democraciaparticipativa.net

You must register for posting. It's free! Find the Login Form in the left column.
Debe registrarse para publicar en el "Login Form" de la izquierda. ¡Es gratis!

FORO PARTICIPATIVO / PARTICIPATIVE FORUM
home \| post reply \| threaded view \| help

Boardwalk :: Forum List

Foros

Estados Unidos / United States of America

Democracia Participativa Net
User

Posts: 9

Should voters decide on expenditures and budgets? - 2008/10/16 13:13 Iniciativa Cultural pro Democracia Participativa, Inc.
Madrid ? Miami ? Caracas

The case before Arizona's voters

Arizona's citizens are being asked to vote in referendum to make it harder for voters to pass ballot measures that result in higher spending or taxes. If approved, the Constitution of Arizona would require such measures to have the support of a majority of registered voters -not just those who cast a ballot- in order to become law.

Such measures affecting all citizens often turn into law or even succeed to introduce a State Constitutional reform with the approval of a stark minority successfully mobilized to obtain enough votes to pass the reform initiative. This Constitutional initiative would require the approval of over 50% of registered voters in Arizona for such measures to pass in the future. Perhaps other States will follow Arizona's lead.

The use of referenda to legitimize decisions affecting public spending and budgetary measures are gradually becoming widespread in many democracies. Such participatory citizens intervention limits abusive waste for political goals.

However, some consider that Arizona's Proposition 105 goes too far. It may be so. A better alternative might be to require a super majority of those who vote, which would be a minimum support by 60%, 66% or even 75% of those casting a ballot. Democracy may be better served if those opting out would realize that they'll be effectively surrendering their influence in decision-making by failing to exercise their right to vote.

Here's the full text of Arizona's proposed Constitutional amendment:
______________________________

Fiscal responsibility through true majority rule

To preserve and protect the right of the people to fiscal responsibility through true majority rule, an initiative measure that establishes, imposes or raises a tax, fee, or other revenue, or mandates a spending obligation, whether on a private person, labor organization, other private legal entity or this state, shall not become law unless the measure is approved by a majority of qualified electors then registered to vote in this state.
_______________________________

What is your view on these issues? We invite you to express your opinions on this and related topics by answering this message or opening a new post. In order to do so you must register first [<< see under LOGIN FORM in the left column and click on No account yet? Create one]. It is easy, it is free and your privacy is always safe with us!

ParticipatoryDemocracy.net
-

| | The administrator has disabled public write access.

Marcos Villasmil
User

Posts: 80

Re:Should voters decide on expenditures and budgets? - 2008/10/16 15:05 This is quite an interesting subject. Thanks for bringing this matter to our attention.

Let me start by stating -in a very simplified fashion- my position on issues like this:

a) I believe in small government; I also generaly believe that money will be better in citizens´pockets that under the supervision, control and spending decisions of bureaucrats. However, of course, there are always exceptions, and there exist many areas of political action in which governmental spending must be enforced; I do not believe in fixed, draconian rules regarding budgetary policies. A budget is a means, not an end in itself.

b) I am not a believer that all, or most decisions regarding taxes and budgets mut be imposed and certainly not pre-determined. Flexibility, according to the circumstances of the moment, is better than, for example, the well-known California´s decisions via referenda, by which, today, the state´s budget is plagued with impositions defining in advance many expenditures and allocations. It is simply crazy.

Another egregious example is TABOR (Colorado´s Taxpayers´Bill of Rights), that mandates a popular vote on any tax increase, strictly limits over-all government growth, and requires that budget surpluses be returned to taxpayers via rebate checks. This initiative served as a model for small government conservatives nationwide. However, in 2004 Colorado faced a large fiscal crisis, with a budget deficit of almost one billion dollars, which threatened, among other things, a cut in funding for higher education by a third. Many months of discussion followed, especially inside the different Republican groups. As a result, with Republicans divided, a ballot measure to suspend TABOR rule for five years was approved, allowing the government to use budget surpluses for health care, education, and transportation rather than refunding them to taxpayers.

Going back to the first paragraph: I believe in traditional, conservative visions of how government must act. But, I also believe in common sense at the moment of decision-making, and I certainly do not want elected officials, maybe having the best and most creative ideas to face the present crisis, with their hands tied by mandatory decisions regarding budgets, taxes, and how they are implemented, distributed and enforced.

| | The administrator has disabled public write access.

Gerardo E. Martínez-Solanas

Admin

Posts: 323

Re:Should voters decide on expenditures and budgets? - 2008/10/22 19:02 I practically agree in principle with mostly everything that Marcos is saying here. Referendum is often abused for administrative decisions that should be left to those elected officials conducting the policies mandated by their electors. Therefore the practice of Referendum should be reserved for important and controversial decisions and for cases of popular outcry caused by bad policies.

On the question of budgets, however, we all face in many countries the many excessive and politically motivated expenditures at national, regional and/or local levels that are prompting such popular outcries. Citizens are using their democratic powers to introduce legislative initiatives on budgetary constraints to stop such waste of their taxpayer's money. Everybody knows that in times of surplus, politicians increase expenditures on their own volition and for their own benefit on the popular favor they perceive such waste will translate into more votes in future elections. Politicians seldom (if ever) save budgetary surpluses to be allocated in special accounts reserved for eventual fiscal crisis. Therefore, taxpayers are demanding a tax refund in such cases. They all believe that each one of them is a better judge on how to spend their own money. After all, any budget is based on taxpayer's money.

Even if Marcos and I agree in principle, I do not see why citizens may not use their democratic powers to decide whether budgetary expenditures should rise or not. Such a mandate forces government officials to promote budgetary increases in an open public debate. If there is a good reason for the additional expenditures, voters would perceive its benefits and approve them forthright. The same reasoning applies to tax increases.

| | The administrator has disabled public write access.

Boardwalk :: Forum List Foros Estados Unidos / United States of America