California Family Minute

March 7, 2011

Wanted: Four Republican Votes

by Rebecca Burgoyne, 
CFC Research Analyst

Attracted by miracles Jesus was doing, Nicodemus, a member of the powerful Jewish ruling council, visited Jesus at night with his questions. (John 3) Governor Jerry Brown, a Jesuit seminarian who studied to become a Catholic priest in his youth, relied on that analogy in admitting that he had been talking with a handful of Republican legislators under the cover of night. “Well, that's kind of where we are now with the Republicans and working with possible tax extensions,” he told a reporter Friday.  “They can only come under the cover of darkness.”

Two days remain before March 10, the deadline Governor Brown imposed on the Legislature to place tax extensions on a spring ballot. What is clear is that the governor’s proposal is headed for floor votes in both chambers this week, likely on Wednesday. What is unclear is whether Brown and the majority Democrats have obtained the two Republican votes needed in each house. 

Publicly, Republicans have fought putting tax extensions on the ballot, instead advocating for long-term pension reform (as the state faces $115 billion in unfunded liabilities), a cap on state spending, easing business regulations, and cutting the state workforce. A week ago, when numerous news stories first confirmed that some Republican senators had been meeting with the governor, Senate Republican Leader Bob Dutton (R-Rancho Cucamonga) maintained they weren’t looking at cutting side deals. That question remains: Are a handful of Republicans ready to vote for the tax extensions and are the Democrats willing to give them what they want?

While the governor and majority Democrats portray the proposal as half cuts and half taxes, in actuality it is much heavier on taxes. In predictable accounting sleights-of-hand, shifting funds from one account to another is counted as a cut, and $2 billion in taxes is ignored because it would go straight to education (not the general fund). Additionally, because Democrats disallowed nearly $900 million in proposed cuts at the committee level, the budget plan is closer to one-third cuts and two-thirds new taxes. So much for transparency and lack of gimmicks! Should legislators manage to put the tax extensions on the ballot, Californians will have the final say on whether to increase their taxes “one more time.”

Beginning next week, legislators plan to concentrate on bill hearings, and bills introduced last December are beginning to be scheduled.   For help in expressing your opinion on any of these measures, visit CFC’s Legislative Action Center.

AB 123 (Mendoza, D-Norwalk) School Safety: Disruption Threatening Pupils – would limit outside disruptions to students arriving, on school grounds, or leaving schools by controlling “disruptive” or threatening access to schools, school grounds, or nearby streets, sidewalks, or public ways. AB 123 amends an older law and there is some cause for concern as the new bill deletes a section of law that provides protection for freedom of speech and assembly.
Assembly Public Safety Committee, March 15, 2011

AB 177 (Mendoza, D-Norwalk) Juveniles: Parenting Class – Current law allows juvenile courts to order the parents of a minor first-time offender for a gang-related crime to attend an anti-gang violence parenting class. This measure would extend the authority of the courts to order the parents of a habitual truant to attend the anti-gang violence parenting class. 
Assembly Public Safety Committee, March 15, 2011

AB 321 (Hernández, D-West Covina) Juvenile Offenders: Obscene Materials – If sexually explicit material is found in the possession of a minor, a court may order payment of a fine up to $1,000 and counseling (paid by parents). AB 321 also defines “sexting,” a growing problem among teens, as “the sending or receiving of sexually explicit pictures or video images via cellular phone or similar electronic device.” 
Assembly Public Safety Committee, March 15, 2011