2009 California Proposition 1A: Difference between revisions
m Fixed typo, "by by" |
Proposal |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ElectionsCA}} |
{{ElectionsCA}} |
||
'''Proposition 1A''' was a [[California]] [[California ballot proposition|ballot proposition]] that appeared on the May 19, 2009 [[California state special elections, 2009|special election]] ballot. It was a constitutional amendment that would have increased the annual contributions to the state's [[rainy day fund]]. The proposition was [[legislative referral|legislatively referred]] to voters by the [[California State Legislature|State Legislature]], and sponsored by [[California State Assembly|Assemblyman]] [[Roger Niello]] ([[California Republican Party|R]]-[[Fair Oaks, California|Fair Oaks]]) |
'''Proposition 1A''' was a defeated [[California]] [[California ballot proposition|ballot proposition]] that appeared on the May 19, 2009 [[California state special elections, 2009|special election]] ballot. It was a constitutional amendment that would have increased the annual contributions to the state's [[rainy day fund]]. The proposition was [[legislative referral|legislatively referred]] to voters by the [[California State Legislature|State Legislature]], and sponsored by [[California State Assembly|Assemblyman]] [[Roger Niello]] ([[California Republican Party|R]]-[[Fair Oaks, California|Fair Oaks]]). |
||
== Background == |
== Background == |
||
In February 2009 the State Legislature narrowly passed the [[2008–2009 California budget crisis|2008–2009 state budget]] during a special session, months after it was due. As part of the plan to lower the state's annual deficits, the State Legislature ordered a special election with various budget reform ballot propositions, among them Proposition 1A.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/analysis/prop1a.htm |title=Proposition 1A Analysis - Voter Information Guide 2009 |publisher=[[California Secretary of State]] |accessdate=2009-05-08}}</ref> |
In February 2009 the State Legislature narrowly passed the [[2008–2009 California budget crisis|2008–2009 state budget]] during a special session, months after it was due. As part of the plan to lower the state's annual deficits, the State Legislature ordered a special election with various budget reform ballot propositions, among them Proposition 1A.<ref name="analysis">{{cite web |url=http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/analysis/prop1a.htm |title=Proposition 1A Analysis - Voter Information Guide 2009 |publisher=[[California Secretary of State]] |accessdate=2009-05-08}}</ref> |
||
== Proposal == |
|||
<blockquote> |
|||
Proposition 1A would have increased the target size of the state's rainy day fund from 5% to 12.5% of the General Fund (the state's chief operating fund).<ref name="title">{{cite web |url=http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.gov/title-sum/prop1a-title-sum.htm |title=Proposition 1A Title and Summary - Voter Information Guide 2009 |publisher=[[California Secretary of State]] |accessdate=2009-05-26}}</ref> The proposition also established a way of determining which extra revenues to contribute to the rainy day fund (officially the Budget Stabilization Account, however Proposition 1A would have changed the name of the fund to the Budget Stabilization Fund). Extra revenues would first be used to meet constitutionally mandated education funding obligations and the remainder would be deposited in the rainy day fund. Once the target size was reached, any other revenues would have been used to pay off Economic Recovery Bonds established by [[California Proposition 57 (2004)|Proposition 57]] in 2004. Once these obligations were made any further unexpected revenues could be used on other projects.<ref name="analysis"/> |
|||
Changes the budget process. Could limit future deficits and spending by increasing the size of the state "rainy day" fund and requiring above-average revenues to be deposited into it, for use during economic downturns and other purposes. Fiscal Impact: Higher state tax revenues of roughly $16 billion from 2010-11 through 2012-13. Over time, increased amount of money in state rainy day reserve and potentially less ups and downs in state spending.<ref name=1Achanges>[http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/public-display-051909/court-order-bl-prop1a.pdf Superior Court of California. County of Sacramento. Judgment Granting Petition for Writ of Mandate on Proposition 1A. March 5, 2009.]</ref> |
|||
</blockquote> |
|||
On March 5, 2009, a court ordered changes in the ballot title, label, and summary.<ref name=1Achanges/> |
|||
If [[California Proposition 1B (2009)|Proposition 1B]] also passed, then 1.5% of revenues would be subtracted from the rainy day fund annually until $9.3 billion was paid to public education.<ref name="analysis"/> |
|||
Overview of the Proposition from the [[California Legislative Analyst's Office]]: |
