California Special Election: Prop. 1F explained

What Proposition 1F would do: This measure would prevent pay raises for legislators and statewide officeholders in deficit years.

Quick take: Near the end of each fiscal year, the state finance director would determine whether the general fund is expected to run a deficit. Declaration of a deficit would mean the California Citizens Compensation Commission is not permitted to raise the salaries of top elected leaders, which currently range from $116,000 for legislators to $212,000 for the governor (Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger does not take his salary).

-- Evan Halper

Full text of the propositions

Recent coverage: Election Central

Links: May 19 Voter Guide | Find your polling place  | How the props are expected to do | Times endorsements

Discuss: Should the salaries of lawmakers and state constitutional officers be frozen when California is running a deficit?

Share your comments or upload a video with your answer here.

Comments

[Melinda Wiman]

I believe this proposition is bad for our state AND our country.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and even representatives saying they are in favor of it, (I believe the legislature has no nays) gave me pause and caused me to investigate it further.

I do not believe in amending the constitution for this kind of matter. It believe it is better to take other actions and not "feel good" or "thinking we have done something" measures. There are better ways to get our point across.

In 1990, didn't we vote for Prop 112 to handle the salary issue? This is another case of passing another law without looking into why the prior law didn't work the way we thought it would.

I do not believe this new amendment will help the situation, and in fact, I believe it will only make it worse for our state and other states.

It appears it was part of the "political blackmail" by Abel Maldonado, who pledged his deciding vote on passing massive tax increases in returns for some "demands" of his own - one of which was the placement of this ballot measure before the voters. I believe he sold us out and therefore I will not give him a victory by voting for it. We also need to keep an eye out for another proposition that will be on the June 2010 ballot. We know this happens all the time, but I believe this time, it is so obvious what happened that other politicians will see how easily it worked and jump on board with this tactic.

I don't doubt for a minute that this happened with Snow, Spector, and Collins - this kind of backroom deal. Voting for 1F, I believe it sets a very bad precedent for states. This could spread like wild fire through other states - ie: "If you agree to vote against what your party and constituents want, you will get rewarded with something you want."
I say instead of voting for this, kick them out and get honest people in. Fight them other ways, not by awarding Maldonado a win for what was an obvious backroom deal.

So, I am 100% opposed to this proposition.

All it does is allow a few legislators to pretend that they got something valuable in return for breaking their campaign promises. We get to pay tens of billions of dollars in new taxes while they brag that "future" legislators might not get raises.

So my vote is NO on all propositions. Do not let the Governor use threats to get us to change our vote.

[David Stein]

I truly feel that all government employees in this state should forfeit their salery every other week for two years. They could make ends meet. I also don't understand why we the tax payers have to buy their insurance.. they should have to pay for it just like the rest of us...And if they dont like it then get a job they are happy with

[Guillermo hernandez]

$116,000 for legislators to $212,000 for the governor (Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger does not take his salary).

the Gov. schwarzenegger gets his pay from special interests like big Insurance companies that pay him to fly back and forth from Bel-air to the capital . he gets millions from special interests, the 212.000 is chump change

[Racht]

This ballot is very fishy to me, why would they created 6 ballots in which the first 5 most likely to be voted down and here is Prop 1F which in seems like they want you to vote yes. Very suspicious to me

[Tannim]

What they're not telling you about Prop 1F:

There is a ballot initiative in circulation for signatures right now that is a constitutional amendment that provides that if the legislature and the governor can't get a balanced budget enacted by 120 days into the fiscal year, they are all automatically removed from office. If you see this petition, sign it ASAP!

Salary freeze is a drop in the bucket. Firing them for not doing their job--that's a message!

[monkeyboy]

The problem is that most government workers are overpaid. When you consider that many of them can work 20-30 years and then retire at current wages or higher and also receive medical, they are way overpaid compared to private sector. Many of the workers are also lazy, but I'm not sure if this is due to the workers personal work ethic or the inefficient management structure.

The people of California can no longer afford this waste. There are too many other important priorities that deserve funding.

Let's get someone in charge of state workers who's primary directive is to make them efficient, not to preserve inefficient organizations. Private firms go bankrupt when they don't make sense, goverment just sucks more money. It's really bas-ackwards.

[Michael]

On the one hand, perhaps we should torture them until they balance the budget. On the other hand, if these jobs get to sounding much less desirable, then the only people who will run for office are those who are owned by special interests. Actually, this may already be the case. Of course, it might help if more than 1% of voters actually knew their state representatives.

