After a couple of rounds of voting in the legislature, enough votes in both houses were eventually found to reach the 2/3 mark needed to pull Prop 18 from the November ballot and delay it until 2012:
The California Legislature voted Monday night to pull the $11 billion water bond from November’s ballot and delay it for two years, a move that came as backers of the proposal became increasingly concerned about its prospects at the polls.
The full Senate approved the delay of Prop. 18 by a 27-7 vote, barely reaching the necessary two-thirds majority of the 40-member Senate, and the issue moved to the Assembly, where late Monday night it also passed by the slimmest of margins in that 80-person house, with a 54-22 vote.
Some water bond opponents, like Senator Lois Wolk (SD-05) called for the bond to be kept on the November ballot, in hopes that it would go down in flames this year, instead of living to fight another day two years from now. Instead Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s position prevailed, and supporters will try again in 2012.
This year turned out to not be so good for the water bond. The relatively cool and wet weather the state has experienced in 2010 eased the drought, to a degree, removing some sense of urgency for passing the bond. Nationwide Republican criticisms of deficit spending hurt its chances with GOP voters here in California, and Democratic voters were increasingly split as some environmental groups opposed the details of the proposal, including new dams and replumbing of the Delta to fuel sprawl elsewhere in the state.
It’s hard to see how the $11 billion proposal will fare much better in 2012. Unless the drought returns with a vengeance, unless Republican voters suddenly become comfortable with deficit spending for something other than wars and tax cuts for the rich, and unless Democratic voters become less wary of the possible environmental impacts of the bond – all in the space of two years – I’m not so sure the bond will fare all that better.
And with a new governor, the bond itself could change significantly in scope and content before going to the 2012 ballot.
Other bond proposals have passed even after repeated delays, such as the $10 billion high speed rail bond, which voters approved in November 2008 as Prop 1A. It was originally to have gone to voters in November 2004, then in November 2006, but was delayed so as to not conflict with other bond votes. Ultimately it worked out pretty well for us high speed rail supporters, as the 2008 gas price spike helped convince Californians of the need for an alternative means of getting around the state that doesn’t rely on oil.
Barring some similar shift – like a drought relapse – it doesn’t seem like the $11 billion water bond will have any better chance in 2012 than it does this year. But we will apparently get the chance to find out. Guess I’d better set up the “Election 2012” category here at Calitics…
but I guess I don’t mind waiting.
I think if they want something like this to pass, it needs a substantial rewrite.
Thank Valero for Prop 18 going off the ballot. The oil companies challenge to a key environmental law that the Governor saw as his legacy was the final straw to cause a delay. The economy, the relatively wet year, a small but vigorous group of opponents, combined made this a tough sell but it was doable…but with the Governor checking out, the money wasn’t there to pass it this year. A good deal of money was already spent on it although God knows what it got spent on except consultant fees.
Who knows whether 2012 will be better—but its clear that the opponents of the bond, who couldn’t even muster more than 1/3 of the votes, feared it might be better, hence their almost universal opposition to moving the bond to 2012. An improved economy, more evidence of global warming and drought, some changes to the bond to get rid of water taxi issues, and some progress on the Delta preservation issues that will follow from the legislation that passed,should make 2012 a better year, but as I said, who knows for sure.