, members of their families. These people are interested in themselves, not the public good, but for a very, very few of them.

Next up are the many propositions specifying categorical funding or limiting revenues the people, in their infinite wisdom vote on to pass and those that greatly increase spending requirements with no dedicated funding streams identified or required. Propositions 13, 98, 63 and 83 leap immediately to mind.

Last but not least are the many "expensive," feel good, union friendly and vote attracting bills passed by the Legislature and signed into law by6 Governors like Gray Davis and Ol' Krusty/Gov. Moonbeam/Jerry Brown and the "hard-line" law enforcement bills signed by the likes of Pete Wilson and Ahnold without regard for probable costs. And hang onto your wallets. Chelsea's Law is on Ahnold's desk as I write.

Until there is realistic, non-partisan redistricting, and until Californians take enough interest in the process to educate themselves politically, and until the people eschew political party affiliation in favor of real policy, and until the super majority is no longer necessary, and until the constitution is changed to require all propositions to be self-funding, and until the people rise up and say, "No!" to deficit spending, tricks, smoke and mirrors, borrowing and unfunded mandates, the problems will only continue.

Meanwhile, CA continues to circle the drain at an ever-increasing pace!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-07-2010, 04:35 PM
 
Location: The High Seas
5,755 posts, read 7,293,280 times
Reputation: 6758
Bonus prize to anyone who can spell George "Duke's" name correctly (without looking it up!)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2010, 04:36 PM
 
5,375 posts, read 7,149,693 times
Reputation: 2768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
Until there is realistic, non-partisan redistricting, and until Californians take enough interest in the process to educate themselves politically, and until the people eschew political party affiliation in favor of real policy, and until the super majority is no longer necessary, and until the constitution is changed to require all propositions to be self-funding, and until the people rise up and say, "No!" to deficit spending, tricks, smoke and mirrors, borrowing and unfunded mandates, the problems will only continue.

Meanwhile, CA continues to circle the drain at an ever-increasing pace!
You've made some interesting points! Particularly the gerrymandering of our districts. They are obviously drawn up specifically to thwart the voters and favor politicians and parties.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snort View Post
Bonus prize to anyone who can spell George "Duke's" name correctly (without looking it up!)
Tell us what the bonus prize is first. I don't do heavy duty typing for mere pennies.

(Or putting it another way, nobody cares how his name is spelled, except him of course.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2010, 04:38 PM
 
Location: SW MO Aux Arcs
19,219 posts, read 16,572,878 times
Reputation: 17345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovehound View Post
That's simply ridiculous. If there wasn't any two-thirds super majority required then taxes would skyrocket. The two-thirds is the only reason they haven't.

What we need is to cut the size of our bloated government programs.
Wrong! Yes, the government is overly large, agonizingly prescriptive and horribly intrusive and regulatory. However, it all begins with the Legislature. Clean up that cess-pool (the big chunks always rise to the top in one) and CA will be on the road to better health.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2010, 04:48 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
787 posts, read 1,052,779 times
Reputation: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lovehound View Post
That's simply ridiculous. If there wasn't any two-thirds super majority required then taxes would skyrocket. The two-thirds is the only reason they haven't.

What we need is to cut the size of our bloated government programs.
Well, we really don't know that. There are plenty of other state with no such requirement and taxes are not through the roof, budgets are balanced.

The 2/3's requirement for BUDGETs is the biggest sticking point....I think even the state Chamber of Commerce thinks that is something we should change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2010, 05:04 PM
 
19 posts, read 36,796 times
Reputation: 28
All I know is one thing...Taxes are so much higher here than in TX and yet still it looks like the State has no money. The Infratructure (i.e. Roads) looks like it needs a healthy dose of cash as well. You can spot the improvement in infrastructure once you enter Orange County. I read on a few links that
* LA county has 1 in 5 people on welfare
* CA has 12% of people in USA but 35% of TNAID (Don't know the right Abbrv, temporary aid programme for in need families)
* CA has the largest prison system in developed world
etc.
* Community Colleges are cheaper or free (hardship form, not verified)

What about Parks/Wildfires/Police etc? Are they a big drain on the system? Do you know if the ratio is disproportional to other states? Why haven't the people of CA speaking out against the free distribution of money to welfare programs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2010, 05:33 PM
 
Location: Mt Washington: NELA
1,156 posts, read 2,041,335 times
Reputation: 615
Well, I know a few things.

Orange County also has little or no rapid transit, so they gobble up more and more houses to create freakishly wide freeways that turn into parking lots in a few years. So much for forward thinking, or any real commitment to infrastructure. The closest thing they get is Metrolink and Amtrak. They have shot down every other rail project proposal because it would cost them money.

And alittle nuance may be in order regarding prison systems:

"If you take into consideration the amount of people imprisoned per capita, states like Alaska, Delaware, Louisiana, Mississippi and Oklahoma actually have the biggest prison populations. It's good to remember that in every state, less than 1% of their population is incarcerated (as of 2004)."

That from WikiAnswers - Which US state has the biggest prison population.

Then again, California is the most populous state- isn't that a HUGE factor? Further, the United States has some of the most inflexible laws on the planet. There is little or no judicial discretion when these sentences are meted out, regardless of State. The Economist did a great story on this some issues back. Here is an excerpt:

The Economist takes on America's obsession with prison | John Howard Association of Illinois
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2010, 05:51 PM
 
1,881 posts, read 2,507,522 times
Reputation: 1432
Probably Texas gets a lot of steady revenue from the oil industry, which we don't have here in Cali. Ideally, we could expand gaming laws to allow for resort casinos to boost tourism & revenue, but I'm sure there are practical considerations why this will never happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2010, 05:59 PM
 
Location: SW MO Aux Arcs
19,219 posts, read 16,572,878 times
Reputation: 17345
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokingGun View Post
Probably Texas gets a lot of steady revenue from the oil industry, which we don't have here in Cali. Ideally, we could expand gaming laws to allow for resort casinos to boost tourism & revenue, but I'm sure there are practical considerations why this will never happen.
Been to Bakersfield?

Yup! It would be politically incorrect to infringe upon the (politically correctly designated) Native American monopoly on casinos in the most "progressive" state in the union.

And just look at what y'all have to show for it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2010, 06:59 PM
 
97 posts, read 100,240 times
Reputation: 65
What are taxes like in California/LA? Specifically, income tax, sales tax and property tax. Anyone got the percentages?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > Los Angeles
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top