[Figgins]

@ Melinda Wiman

Why not vote for 1F, AND vote out Maldonado? Sure you've "held your nose" when voting before. If politicians see that the people will vote them out for betraying their constituents, they won't pull a stunt like Maldonado.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE MESS WE'RE IN, LOOK IN THE MIRROR TO FIND THE CULPRIT, and then vote the rats out!

[State Worker]

Now that the loser real estate and mortgage crowd (un-educated) and overpaid banking folks are making real money, less than $60k a year they want to bash state workers. State workers do not get bonuses and the only ones that get six figures are attys with 10 plus years experience and executive staff. So all the whining about people who make $40 - $60k a year is ignorant and silly. While everyone else had salaries that jumped through the rough in early 2000's, state workers saw no increase, in fact they lost money under Gray Davis and Arnie's done nothing for them either, there were no complaints about how much they made then, which is what they make now, just complaints from ignorant people who wanted all the rewards with no risk, now the state workers who take little job risk are public targets, please. Try being able to afford groceries if we didn't have illegal laborers working the farms and factories, deal with reality people.

[jojo]

Not only frozen but cut back!
They aren't worth what they receive now.

[Go Bruins]

What people are overlooking here, and why I implore you to vote no on this proposition, is that if a state legislators' raise in salary is dependent on running a "balanced" budget, there are many clever ways in which to make a budget look that way. I believe a proposition like this will promote even murkier accounting on the behalf of the state, something that in the end is more detrimental to the state than a salary increase for legislators.

[TechBro]

I think some of these posts are missing the point a bit (and I'm not trying to disrespect anyone here).

1) Should constitutional officers have their pay suspended if there is no budget? I think...maybe. My concern is this: you have some folks who are trying to do a good job and actually need their legislature salary to live on. Alternatively, you have some folks who are just there as a "stepping stone" and have independent income (say a small business or family wealth). In this case, all a salary freeze does is give additional leverage to a legislator who can afford to not be paid and weaken the one who needs the paycheck.

Don't get me wrong here; I'm more in favor of something like "for everyday the budget is late, someone from your district gets to kick you in the tucas as hard as they can." It can be sponsored by Foot Locker and be a pay per episode thing on iTunes. That way it can be morally satisfying and revenue generating.

As for the state workers are overpaid thing, I think you are generalizing. Are there some positions that are redundant or overpaid. Heck yeah! But we also have some folks who are underpaid on a current cash basis (compare what state scientists make to what folks with those same degrees can make at a biomed firm, not counting stock shares). The tradeoff for those folks is a much better retirement system.

Ask yourself this: do we really want to cut the pay of state engineers by 50% and remove all benefit packages? Exactly who do you expect to get to inspect the bridges and tunnels then? Our "best and brightest" would never even consider it, because they could never recover the cost of the education. This should remind you of the delima of finding good teachers: many capable folks don't think it's worth the compensation.

BTW, I'm a private sector guy who has worked in the public and non-profit sectors, so I've tasted both the honey and lemons of each.

These are tough choices, but anyway you slice it, we have to keep sharing our thoughts and ideas and make those hard decisions together.

[James J. Corboy]

Our California legislatures have failed in their jobs and they should pay be for their failure by freezing their salaries at a minimum, but we should also enact across the board pay cuts for all legislatures.

[Roberta Freeman]

No raises for government workers. They should be taking a pay cut. How long am I going to be waiting for my state tax return? That is my money the state is holding on to. A shameful way to do business.

[John E McCue]

The response should be "Yes". But not only should our elected officials be held accountable for their management of the state, all business and military leaders should be held accountable as well.
The notion that the poor and the average person should be made to suffer while the leaders who were to blame do not, seems to be following the system in place for royalty and slave owners.
The capitan of a ship should suffer what the passengers and crew members do, but, should, also, be the last one to leave a sinking ship. Some thing has happened to the values of our society.

[Eulalia Luevano]

Not sure what rock David Stein crawled out from but here is another thought. I am a State Worker, my husband was forced out of his job. He wasn't layed off so we can't get unemployment, he is a few years away from SS. I bring home $1950. per month, mortgage is $950. So I am trying to pay necessary bills & live on $1000/month and you bonehead want me to give up every other week of salary? Give me your address because well be moving in w/you.

[Gimme A BREAK!]

Sacramento needs a terminal enema! ONLY a TOTAL replacement of these self-serving goons will CHANGE our lives. Schwatzaneggar's ill-conceived plan to see California's CROWN JEWELS for peanut shells, just goes to show you, how lame and INCOMPETENT all these political flunkies are at leadership and management..... IF you don't like this posting, tell us WHAT YOU'RE SO PROUD OF, with this crop of geriatric incumbent crooks.

