Dan Schnur points out the need for an alternative budget below. This is something that I have been considering for several weeks now.,
In 1993 a member from each party did come together to attempt to "solve" the budget crisis. Republican Senator Frank Hill and Democratic Assemblyman Phil Isenberg actually started to write their own budget document. The budget delay then was 63 days but few would doubt that their efforts helped determine the eventual outcome.
Personally, I support term limits for members of the Legislature but one of the obvious reasons we don’t have alternative budgets is because of the imposition of term limits. It is hard to write a budget that makes sense. It takes experience with government and an understanding of the process.
Many of you will attempt to point to the fact the Hill later served time in prison as a reason this was a bad system. The reality is that he and Isenberg are both very bright men that understood the system and had the staff support to make this happen. His other issues have nothing to do with this.
Right now in Sacramento how many members of the Legislature truly understand state government? I argue that it is no more than two dozen out of the 120 in the Legislature. Only the leaders and one or two others out of that group have the staff resources necessary to pull off such a project.
During the budget crisis this year one group I am aware of actually produced a complete budget. That was SEIU. While their idea of state government is not shared by me, you have to admire the intellectual consistency of creating a budget that reflected their values.
In an era of term limits I would have expected to see more third parties step forward with well written proposals regarding the budget process.
An alternate budget would be a great idea. Schnur is right, but it is extremely unlikely to happen in our current system.