|||
<blockquote><div> |
|||
'''''Measure Changes the State’s Budgeting.''''' This measure would make major changes to |
|||
the way in which the state sets aside money in one of its “rainy day” reserve accounts |
|||
and how this money is spent. As a result, Proposition 1A could have significant impacts |
|||
on the state’s budgeting practices in the future. The measure would tend to increase the |
|||
amount of money set aside in the state’s rainy day account by increasing how much |
|||
money is put into this account and restricting the withdrawal of these funds. |
|||
'''''Measure Results in Tax Increases.''''' If this measure is approved, several tax increases |
|||
passed as part of the February 2009 budget package would be extended by one to two |
|||
years, including the following: (1) A 1% increase in the state sales tax, from the current tax of 7.25% to 8.25% (and can total up to 10.25% when local sales tax is included), will be extended for one year through 2011-12 (2) The state's Vehicle License Fee will go from .65% to nearly 1.15% of a vehicle's value for two additional years through 2012-13 (3) An increase of 0.25% in the state's Personal Income Tax on every tax bracket, will also be extended for two more years through the 2012 tax year |
|||
State tax revenues would increase by about $16 billion from 2010-11 through |
|||
2012-13.Overview of the Proposition from the California Legislative Analysis Office: |
|||
</div></blockquote> |
|||
The Legislature passed a different bill that included tax increases with the 2009-2010 budget. That bill had a provision that stated if Proposition 1A passed, the tax increases would continue for another 2 years. |
The Legislature passed a different bill that included tax increases with the 2009-2010 budget. That bill had a provision that stated if Proposition 1A passed, the tax increases would continue for another 2 years. |
||
== |
== Results == |
||
[[File:2009 CA special - 1A.svg|250px|left]] |
[[File:2009 CA special - 1A.svg|250px|left]] |
||
{{Referendum | title = Proposition 1A | yes = 1,327,400 | yespct = 34.2 | no = 2,555,519 | nopct = 65.8 | invalid = | invalidpct = | total = 3,982,919 | turnoutpct = }} |
{{Referendum | title = Proposition 1A | yes = 1,327,400 | yespct = 34.2 | no = 2,555,519 | nopct = 65.8 | invalid = | invalidpct = | total = 3,982,919 | turnoutpct = }} |
||
Revision as of 00:27, 27 May 2009
| Elections in California |
|---|
 |
Proposition 1A was a defeated California ballot proposition that appeared on the May 19, 2009 special election ballot. It was a constitutional amendment that would have increased the annual contributions to the state's rainy day fund. The proposition was legislatively referred to voters by the State Legislature, and sponsored by Assemblyman Roger Niello (R-Fair Oaks).
Background
In February 2009 the State Legislature narrowly passed the 2008–2009 state budget during a special session, months after it was due. As part of the plan to lower the state's annual deficits, the State Legislature ordered a special election with various budget reform ballot propositions, among them Proposition 1A.[1]
Proposal
Proposition 1A would have increased the target size of the state's rainy day fund from 5% to 12.5% of the General Fund (the state's chief operating fund).[2] The proposition also established a way of determining which extra revenues to contribute to the rainy day fund (officially the Budget Stabilization Account, however Proposition 1A would have changed the name of the fund to the Budget Stabilization Fund). Extra revenues would first be used to meet constitutionally mandated education funding obligations and the remainder would be deposited in the rainy day fund. Once the target size was reached, any other revenues would have been used to pay off Economic Recovery Bonds established by Proposition 57 in 2004. Once these obligations were made any further unexpected revenues could be used on other projects.[1]
If Proposition 1B also passed, then 1.5% of revenues would be subtracted from the rainy day fund annually until $9.3 billion was paid to public education.[1]
The Legislature passed a different bill that included tax increases with the 2009-2010 budget. That bill had a provision that stated if Proposition 1A passed, the tax increases would continue for another 2 years.
Results
| Choice | Votes | % |
|---|---|---|
 No
|
2,555,519 | 65.8 |
| Yes | 1,327,400 | 34.2 |
| Total votes | 3,982,919 | 100.00 |
External links
Prop 1A information from CaliforniaPropositions.org
References
- ^ a b c "Proposition 1A Analysis - Voter Information Guide 2009". California Secretary of State. Retrieved 2009-05-08.
- ^ "Proposition 1A Title and Summary - Voter Information Guide 2009". California Secretary of State. Retrieved 2009-05-26.
 | This article about the politics of California is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |