|
The May 19 statewide special election features propositions that, instead of solving the state’s long-term fiscal challenges, actually make them worse. Propositions 1A, 1C, 1D and 1E propose a variety of schemes that will hurt children, burden the state with debt, and force cuts in 4-year colleges and universities, health care, and other social programs, while permanently underfunding public education.
The CFT recommends:
- 1A NO
- 1B YES
- 1C NO
- 1D NO
- 1E NO
- 1F NO
NO on 1A
In return for a few temporary and regressive tax increases, 1A imposes a destructive permanent state spending cap. It is similar to right-wing initiatives in other states that have used caps in spending as part of a larger effort to starve government programs. In limiting growth in the state budget to population increase and cost of living, it obscures the central driver for future state spending: our aging population, the price of whose health care needs in retirement will easily exceed the proposed cap.
 This would force large cuts to the non-Prop 98 portion of the state budget, especially public health and other services to children in poverty, seniors and the disabled. CFT members know that children who come to school sick or hungry cannot learn. CSU and UC, already victim to major cuts and student fee hikes over the past decade, will suffer further reductions in funding.
Proposition 1A is a power grab. It gives the governor the power to make midyear cuts without legislative approval or public input. Voters rejected the similar Prop 76 in 2005.
In opposing Proposition 1A, CFT joins a coalition that includes the California School Boards Association, California Faculty Association (representing CSU professors), Service Employees International Union (SEIU), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Teamsters, Congress of California Seniors, Consumer Federation of California, and League of Women Voters.
Glaringly absent from this group of public service advocates is the California Teachers Association. The CTA formed an alliance with the governor to pass the entire package of propositions, in return for the governor’s promise to restore school funding cuts over the last two budget years to the Prop 98 base, as provided in Prop 1B. Download a flyer on 1A (pdf).
YES on 1B
However, Proposition 1B does not provide new money above the Prop 98 guarantee. It simply reinstates what our schools and community colleges are already owed due to budget cuts. Passage of 1B would thus eliminate the need to sue the state to follow the law.
The problem is that Prop 1B is tied to Prop 1A’s passage. If Prop 1A fails, 1B does not go into effect. Even if Proposition 1B is enacted, it could take years for the schools and colleges to see any of these revenues. But the state would still owe schools and colleges the promised funds. In that case, CFT and other education advocates would look at suing the state to force it to restore those funds.
CFT supports 1B because it believes that school funding should be restored. In fact, all public education groups support 1B, regardless of whether they are supporting, opposing or staying neutral on Proposition 1A. However, as delegates to the CFT convention pointed out repeatedly, the damage done by Prop 1A is not worth 1B. The California Budget Project estimates that the spending cap will leave the state budget $16 billion short in 2010-2011 of the governor’s own baseline projections. Since the K-14 share of the state budget is roughly 40%, that would mean more than $6 billion in cuts to public education.
The other measures: 1C through 1F
The California School Boards Association joins CFT in opposing 1A, 1C, 1D and 1E. The CFT also opposes 1F.
1C: would borrow against future lottery revenues and take years to repay.
1D: would remove funding from early childhood programs, hurt low-income children and make it even harder to close the achievement gap.
1E: would erode already under-funded mental health programs, including those for young children.
1F: would vindictively punish all legislators by denying them pay raises if a small minority of them block the adoption of a state budget that requires a two-thirds vote.
Where these positions come from: union democracy
The CFT does not take its positions on the propositions lightly. More than four hundred members debated and discussed the ballot propositions at the CFT convention March 20-22 in Sacramento. Delegates shared insights and arguments based on their work as K-12 teachers, community college instructors, classified workers, UC faculty and librarians, and early childhood educators.
|
