# My fellow Californians, and our legislature... **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 20, 2009, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074 "2009-05-20T15:14:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Rigamarole](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/77aa72/32.png) [@Rigamarole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rigamarole)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/41 "2009-05-21T04:25:41Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > Second, what do you mean you are “ethnic?” I’m ethnic, too. So is every human on the planet. Silly pedant, everyone knows “ethnic” is code for “not white”. I suspect you know that though and are just being intentionally obtuse in order to call him out on his use of this (admittedly bullshit) term. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/42 "2009-05-21T06:02:59Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > I agree with **Pleonast** - time to tear down the whole thing and start anew, especially with majority vote for tax increases and much more stringent rules for getting propositions on the ballot. No it should not be a simple majority for a tax increase. It should still be a supermajority, just a three-fifths or 60% vote. ---
**Author:** ![Snnipe\_70E](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5a626/32.png) [@Snnipe\_70E](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snnipe_70E)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/43 "2009-05-21T06:30:57Z")
> [@jayjay](#): > > As far as schools, doesn’t that devolve on the California citizenry, who passed Prop 13? If you think that property taxes on homes should be around $50,000 a year, then prop 13 is bad. ---
**Author:** ![Yookeroo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yookeroo/32/323_2.png) [@Yookeroo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yookeroo)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 8:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/44 "2009-05-21T08:35:56Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > It’s time to push the big ole reset button: constitutional convention. > > Our government needs complete structural reform. Initiatives are too easy to pass and too hard to amend. Local governments and schools either can’t raise the revenues they need, or if they can, it’s stolen by the state. The legislature cannot make hard decisions and gerrymandering prevents replacing them. The legislature can’t fix the budget even if it wanted to because of mandates. This. I’m totally on board. > [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > The root of the budget troubles goes back to the tax-revolt fervor of Howard Jarvis et al. in the late 70s and early 80s. Proposition 13 was only the start. Proposition 4, IIRC, made it nearly impossible to raise taxes when needed to provide income. Then a proposition came along mandating a certain percentage of the budget go to education. Then along came a proposition that … > > But the reason these propositions pass is that the Legislature doesn’t. Legislate, that is, not in any meaningful way. Even when they are not hampered by a super-majority requirement, they refuse to deal with political realities. Like a Democratic majority in the Legislature but a Republican governor. No, we’d rather engage in finger-pointing than admit that we need to suck it up and do what we would prefer not to. Idiots. > > And yes, the public in California is always demanding a liberal approach to services, but then turning around and refusing to pay for them. And I would very much doubt that someone is paying more in California in property tax pro rated for the VALUE of their home than in Massachusetts. It’s just that Californian properties are ridiculously expensive, making the taxes high in cost per family. Stop flipping your properties, and they will get better and better looking, thanks to Proposition 13. :rolleyes: Jarvis & Prop 13 are some of the worst things to happen to this state. Of course the root of the problem is with the initiative process. We need to dump that ASAP. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/45 "2009-05-21T10:50:24Z")
> [@Snnipe\_70E](#): > > If you think that property taxes on homes should be around $50,000 a year, then prop 13 is bad. Oh get real. Even for hyperbole, that’s being ridiculous. Proposition 13 wasn’t about high rates of taxation. Proposition 13 was about the effect of rising property values on people with incomes that weren’t rising to match. It was an early reaction to the beginning of the real estate bubble that continues in California to this day, even in the face of the current economic woes. People who had owned homes for 20 years were being forced to sell because they happened to live in neighborhoods that were becoming pricey, and their assessed valuation was going up accordingly, and, thus, their taxes as well. Very little of what drove that proposition was increases in rates, which, as with property taxes in most places, hung in the neighborhood of 1% to 2% of assessed valuation each year. For $50,000 in property taxes on a $500,000 home (a damned expensive home, even in California, though in the Bay Area, possibly the median value!), you’d have to have a tax rate of 10%. So I call B.S. on your post. In Ohio, I lived in a house that was worth (roughly) $300,000, and paid just under $4000 a year in taxes. Ohio is a fairly conservative state when it comes to property taxes; all tax levies must be renewed every 5 years or so, which allows the populace to kill taxes they think don’t give them value for their money. Yet those taxes are about $1000 a year higher than the same property in California. No wonder California’s schools are becoming the worst in the nation. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/46 "2009-05-21T11:05:04Z")
