Our recommendation: ‘No’ on all props

As much as it pains us to say this, we cannot support any of the six propositions in Tuesday’s special election. We urge you to vote — and to vote no.
The state is in a mammoth financial crisis, and these measures are intended to put the final touches on a budget that is months late. But to think that they will fix anything in today’s economy is a fantasy.
The propositions are:
1A: Would cap spending and create a “rainy day fund” with the excess revenues.
1B: Would provide additional education funding, but only if lA passes.
1C: Would promote more lottery ticket sales and permit borrowing against future lottery revenues.
1D: Would redirect tobacco-tax money from children’s early development programs for general uses.
1E: Would redirect mental health services funding to mental health programs now financed from the general fund.
1F: Would freeze legislators’ salaries in any budget deficit year.
The Legislature and governor are unified in saying that the entire package must be passed. Otherwise, they threaten further cuts, including more reductions in education funding, the wholesale closure of state fire stations and forced “borrowing” from cities and counties.
We say the entire package should be defeated.
As state revenues continue to plunge, whether the propositions pass or not, lawmakers will have to return to budget session soon to address the new shortfall, and we’d bet that the Legislature’s minority Republicans will hold the budget hostage again.
Even if that delay doesn’t happen, there almost certainly will be further cuts to education because it makes up half of the budget.
We’re fed up with the budget mess and our elected officials’ refusal to do their jobs. It’s their job to adopt a budget, not to toss it into voters’ laps. Even if they have to come to the citizens, it’s their job to write ballot measures that can be understood without a Ph.D. What’s more, it’s their job to sell the measures on their merits.
The state needs a longer-range solution to the larger problem.
Here’s our alternative: a constitutional convention.
First of all, the convention would amend the state constitution to get rid of the two-thirds requirement for budget passage. Then we’d like to see removal of the many funding restrictions placed by poorly conceived voter initiatives that have hamstring budget negotiators.
While we’re at it, we’d also like to see the initiative process revised to outlaw paid professional signature-gatherers, adequate funding established for all levels of education and the creation of a wholly new unicameral (one-house) legislature.
Too much to ask? Perhaps, but let’s at least defeat Proposition 1F. It doesn’t go far enough — legislators’ salaries should be cut in half if they can’t balance a budget.