Houston urges Yes vote on Propositions 76, 77 Houston urges Yes vote on Propositions 76, 77 (November 04, 2005)

Favors budget controls, reformed redistricting
by Jeb Bing

State Assemblyman Guy Houston (R.-15th) urged voters to approve Propositions 76 and 77 Tuesday in order to continue Gov. Schwarzenegger's drive to rid the state of budget deficits and to bring more geographical order to legislative districts.

Speaking to a luncheon meeting of the Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce, Houston said that when he was first elected to the Assembly in 2000, the state faced a $20 billion deficit in fiscal 2001-2002.

"The second year, we were only $12 billion in deficit, and in the third year, we were just $6 billion in the hole," he said. "I guess that means we're making progress."

He said Schwarzenegger decided that 2005 would be a year for reform, which is why he is pushing selected propositions.

"He may have bitten off more than he can chew, but that's the kind of person he is," Houston said. "He took the job to get things done, not to sit back and enjoy his popularity ratings. I respect him and commend him for trying to do something for California on issues that he thinks are very important, and I happen to agree." He said the ads in opposition to Prop. 77 are way off the mark because nothing would change if the Legislature does its job in balancing the budget. The measure states that if the budget is more than $250 million out of balance, the Assembly and State Senate have 45 days to bring it back into balance, either by raising more revenue or cutting expenditures.

"The governor would get involved only if the Legislature can't do its job, and then he would have the responsibility of making the decisions necessary to get the job done," Houston said. "Some see this as power-grabbing, but it's not. It's a determination by the governor to make sure that we solve our budget problems before they become $1 billion, or $5 billion or $20 billion problems, which I saw when I first went to the Assembly."

"Some in the education community are saying that this proposition violates Prop. 98, which the voters passed," Houston explained. "They say that proposition guaranteed them money and that they are owed $2 billion. Well if they are still owed it, that means they didn't get it so that formula didn't work."

"If you don't have the money, folks, you don't get the money," he added.

As for Proposition 77 - Redistricting - Houston told the luncheon crowd that his own district was gerrymandered in 2001 when he first went to Sacramento by incumbents in the Assembly and Senate to protect their jobs.

"It's part of a scheme that is bipartisan - Republicans and Democrats - who work together to make sure their seats are safe," he said.

While he was running for office, he had a chance to see how the redistricting scheme worked. With computers, aides could place the cursor on any district and see immediately the number of Republicans, Democrats, men, women, whites, blacks or any other racial or ethnic group. By moving the cursor, they drew lines on the computer to make sure the district had enough voters to keep the incumbent in office.

"Do you think you vote for elected officials in California?" Houston asked. "Not true. We pick you. That's how it works here and it's wrong, not democratic."

As the mayor of Dublin and a homeowner there when he ran for the Assembly, he found that the city was yanked out of the 15th District where it had been for 40 years and moved into the 18th, which is controlled by politicians in San Leandro and Hayward. His district was redrawn to include other parts of Alameda County as well as parts of Contra Costa, San Joaquin and Sacramento counties.

"I love the people in Golf and Elk Grove up by Sacramento, but does it make sense to have them part of this area where they have no common interests?" he asked.

Prop. 77 would take the responsibility for redistricting out of the hands of politicians and give it to an independent panel of judges, which Houston said would be preferable.

Houston also said politicians and voters have to decide where they want the state to go in the future. Under Gov. Ronald Reagan, social spending and welfare accounted for just 6 percent of the state budget, compared to 19 percent today. More than 11 percent of the budget was spent on state infrastructure needs, such as highways, whereas the total today is one-quarter of 1 percent of the budget.

"We have to decide how we are going to continue distributing our money," Houston said. "I'm a fiscal conservative and I don't want to raise taxes. But I'm not opposed to higher taxes if that's what a two-thirds vote of the electorate wants."

"If we want to be a world class California, it will take money, and we will have to decide what we're willing to pay for and what we're not," he added.

2

E-mail a friend a link to this story.