Tuesday, we Californians faced another special election. Yes, another. As you probably know, this one addressed the state budget crisis, primarily through taxation, loans, and endless terminological juggling. The sentiment (both before and after) was largely against the measures, and that included me. My dilemma: I am a California school district employee — a dreaded state worker.
I’ve endured the union propaganda, and numerous heart-wrenching speeches and commercials about how the failure of these measures will virtually doom thousands of poor people, sick people, and California children. The prisons will be emptied, fires will burn uncontrolled, and the politicians in Sacramento will have to cut caviar and veal cutlets from their free luncheons.
And, of course, my job could get nixed.
Maybe I’m dense, but these threats don’t really bother me — at least not enough to vote to increase taxes. Again. What bothers me is seeing a bloated, inept, out-of-control government, stagger from one trough to the next, unwilling to look in the mirror and address the monstrosity it has become. Will these morons ever get the message?
So I voted “no” and it felt a lot like shooting myself in the foot.
Magan McCardle, in a piece for The Atlantic entitled Is California Too Big Too Fail?, speculates on the ultimate outcome of the special election:
California will go bankrupt, muni and state debt will spike, the federal government will backstop humanitarian programs and very possibly all state and local debt, and eventually, California will figure out whether it wants higher taxes or lower spending. But we will not actually make the world a better place by enabling the lunatics in Sacramento to pretend they can have both.
I’d like to think my “no” vote was a matter of principle. I mean, should I vote to raise taxes just to keep my job? Frankly, there’s a lot of people I know who answered “yes” to that. But in the long run, “enabling the lunatics in Sacramento” to keep on spending is not only unwise, it is the wrong thing to do.