The No on 1E people say they caught a CTA official stating in error that the money IE would shift from the Prop 63 fund would be "borrowed" and paid back "with interest." The 1E opponents point out that this is not the case, that the money being shifted will not be "repaid." To which I say good. I probably wouldn't support 1E if it were proposing another budget "loan."
We don't need to borrow from ourselves. The mental health fund is money that comes from Californians, or at least the handful who earn more than $1 million a year. It was a mistake to set that money aside for a special purpose in the first place, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with saying to voters, "Hey, do you want to loosen the strings on that money for a year or two so we can use it to avoid cuts in other programs that might be more important at the moment."
That's called setting priorities. It's something the Legislature should do more of, not less. And in this case the people should support them.
The text of the No on 1E statement is below the jump.
SACRAMENTO, April 7, 2009 - Today, the NO on Prop 1E campaign condemned proponents of Prop 1E for presenting deceptive information to Californians. Last night, as a guest on a radio talk show, David Sanchez, president of the California Teachers Association, claimed:
"D and E are tied because it is based on money being borrowed...and I hate that the fact that they are borrowing money from the reserve to balance the budget, but that is where they need to go. The state will in fact pay back the reserves and pay it back with interest..."
Nowhere in the language of Prop 1E does it claim that any of the $460 million being diverted from mental health services will be repaid. Voters approved Proposition 63 in 2004 to provide a stable, reliable source of funding for mental health programs. Prop 1E goes against the will of people by redirecting these monies into the General Fund.
"This is another deceptive tactic the "yes on everything campaign" is using to lure voters their way," said Dave Fratello, campaign manager for NO on Prop 1E. "This along with their other false claim that Prop 1E is necessary to protect children's programs fits a pattern of falsehoods. The supporters of this measure must realize that they can't win if they are honest about 1E."
For more information, visit www.noprop1e.com
About Comments
Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.