Under the Paperweight, June 28- July 4, 2009 1

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass calling citizens’ actions “terrorism” because they threaten to unseat or not re-elect their state representatives, and then as an afterthought admitting that “I guess it’s about free speech” got her quite a bit of attention in the blogosphere last week. Under the Paperweight are posts covering her faux pas and other links dealing with politics of the state budget crisis:

From Patterico:

So it’s “terrorism” to hold elected officials to their word??

She “guesses” it’s about free speech, but it’s “extremely unfair”?

This is the sort of attitude we’re seeing in Sacramento. They want to do what they want to do (raise taxes ad infinitum) — and they’re so very irritated at having to deal with petty annoyances like their signed pledges, and the voters’ wishes.

And from Hot Air Blog:

There’s a lot of stupidity and tyranny locked into those few words. The First Amendment guarantees the right to petition the government for redress of grievances, even apart from the “free speech” issues Bass casually discards. Elected politicians are accountable to the people who elect them in a free society. Politicians do not acquire lordly status when they go to the Assembly, or anywhere else.

Usually, politicians are smart enough to at least pay lip service to getting feedback from their constituents. Instead, Bass calls them “terrorists” for … what? Calling their representatives and telling them not to raise taxes even higher, in the state with the sixth-highest per capita tax burden in the nation? Expressing their opinions? Telling politicians they won’t get their support if they vote for a tax hike? That’s democracy, not terrorism, although I’m hardly surprised that Bass can’t tell the difference.

LA Now reported on another setback to California representatives: a state court of appeals ruling last week that they can’t appropriate transportation funds to cover budget shortfalls.

Carol Platt Liebau stands up to pitches against Prop 13 and the 2/3 majority rule by batting the arguments out of the park:

Ultimately, any honest assessment of California’s plight must assign responsibility for the state’s fiscal crisis – not to the taxpayers who voted for Prop. 13 three decades ago – but to the politicians who have subsequently exploited them without mercy. Indeed, if spending had simply reflected average population growth plus the average increase in the cost of living since 1991, there would now be a $15 billion surplus. After adjusting for inflation, the state now spends nearly 20% more per capita than it did 18 years ago; even as California’s tax revenues increased by 167% during that period, state spending exploded by 189%.

And Capitol Weekly reports on Governor Schwarznegger’s proposal to reduce budget shortfalls by cutting state employee benefits and pensions – a sore subject for California taxpayers who don’t enjoy nearly the amount of health care coverage or future retiree benefits their taxes support for state workers.