> [@Yookeroo](#): > > Jarvis & Prop 13 are some of the worst things to happen to this state. Of course the root of the problem is with the initiative process. We need to dump that ASAP. Actually, the initiative process is the only way California manages to get much of anything important done, sadly. For example, remember Proposition 103? It was one of **three** propositions that were up for vote at the same time in 1988. There was a public perception that automobile insurance rates in California were out of control. In some counties (notably in the LA area), annual insurance bills were getting to be well over $1000. This was without regard to a driver’s driving record. For a couple years, the issue fomented, but the Legislature and the Governor (Dukmejian, IIRC) couldn’t come to agreement on what to do. Between the lobbying power of the insurance companies and the philosophical differences of the Democrats controlling the Legislature and the Republican sitting in the corner office, it was stalemate. So the people took the matter into their own hands. Proposition 103 was put up for vote, which rolled back rates, established certain limits on how rates are set, and accomplished a number of other, minor reforms. The insurance companies got scared that the proposition might pass, so they offered up a competing proposition which, if it also passed, would have eviscerated Proposition 103’s effects. There was a third proposition up for consideration as well, the reason for which escapes my memory. After a hugely expensive campaign, which co-incided with that year’s presidential campaign, Proposition 103 won the day. Ballot initiatives are the brainchild of the Progressive Party back in the early 1900s. They were a method of making sure that a two-party system doesn’t get stagnant, with the voice of the people left unheard when big business (or other “evil” faction) manages to gain the control of enough of a state’s legislators. They have become the answer to California’s constant legislative gridlock. Sadly, they also allow potentially bad law to be enshrined in the state’s constitution. Witness Proposition 13, Proposition 4, etc., the basis for the state’s continual budgetary woes. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/47 "2009-05-21T11:06:26Z")
> [@Rigamarole](#): > > Silly pedant, everyone knows “ethnic” is code for “not white”. I suspect you know that though and are just being intentionally obtuse in order to call him out on his use of this (admittedly bullshit) term. This is not correct. When I lived in Toledo, for example, the whole East side was “ethnic,” which included the Poles, the Hungarians, and other non-English, non-Germanic ethnicities. ---
**Author:** ![Rigamarole](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/77aa72/32.png) [@Rigamarole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rigamarole)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/48 "2009-05-21T22:05:03Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > This is not correct. When I lived in Toledo, for example, the whole East side was “ethnic,” which included the Poles, the Hungarians, and other non-English, non-Germanic ethnicities. According to whom? I guarantee you I am not the only one who has seen the term used to specifically mean “non-white”. ([this guy](http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080407080844AAIFUig), for example) ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/49 "2009-05-21T22:08:42Z")
> [@Rigamarole](#): > > According to whom? I guarantee you I am not the only one who has seen the term used to specifically mean “non-white”. ([this guy](http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080407080844AAIFUig), for example) So, you and some other guy… ethnic is NOT code for non-white. ---
**Author:** ![Rigamarole](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/77aa72/32.png) [@Rigamarole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rigamarole)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/50 "2009-05-21T22:15:31Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > So, you and some other guy… ethnic is NOT code for non-white. Compelling argument you have there, but I am going to go ahead and stand by my perception that there are at least a significant number of people who use it that way. I’m not saying it’s a “good” or “correct” usage of the term, just that it is a common usage. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/51 "2009-05-21T22:23:39Z")
That was my point (as **Rigamarole** clearly got)—it’s commonly used to mean “non-white,” “other,” “different,” and who knows what-all else, and thus isn’t really useful in a debate. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/52 "2009-05-21T22:29:26Z")
Ok, here is the American Heritage definition: 1. Of or relating to a sizable group of people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious, linguistic, or cultural heritage. 2. Being a member of a particular ethnic group, especially belonging to a national group by heritage or culture but residing outside its national boundaries: ethnic Hungarians living in northern Serbia. 3. Of, relating to, or distinctive of members of such a group: ethnic restaurants; ethnic art. 4. Relating to a people not Christian or Jewish; heathen. > **[Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words](https://www.dictionary.com/)** > > The world's leading online dictionary: English definitions, synonyms, word origins, example sentences, word games, and more. A trusted authority for 25+ years! 1. pertaining to or characteristic of a people, esp. a group (ethnic group) sharing a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like. 2. referring to the origin, classification, characteristics, etc., of such groups. 3. being a member of an ethnic group, esp. of a group that is a minority within a larger society: ethnic Chinese in San Francisco. 4. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of members of such a group. 5. belonging to or deriving from the cultural, racial, religious, or linguistic traditions of a people or country: ethnic dances. 6. Obsolete. pagan; heathen. –noun 7. a member of an ethnic group. [freedictionary.com](http://freedictionary.com) 1. a. Of or relating to a sizable group of people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious, linguistic, or cultural heritage. b. Being a member of a particular ethnic group, especially belonging to a national group by heritage or culture but residing outside its national boundaries: ethnic Hungarians living in northern Serbia. c. Of, relating to, or distinctive of members of such a group: ethnic restaurants; ethnic art. 2. Relating to a people not Christian or Jewish; heathen. n. A member of a particular ethnic group, especially one who maintains the language or customs of the group. merriam webster Function: adjective 1 : of or relating to groups of people with common traits and customs and a sense of shared identity \ 2 : of or relating to ethnics \ - eth·ni·cal·ly /-ni-k(-)l/ adverb Oxford online dictionary • adjective 1 relating to a group of people having a common national or cultural tradition. 