Read the for and against arguments regarding prop 25. Would a yes vote put the minority at risk? Would a no vote put the majority at the mercy of the few? Which argument seems more reasonable? Why? Predict the impact of a yes or no vote.
8 Comments
Liam Van Keuren
9/14/2010 04:26:51 am
This will help the states get in the budget quicker which will help the nation in the long run. This will also help one of the ongoing problems in the US theat democracy is to slow, this will speed the process of the budget, which is a positive. A yes vote I belive will benefit the states especially California considering we are months late.
Reply
G. Martin
9/14/2010 03:24:43 pm
A "yes" vote on proposition 25 would not necessarily put the minority at risk as long as this group has ligitimate reasons to deviate from the proposed budget. On the other hand, however, a "no" vote may result in legislative gridlock like California has experienced last year. While proposition 25 appears to be a good idea on the surface, serious flaws become evident once more information is sought. While proposition 25 claims to retain the current 2/3 vote requirement for taxes, this does not seem to be the case: "On August 5, 2010, a Superior Court judge ruled that Prop 25 did not maintain the 2/3rds requirement to raise taxes."* As the actual verbage states: "Notwithstanding any other provision of law … bills providing for appropriations related to the budget may be passed [by] a majority."* Appropriation is defined as "a deliberate act of acquisition of something, often without the permission of the owner,"** which shows a hidden agenda of the proposition. In other words, Prop. 25 is a Trojan horse that, if passed by the voters, will allow state legislators to raise taxes hidden as fees through a single majority, while posing as a common sense solution for budget gridlocks. If Prop. 25 passes, the impact would be catastrophic to California, as it will open the doors to unbridled taxation by politicians, thus crippling whatever has remained of our economy.
Reply
Rubi Pelayo
9/15/2010 11:01:07 am
I believe that a "yes" vote wouldn't put the minority at risk since people aren't okay with spending more money on taxes and paying the consequences for a late budget. A "no" vote for the most part would only affect politicians as they are the ones who are being irresponsible with making sure that the budget is on time and it seems pretty fair as it's not the citizens obligation to pay for the mistakes of the government. Although a "yes" vote is more appealing, I think that there might be a catch to prop. 25 such as hidden fees because it seems to good to be true that politicians are willing to pay for their own mistakes. In these economic times I don't think that anyone wants to have such a big responsiblity to own up to if something goes wrong. If Prop. 25 were to pass, I believe that we will fall into another trap filled of promises for a better future. Prop. 25 just isn't strong enough to solve all the problems in our economy.
Reply
Dakota Rose
9/15/2010 11:19:16 am
Upon reading both the afore-mentioned arguments For and Against and the subsequent rebuttals to those arguments, alongside the full Proposition 25 "Passing The Budget On Time Act of 2010"*, I have seen no evidence that the passing of Prop 25 would in any instance give Legislators the power to pass "secretive" and "hidden" tax laws. Furthermore, nowhere in the legislature does it even hint toward giving the legislators power to reimburse themselves for lost pay. The rebuttal firmly states that Prop 25 will "Lower the vote requirement for the LEGISLATURE TORAISE SALES, INCOME AND GAS TAXES." Having read the legislature of the Proposition, this is completely and utterly false. Also, throughout their entire during their own Rebuttal and their own Argument, those against do not say anything other than "Raising taxes" and "giving politicians the power to reimburse themselves." Nothing more. All they do is reword those statements. In fact, Proposition 25 clearly states that whenever lawmakers fail to pass the budget on time, they forfeit their pay and shall not receive any reimbursements. In response to the specific questions, it is normally the minority that is the problem for passing the budget. Thus, they are at risk, but it is tolerable as it allows for the budget to be passed on time and without the addition of others' agendas. Also, a no vote WOULD put the majority at risk, as it is already underpowered by the few. I personally think that the Yes argument is the more reasonable, for it eliminates the ability of the minority to put a stop to the budget and further damaging California. However, I do fear that although the Yes vote is more reasonable and better for California, because the majority of voters will not read the full version of Prop 25, it is likely that it will not pass. With those against yelling, in all capitals, about raising taxes and secret agendas that do not appear in the actual legislation. The people are too uninformed to make a proper decision, and will likely allow Prop 25 to be voted away. The consequences of that are the same as what we see now with the budget: it will be held up by the minority until that minority is able to add what they want into the budget and thus receive all the money and other provisions they need.
Reply
Gaby rulon
9/15/2010 12:49:18 pm
To be honest I do not believe a yes vote will affect the minority substantially. I believe most of those opposed to prop 25 would be legislators and those affected by a cut in their pay check due to late budgets. The majority of the public would lose more if they were left at the mercy of the few, because if legislatures had it their way they would take their time on passing the budget without any cuts in their paycheck while other Californian jobs and businesses suffered from this late budget. By refusing to pay the legislatures for every day the budget is late they will realize the effects that their indecisiveness has on American businesses and jobs. The direct consequences of passing a late budget will cause legislatures to become less argumentative in this process in order to pass the budget on time. Therefore a yes vote on prop 25 will help businesses, schools and jobs in California.
Reply
Diane Meyer
9/15/2010 04:19:07 pm
Throughout my entire life, I have been forced to made deadlines wether it be at school or at a job. If I don't turn a school assignment in on time I get a bad grade, if I don't complete a task at job, I am in jeopardy of being fired. However, when it comes to passing a budget which affects the lives of millions of people throughout California, there is no consequences for those who do meet the deadline. Therefore, a yes vote on Prop 25 will not put the minority at risk. It merely makes legislators accountable for their actions. If they pass the budget on time, then they will still receive a full paycheck, if not, then that is merely a consequence of not taking the time to work together to find a fit solution for the budget. The fate of the legislators' salary rests in their own hands.
Reply
Matt Myers
9/16/2010 03:18:22 am
A 'yes' vote would in-fact put the minority, being the legislatures, at risk. If anything it would only benefit the general public and small businesses. A 'no' vote would put the public at the mercy of a few politicians. The more pheasible action to take would be voting 'yes'. The impact of voting 'no' could cause repeat action of the millions in IOU's issued to small businesses. In our current economic crisis this could cause much trouble for unstable mom-pop companies.
Reply
Annalotta Saarikoski
9/16/2010 03:20:50 pm
I think 'yes' vote on the prop25 is good because it's more fair and the budget will be ready faster. And therefore people know what their budget is going to be for the year for example the schools will know how much money they have to pay to the teachers.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Mr. LPart teacher/part entertainer/ part coach/ part task master Archives
November 2014
Categories |