TFPO column: we have a budget...what next?

I've been under the weather this week, to abuse a clichéd turn of phrase, so this week's column is a just a mild musing on a topic that isn't generating nearly as much outrage and attention as it should. It did post on Monday, as scheduled; I've just been tardy with the blog. Sorry.

On to this week's question, then, at The Front Page Online:

We Have a Budget...What Next?

TFPO column: playing with the budget...and getting burned

There's no winning when it comes to the California budget, especially when we remain so confused about the status of the "public" in our political ideologies. Find out for yourself with some cool, but disturbing, budget balancing tools.

Playing with the Budget...and Getting Burned

What do you think California's Powers That Be should do about the budget? What choices did you make in regards to California's budget? I'd love it if you sounded off in the comments directly below.

California's message to Sacramento

It’s no surprise California voters rejected all the budget ballot measures save one – the restriction on legislators’ raises during times of fiscal crisis. Beyond the general problem of asking voters to make decisions on issues they have neither the expertise to interpret effectively nor the time to research thoroughly, these were lousy measures. 1A had uncertain fiscal effects according to the legislative analyst. 1B’s effects depended on how the constitution would be interpreted – a structural ambiguity that is very worrying. 1C borrowed against theoretical future lottery earnings – a gamble that those earnings would, in fact, materialize. 1D and 1E were convoluted shell games that maybe screwed over children and the mentally ill or maybe not. Who knows? The point is that despite the apocalyptic warnings that not voting for these bad measures was worse than approving, there would still be a major deficit ($15 billion vs. $21 billion) and it was uncertain whether would sacrifice the long-term in favour of a quick fix. The message from voters to Sacramento is, essentially: quit fucking around.

If the legislature were serious, they would immediately put forth an amendment to get rid of the supermajority since clearly the high requirement isn’t helping to achieve consensus. I’ve been receiving eMails from various campaigns pushing for that. When neither rock nor hard place will budge, deadlock after deadlock and delay after delay is inevitable and one of the world’s largest economics just can’t take the strain. I don’t like getting rid of the supermajority requirement, but at least there is still some accountability in the form of the general election. Next, there has to be the acceptance that getting out of this hole is going to be painful. Either we cut spending or increase revenues. It’s time to take some radical, long overdue measures:

• Decriminalize pot and other drugs, as well as prostitution. Enforce health standards and establish taxation guidelines.
• Diminish the prison population, and thus the cost of maintaining said population, by reducing/removing prison terms for non-violent offenders.
• Allow the hemp industry to flourish.
• Expand gambling. (Note to self: find out if Larry Flynt still wants to be governor.)

These aren’t new ideas. I’m certainly not the first to put them out there. And there’s nothing revolutionary about pointing out that unless the State is willing to take innovative steps towards addressing the budget crisis instead of hiding behind the Republican cut-all-taxes cookie cutter or the Democratic money-tree growth formula. But perhaps the prospect of a total meltdown will finally get things moving in the right direction. Unless, of course, Naomi Klein’s shock doctrine applies and the PTBs use this “opportunity” to bend the middle and lowers classes over again and have their way.

TFPO column: prop. 8 - freedom to discriminate

It's hard to say which way the California Supreme Court will swing on the issue of overturning Prop. 8. Personally, I'm not entirely optimistic - the "will of the people" is an alluring shield to hide behind. Freedom, however, means accepting that not everyone will behave or think the way we would prefer. Which makes me wonder if someone really are interested in freedom, or if freedom simply means the freedom to comform.

Prop. 8: Freedom to Discriminate

new column: merry spendmas and other holiday musings

Whew! The holidays are really throwing my writing schedule off. This is my last column until the New Year, and I'm not anticipating having any film reviews until the first week of January. I may, however, arbitrarily update the blog in the meantime - I expect to get back to a regular schedule on January 5th.

With the Christmas season comes all the usual ornaments and traditions including, of course, the biggest tradition of all: spend money. We could consider renaming the holiday “spendmas,” especially when the news reminds us about how much we’re doling out for stuff in comparison to past years. Outlook: not so good. Says the Front Page’s favourite punching bag, the L.A. Times: “The International Council of Shopping Centers has estimated that in November and December, sales at stores open at least a year may decline as much as 1 percent. That would be the largest drop since at least 1969, when the New York trade group starting tracking data.”

Read the rest of Merry Spendmas and Other Holiday Musings.

Happy holidays!

a reminder to vote NO on prop 8

new column: what do prop. 4 and prop. 8 have in common?

Dichotomies go boom:

One proposition would require parents or families to be notified when a teenager seeks to get an abortion. The other would throw love under the bus and ban same-sex couples from marrying. Two different propositions, but one underlying issue. Read What Do Prop. 4 and Prop. 8 Have in Common?