[SoCalGirl]

Those in office shouldn't be allowed to make any more then 3x the poverty level...they want more money then they need to work at getting the poverty level up! Take care of the people, that is what you were elected for.

[rudi gomez]

The State Legislators have not earned their keep for the last 10 years or more. Partisian politics has led to nothing more than these freeloaders paying themselves and their staffs well and making homes for those who have been termed out. It's time to get rid of the whole damn bunch of them and go back to a part time legislative body.....Pay raises! they should not recieve any pay when they cannot and will not pass a budget and keep it balanced.

[Rick & David McGilton-McGlamery]

Not only should their raises be frozen, but they also should freeze their pay & benefits when there's a deficit and a budget isn't passed

[docvee]

My company is NOT loosing money and my salary has been frozen. Why should our incompetent lawmakers have pay increases while the state buget is running at a decifit? It certainly does not require a rocket scientist IQ to see something is wrong with the premise of giving a pay raise when your job preformance rating is unsatisfactory.

[Know it all]

It is not capitalism that has failed, but the political systems in place in the United States. Politicians, snidely lawyers and business lobbyists run the show. Only a small fraction of the citizens even vote. The ballots are filled with rigged language designed to make the politicians beneficiaries and to harm the public. Politicians only work on being re-elected to power and continuing their fat paychecks and perks. The majority of us just sit back in ignorance and only cry out in vein when gross incompetence is revealed, but we do nothing to fix it. It is the tightly controlled system that the very few can manage to dominate.

[Chuck]

Freezing their salaries would be a nice start, but it doesn't go nearly far enough. They should simply not be paid during a deficit, with their salaries being returned to the general fund to help correct the situation.

[JaneE]

All expenditures should be frozen, not just salaries. The only exception should be for emergencies like fires and earthquakes. Essential services should be maintained and the rest cut or eliminated. Essential should mean just that. If people die without it, it is essential. Otherwise not.

[rob]

Not only salaries frozen, but don't you think they should take a cut?? Say 10%

[Cat]

Unhappy with the salaries that legislators make? Then when they come up for re-election VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE. Some of you that are whining must not have read what's written up there especially those of you that are state workers it says Elected Officals. Not to mention that I sure hope you are reading this from home and not the office on the TAXPAYER'S DIME. If you have time to read the newspaper from your desk then you don't have enough work to do and the taxpayers money is being wasted. Get mad at me I don't care its stuff like this that makes taxpayers upset. If, as a state worker you don't make enough money then why on earth are you still there??? Why didn't you leave a longtime ago and go to a job that pays you more money??? We as Californians are at fault for letting our state workers run roughshod over us. Let's unite and VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE. Make sure they understand we are sick and tired of it. Don't vote republican, don't vote democrate, vote for what's best for the California taxpayer. Do state workers ever think about where their paychecks come from??? The California Taxpayer. There was one lady on here who was upset because her husband lost/quit his job and couldn't get unemployment. Well I'm sorry for your troubles but giving you a raise is out of the question as you see I've been taxed so much by the state I can't afford to pay my bills let alone yours. We are going to have to bite the bullet here and do away with some of the programs our state has. I have no idea which ones, but something has to be done. My son is a state worker and I'd hate for him to lose his job, but you know what I have to live too.

[Sark in the 951]

I was a county worker for the Medi-Cal program. Starting pay was 13.10 per hour and I can tell you that after taxes, union dues and other deductions necessary to be a government worker there is not much left. I quit the job that I worked so hard to get (numerous tests, several panel interviews, a health physical- hard to pass being overweight!) because I could not survive on state worker salary. The cuts should come from the politicians and their staff, not the average everyday state /county worker- the little people arent living the high life. Cuts have to be made in the correct places to be effective, so please dont think that the DMV or Welfare workers are getting rich- they are not. Sark in the 951

[z]

I feel for people in CA my mother is there and I feel like she and a lot of other people need to run and really let them feel the pressure of money. The people are going to be hurting you pay taxes and then get a piece of paper in the mail, you cannot even get what you put in there are surrounding state that are better off.

[thecanimalshusband]

We need to support our public servants. Why else would they refer to themselves "public servants"?

[Abboy,Ramadas]

Reg. ENDORSEMENTS 2009
Props must fail and endure drastic cuts.Dont you know?

