I'm fed up, and I want some change.
I want a responsible government, and I want the critters in the legislature and governor's office to feel the fangs of doing something irresponsible.
Namely, I'm talking about spending.
Arizona is in a deficit-spending mentality right now. We've got a $1.3 billion budget shortfall last I heard, and the whizkids at ASU had the gall to ask the legislature for another $4 billion in funding for school expansion in the midst of this.
Here's what I'm thinking... help me refine the idea a bit before I stroll down to the Secretary of State's office to begin the Proposition process.
1. It's gotta be a ballot prop. The critters will never limit themselves in a manner like this voluntarily with legislation created in the Capitol.
2. It's can't be a suicide pact for the State in the face of a true crisis. If the State MUST go into debt to attain important goals, then it must be possible to do so.
3. It must enforce accountability for the actions of legislators and the governor. Voice-votes must be prohibited for votes in the Legislature regarding the annual budget. Punishment for allowing voice-votes should fall squarely on the state Speaker of the House or President of the Senate (whatever those equivalent titles may be in AZ). If the Speaker (or similar authority) allows a voice-vote for budget votes, he/she should be immediately removed from office, disbarred (if a member of the state bar association), charged with a felony to commit fraud on the State, and jailed for no less than 12 months. This must be a political-career-ending punishment to preclude political party collusion to avoid accountability for votes. If a voice-vote is somehow allowed to occur, all members of the legislature are prohibited from seeking re-election for a period of no less than 4 years.
4. In the event that a deficit-spending budget is approved by the legislature, those members who voted in favor of the deficit spending (as noted in the roll call vote log) are ineligible to run for re-election to their current office for no less than 4 years. This is tracked by the roll call vote.
5. In the event that a deficit-spending budget is signed by the governor, he/she is ineligible to hold any office in the state of Arizona upon the expiration of his/her office for a period of no less than 4 years (since Governors have term limits, unlike members of the legislature).
The net effect of this policy would be:
1. The ending of political careers of politicians who favor grandiose promises from the public treasury.
2. The ability to sacrifice political careers if necessary for patriotic duty, if the state truly needs deficit spending. Such politicians would be ineligible for office for 4 years so they can feel the effects of their legislation back in the private sector, then eligible to test the waters regarding public office to see how the public received their contribution.
3. Cycling of fresh blood into the political arena whenever deficit spending is approved. Obviously, something was mis-managed and new eyes are needed.
4. Those who favor extensive spending will be forced to present revenue sources to pay for their new programs. Taxes, fees, royalties, or sales of state trust land.
5. If phrased properly, would maybe be palatable to the people of Arizona via a ballot initiative whereas such reform would be impossible if started at the Capitol.