{"id":8441,"date":"2009-04-02T17:04:46","date_gmt":"2009-04-02T17:04:46","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2009-04-02T17:30:39","modified_gmt":"2009-04-02T17:30:39","slug":"legislative-counsel-rules-that-majority-vote-package-was-aok","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/2009\/04\/02\/legislative-counsel-rules-that-majority-vote-package-was-aok\/","title":{"rendered":"Legislative Counsel Rules that Majority Vote Package Was A-OK"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Back in December, the Legislature passed <a href=https:\/\/calitics.com\/showDiary.do?diaryId=7708>a revenue measure that would have raised about $18 Billion<\/a>. It was ultimately vetoed by Arnold in a fit of pique because he didn&#8217;t get all the business concessions he wanted. &nbsp;That the changes would have helped save a bucket o&#8217; cash in interest payments seemed a minor matter to the Governator. The Republicans promptly sued to block the measure as a violation of the 2\/3 rules on taxes, but we never got an opinion from the court as the case was rendered moot by the veto.<\/p>\n<p>Flash forward to this week. The Legislative Counsel released an opinion, though non-binding on any court that might happen upon the case, that says the majority vote package was legal:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The March 9 opinion from Legislative Counsel Diane Boyer-Vine, addressed to Gov. Schwarzenegger, reaffirms a 2003 opinion by her office that finds a bill that raises one tax and lowers another by an equal or greater amount only needs simple majority votes in each legislative house.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We think that a tax bill is not subject to the two-thirds vote requirement if the cumulative effect of the &#8216;changes in state taxes&#8217; &#8230; when considered in their entirety would be neutral or would produce a net decrease in state tax revenues,&#8221; her March 9 opinion states. (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.capitolweekly.net\/article.php?_c=xvnrcvsnmg51xj&#038;xid=xvm2brzil6pajf&#038;done=.xvnrcvsnmgo1xj\">Capitol Weekly 4\/2\/09<\/a>) <\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This might serve a valuable purpose were we to a) get a Democratic Governor or b) get Arnold over the proverbial barrel far enough so that he would sign it. &nbsp;If you recall, Sen. Abel &#8220;Me, Me, Me&#8221; Maldonado got the gas tax increases cut out of the package when it was ultimately passed, resulting in a loss to the state coffers in the billions range. In theory, we could try again with a similar, though perhaps not quite as large, package to move an environmentally friendly revenue measure.<\/p>\n<p>With luck, we won&#8217;t need to raise any revenue for this fiscal year. However, it is looking like we might need oh, about $8 billion for the 2009-2010 FY, and the way the polling is looking on the special election, that might not help either. &nbsp;We need to pursue creative solutions to our revenue problem, and this might be one of them.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Back in December, the Legislature passed <a href=https:\/\/calitics.com\/showDiary.do?diaryId=7708>a revenue measure that would have raised about $18 Billion<\/a>. It was ultimately vetoed by Arnold in a fit of pique because he didn&#8217;t get all the business concessions he wanted. &nbsp;That the changes would have helped save a bucket o&#8217; cash in interest payments seemed a minor matter to the Governator. The Republicans promptly sued to block the measure as a violation of the 2\/3 rules on taxes, but we never got an opinion from the court as the case was rendered moot by the veto.<\/p>\n<p>Flash forward to this week. The Legislative Counsel released an opinion, though non-binding on any court that might happen upon the case, that says the majority vote package was legal:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The March 9 opinion from Legislative Counsel Diane Boyer-Vine, addressed to Gov. Schwarzenegger, reaffirms a 2003 opinion by her office that finds a bill that raises one tax and lowers another by an equal or greater amount only needs simple majority votes in each legislative house.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We think that a tax bill is not subject to the two-thirds vote requirement if the cumulative effect of the &#8216;changes in state taxes&#8217; &#8230; when considered in their entirety would be neutral or would produce a net decrease in state tax revenues,&#8221; her March 9 opinion states. (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.capitolweekly.net\/article.php?_c=xvnrcvsnmg51xj&#038;xid=xvm2brzil6pajf&#038;done=.xvnrcvsnmgo1xj\">Capitol Weekly 4\/2\/09<\/a>) <\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This might serve a valuable purpose were we to a) get a Democratic Governor or b) get Arnold over the proverbial barrel far enough so that he would sign it. &nbsp;If you recall, Sen. Abel &#8220;Me, Me, Me&#8221; Maldonado got the gas tax increases cut out of the package when it was ultimately passed, resulting in a loss to the state coffers in the billions range. In theory, we could try again with a similar, though perhaps not quite as large, package to move an environmentally friendly revenue measure.<\/p>\n<p>With luck, we won&#8217;t need to raise any revenue for this fiscal year. However, it is looking like we might need oh, about $8 billion for the 2009-2010 FY, and the way the polling is looking on the special election, that might not help either. &nbsp;We need to pursue creative solutions to our revenue problem, and this might be one of them.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[117],"tags":[3707,152],"class_list":["post-8441","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-117","tag-3707","tag-152"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6Pvhz-2c9","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8441","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8441"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8441\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/calitics.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}