[Robert NO longer in LA]

GLAD to see sooooo many ANGRY Californians QUESTIONING the contemptible politicians!! Sadly CAT et al, most voters will ID with a Party....NEVER with people!!! MOST IMPORTANT: read the Fortune mag piece on BUSTED RETIREMENT systems - you've been a loyal state/city/county/ worker DOING your job....well, almost NO STATE can AFFORD to pay you what you were promised!!! But the politicians skim OFF THE TOP = NEVER have to take a pay nor benefits cut. KICJ OUT EVERY INCUMBENT whose been in office over 12 years - they've become PARASITES! It's YOU and your children their feasting upon.....vote smarter and if you don't vote, in order to show you're disgust? VOTE, you idiot!

[Scott Riley]

Finally, a real chance for California to turn the corner.

I grew up in California, back when the state made sense. It has not made sense for about 20 years. It used to receive the admiration of Americans in other states. Now it's mostly an object of derision.

California is to fiscal irresponsibility what Chicago is to political corruption.

Since the Democrats have overrun the state government, its credit rating and fiscal health have gone into the toilet.

The centerpiece and driving motivation of Democratic spending and taxing policy is this:

SOMEONE ELSE SHOULD PAY FOR MY STUFF.

Led by the Democrats, California has been on a spending binge for more than a decade. Look at the results.

California in 1970s and 1980s was arguably the greatest place to live on the planet. Then the Democrats took over and spending went out of control. Regulation went out of control. Taxes went out of control.

By 2003, California was having trouble keeping the power on.

By 2005, for the first time ever, California was losing large numbers of its productive classes to other states. California was no longer the great state of opportunity.

But, in the face of these danger signs, the Democrats went right on spending and taxing, doing and compounding the very things that put the state in such a mess.

Now, it appears that, finally, Californians have had enough. And let's hope they reject the Democratic games with the budget. Let's get the state to confront these realities:

1. That you can't spend more than what you have; even if you are Californian, the laws of economics and simple arithmetic still apply to you.

2. That you cannot punish the wealth-creating citizens and just expect them to stay and take that abuse, in order to finance the Fantasyland economics of the Democrats in Sacramento.

3. That California's greatness is not found in any of its government programs--remember, it became the greatest place on earth *without* them--but in the essential premise that Californians should decide their destiny for themselves.

That is what the Democrats have taken from Californians. When the government puts you in hock for the next generation, as the Democrats have done, you lose freedom to shape your own destiny.

More deeply, however, the May 19 election is about self-respect.

When the Democrats require you to pay for insanely bloated public unions, it makes you the doormat of those special interests. With each and every tax increase passed by the Democrats, they wipe their feet on you.

The Democrats' spending binge has been a contemptuous and continuous epithet aimed at California's taxpayers.

That is why California is today in such dire straits. That's the choice on Tuesday. Will Californians opt to become Californians again, or will they vote to become like the broke and broken states of the Northeast and Midwest?

We'll see.

[Mike Sanders]

When we voted for Arnold, He said he was going to get Ca. out of the red. Well when is this going to happen.

[David U]

The politicians in Sacramento do what their constituents want them to do, they vote the way you tell them. Fact is the Democrats are unwilling to make cuts and the
republicans are unwilling to raise taxes to pay for the services that the voters do not want cut. You the voters have passed proposition after proposition taking control of the budget away from the legislature. Over 85% of the budget is mandated by propositions. The controller has to pay the schools first and the bonds and other loans second or the state will default. What is left over is what can be spent on programs and services. If these propositions fail there will be a $14billion deficit. Be prepared to do without.
You recalled Davis because he was trying to balance the budget, now Arnold is in the same place. It is not the politicians, it is you the voters who are responsible. You did it, now you need to face the consequences.

[elleneyegreen]

Maldonado - another reason not to vote Latino. Corrupt Mexican politics on our side of the border as usual, no thanks.
Yes, I agree with voting them out of office instead of this hogwash. We vote on myriads of "Propositions" yet never see them make any difference whatsoever - except "affirmative action" which needs to be trashed. Haven't seen a sensible Proposition on the ballot here for decades...

[Tim Smith]

I agree with most people that these ballot measures are a complete waste of time, although, it sounds like I disagree with them for different reasons. I disagree that this was done to us by greedy politicians. Most of this we did to ourselves through the initiative process.

California is experiencing a cyclical budget deficit... depressed property prices yield lower property tax revenues, etc., but more than this, California is experiencing a structural budget deficit. Our tax base is horribly misaligned with our economy. State and local governments' two main revenue sources are property tax and sales tax. We, the voters, artificially capped property tax revenues in 1978 when we enacted Prop. 13, which also required the State legislature to have a two-thirds majority to pass a budget. As a result of this latter provision, the Legislature can not pass a budget without the majority (Democrats) making huge concessions to the minority (Republicans). Hence, the rest of our tax code makes no sense either.

