Commentary: CFBF board makes ballot recommendations

The California Farm Bureau Federatuion Board of Directors has taken positions on the four propositions on the March 2 ballot.

The board opposes Proposition 56, which would permit the state Legislature to enact budget and budget-related tax and appropriation bills with a 55 percent vote rather than the currently required two-thirds vote.

"The so-called 'Blank Check Initiative' is strongly opposed by Farm Bureau," said CFBF President Bill Pauli. "This initiative is a Trojan horse. It is being proposed as budget accountability and disciplining elected officials, but in reality it only gives politicians a blank check to levy higher taxes on California taxpayers."

The board recommends a "yes" vote on Propositions 57 and 58, which were placed on the ballot in response to the state's severe budget deficit.

Prop. 57 would authorize up to $15 billion in bonds to consolidate the deficit and to keep state government running. "The board stressed the need for the state to get spending under control and that Prop. 57 should not be considered a long-term solution," said Pauli. "There needs to be fiscal restraint and a cap on spending so we don't repeat the financial mess that Gov. Schwarzenegger inherited."

Prop. 58, the California Balanced Budget Act, is supported by the CFBF board. It would require the state to enact budgets that keep expenditures within available resources. It would also establish a reserve fund to address future emergencies.

"Farm Bureau policy supports a balanced budget through spending restraint and cutbacks rather than tax increases," said Pauli. "We think California farmers, ranchers, and rural and urban residents will strongly support Prop. 58 and send a clear signal to lawmakers that state government needs to live within its means."

The board voted to oppose Prop. 55, a school bond that would provide nearly $13 billion for construction and renovation of K-12 schools and for higher education facilities.

While recognizing the need to upgrade schools, the board voted to oppose the measure because of the extreme indebtedness of the state and the budget deficit.