2 referring to origin by birth rather than by present nationality: ethnic Albanians. 3 relating to a non-Western cultural tradition: ethnic music. — DERIVATIVES ethnically adverb ethnicity noun. — ORIGIN Greek ethnikos ‘heathen’, from ethnos ‘nation’. Newbury House dictionary ethnic /nk/ adj. related to group characteristics, such as race, country of origin, religion, or culture: The ethnic makeup of the USA is incredibly varied. -n. [C;U] ethnicity /nsti/ So, you and some other guys who don’t have dictionaries… ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [May 21, 2009, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/53 "2009-05-21T22:38:27Z")
Oh, never mind, didn’t read everything, apologies, :smack: ---
**Author:** ![magnusblitz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@magnusblitz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magnusblitz)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2009, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/54 "2009-05-22T00:37:24Z")
The problem is that the legislators have all their pet projects and other pork barrel stuff that no one wants to cut. So it’s a lot easier to just say “cut 10% of everything” instead of cutting all of worthless-item-A and keep all of needed-item-B. That’s why I get pissed off when Arnold said (paraphrasing) today that “Californians overwhelmingly rejected our propositions and said they want cuts to schools, law enforcement, etc.” No we don’t. We want the other, extraneous crap cut out; but no one in the government is willing to fight tooth-and-nail to completely excise the other stuff we don’t need in order to keep the schools and law enforcement running at a strong level. Next time we just need one proposition, one that says “vote everyone out of the Legislature.” ---
**Author:** ![Bearflag70](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2009, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/55 "2009-05-22T00:42:57Z")
Who would constitutional convention delegates be? ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2009, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/56 "2009-05-22T02:52:41Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > There seems to be this weirdly anarchist mentality in our state that you should only have to pay for what you, personally, are using right this second. In other words, never pay any taxes for anything. Meanwhile, the infrastructure is degenerating day by day. I’ve been working in the public sector, paying taxes, voting, and writing my legislators; I’ve been holding my students to high standards and encouraging them to participate in the system to improve it. If you have any ideas on what else I could do, I’d like to hear them, because I’m fresh out. Communist! ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2009, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/57 "2009-05-22T03:01:33Z")
> [@Soul\_Brother\_Number\_Two](#): > > I don’t understand the voter initiative thing. And I’ve been here 15 years. Does any other state pull this shit? We have referenda in Missouri. But I think we tend to tie the funding in as part of the proposition or amendment. Still gets a pretty cluttered state constitution, though. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2009, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/58 "2009-05-22T14:06:55Z")
> [@magnusblitz](#): > > The problem is that the legislators have all their pet projects and other pork barrel stuff that no one wants to cut. So it’s a lot easier to just say “cut 10% of everything” instead of cutting all of worthless-item-A and keep all of needed-item-B. Actually, the problem is that it takes more than a majority to make any changes to the budget, which makes any large minority group able to block cuts (or block revenue increases). We need to make it easier for the legislature to make the budget, and also easier to replace them when they screw up. > [@Bearflag70](#): > > Who would constitutional convention delegates be? I forget where I read it, but one plan is to use the jury list to pull delegates from the general population. Or at least to supplement the usual suspects. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2009, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/59 "2009-05-22T15:10:31Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > Actually, the problem is that it takes more than a majority to make any changes to the budget, which makes any large minority group able to block cuts (or block revenue increases). We need to make it easier for the legislature to make the budget, and also easier to replace them when they screw up. I don’t know if it’s cause & effect, or coincidence, but the system started to fall apart around the same time that term limits for state legislators went into effect. This kind of crap never happened when Jesse Unruh and Willie Brown were running things for decades at a time. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2009, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074/60 "2009-05-22T16:46:08Z")
I’m definitely against term limits–constituents need to be able to reelect good legislators. What I think needs to be changed is the gerrymandering system for creating districts. Districts should be formed based on population and compactness only, and not other things like party affiliation, race, income, etc. Either that or open primaries where all candidates compete in the primary and the top two advance to the general election. Both methods (singly or together) will prevent a single party from locking up a seat based on appealing to a minority of constituents rather than all of them. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-fellow-californians-and-our-legislature/497074.md?page=4)