We give tax breaks to certain individuals and industries that do not benefit the state as a whole, such as the S-corp tax break and the recently enacted motion picture industry tax break. We are one of the only states in the nation that does not have an oil severance tax. We tax goods but not services, which is really stupid when you consider that we have a service based economy, and even the goods we tax don't make any sense. As an example, we tax hot food but not cold food.

We need to reform the budget by making our tax structure make sense - I have a number of ideas for that - and we need to reform the budget and initiative processes. The minority of voters should never hold sway over the majority in any legislative process. The budget process in no exception. Furthermore, legislators should be allowed to do their jobs. Through the initiative process, we have told them they can only tax us so much, and then told them later that they have to spend so much money on education. What happens when we require them to spend more than we make? This is dumb. Let them do their jobs.

I guess that the bottom line in my opinion is that voters shouldn't be voting on anything that doesn't impact the nucleus of the state constitution, such as individual rights or the structure and authority of governments. Moreover, when voters are presented with a proposition, the initiatives' authors should be permitted to do a snow job on the voters. The propositions should enact one change, not several, and each of California's three branches of government should provide analyses of the issues, not the people who are trying to get us to vote for or against them.

Those are just my opinions. Maybe I'm wrong.

[Robert NO longer in LA]

Tim Smith... your logic stops short of reality, I'm afraid. The REASON Californians initiated and passed ALL those Props is because the Legislature/Gov, haven't been doing ANYTHING different for 50 years; rewarding campaign contributors, special interests and VICTIMIZING the people. Do you remember property taxes back in the 70s? Do you see how MUCH prison guards make, and yet, drugs flow into prisons unimpeded.....the Times could FILL an ENTIRE MONTH of this publication re-hashing ALL the nefarious sweetheart deals, BOTH Parties engage in all year long. Sadly, much of the electorate, ID themselves NOT as citizens, but MEMBERS of a Party....like Dem Communists and Rep Nazis. FLUSH the political toilet in 2010 and 2012.

[curt]

Doesn't go far enough. The legislature should be returned to part-time status and not even be eligible for full-time benefits.

This way they won't have as much time to mess things up.

Now, if only we can do that do that to the national level.

[jim]

its time our over inflated state government cut jobs and salarys
yes i said it right.... no more borrowing or selling CUT BACK
there is way to many people in state goverment

[Ron Beyer]

many have it right, that this freeze on raises does NOT go far enough.
In addition to the freeze of salaries during deficit years, All legislator salaries should be WITHHELD indefinitely if a BALNCED BUDGET is not passed ON TIME!

Further, if a deficit occurs, the SALARIES and the personal assets OF THE LEGISLATORS should be confiscated and liquidated to make up for the shortfall.

THEN they will FINALLY understand what the rest of us in this state face when we overspend and mismanage our resources.
This stae makes up 40% plus of the entire US GDP.
What these legislators with their partisan politics and narrow-minded selfish irresponsible pork-for-me-and -screw-everyone-else mentalities have done to this state's economy and finances is supremely shameful and aught to be illegal, ppunishable by decades worth of hard jail time,(not the club-Fed resort communities they normally get.)

[Tanned Californian]

I think 1F is a silly gimmick of a proposition.

Here is a proposition I would like to see some day: that all propositions will be limited to 300 words or less and their only purpose can be to amend the California constitution.

That way, the people would be voting only on general principles and the Legislature would have the proper job of implementing the will of the people in detail. Then, people would actually be able to read what they are voting for. And it would stop this silliness of propositions about anything and everything. With all these propositions, California will soon be totally ungovernable.

[James Meredith]

What about the salaries of those in the government that make well above $116,000? There are government positions paying $400,000 and more. Proposition1F is a joke like all the other propositions. This also should have gotten a NO vote. If Schwarzenegger is for it I am against it. I can't believe we elected this bozo.

[doublespeak]

You guys did great.

When in doubt, vote NO.

propositions always have legalese doublespeak to fool the voters; you end up voting for the opposite you intended too.

let em suffer. State representatives should make less than 50k per year; and limits on political contributions should be 2,000 or less.

[Emanon]

You Dunb Asses! who voted for him...reap what you sow!...

[Achillea]

All you folks who've voted 'yes' on bond issues over the years, quit your bitchin'. You're just as responsible for this mess as the politicians.

[Frank Schroeder]

Let's begin tax cuts of that portion that pays 9 billion to ILLEGAL aliens!!

[California Resident]

1F means that politicians now have a personal financial insentive to raise taxes so that the state does not have a deficit. Why do people have so much trouble understanding this?