Curioser And Curiouser

Whatever else California may be, it is always interesting and often unpredictable. In the past couple days, two events occurred which are almost inexplicable by normal standards. But this is California, after all. First, the California legislature, for the first time in a quarter of a century, passed a budget by the statutory deadline, and it included massive cuts, with no new taxes.

Both houses of the state legislature are solidly controlled by the Democratic Party. Did they suddenly become efficient fiscal hawks while I wasn't looking? Nope. In the last general election, Californians passed another one of those pesky initiatives that get in the way of the long-range plans of the tax-and-spend Democrats. The initiative allowed for the passage of the state budget by a simple majority of both houses of the legislature, ostensibly to break the pattern of budgets being late year after year after year.

But the people giveth, and the people taketh away. They also required that any budget passed by the simple majority cannot include increases in income and certain business taxes. Oh, and if they don't pass the budget on time, the legislators receive no pay during the entire period from the expiration of the deadline to the time a budget actually gets passed. No back pay when it's passed, by the way. What an amazing incentive it was for Democrats who have been living off the public's money for decades. So, California has a budget, with no new taxes (yet).

In order for the legislature to pass new taxes (or in this case, extend the "temporary" tax increase from two years ago), the Democrats, including Governor Jerry Moonbeam Brown needed two Republican votes in the Assembly and two in the Senate. Brave Republicans have stood steadfast in their refusal to extend or write new taxes, despite tremendous pressure. So frustrated was Brown, that he is organizing another initiative for the next general election putting the issue of extending the temporary tax increases to the voters. Wouldn't hold my breath, Jerry.

Putting their paychecks ahead of their spendthrift principles, the Democrats cut serious money from nearly every facet of state government. That may very well come back to bite them because they are counting on the people to extend those temporary taxes to make up the billion-dollar-plus hole still left in the budget. Remember, I said they passed a budget--I didn't say they balanced one. Without that extension (or new and improved taxes), the budget imbalance will continue and thousands of state employees will lose their jobs or have their hours/pay severely reduced. Good for Republicans and conservatives, bad for Democrats. But they gave themselves a little hedge. They didn't cut employee pension benefits by a single dime, a major portion of the budget shortfall.

Second, there's a truly interesting (and funny) sideshow produced by the budget cuts. Remember that California Supreme Court that upheld Proposition 8, resulting in the federal cases challenging the law because it "discriminates" against gay marriage? One seat on that Court has changed hands (butts?)--that of the Chief Justice. The new Chief Justice is one Tani Cantil-Sakauye, appointed by "Republican" Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. She is the first California Supreme Court justice to have performed a gay marriage, so I guess we know which way the wind now blows on that court.

During her confirmation process, one Democratic Assemblyman remarked that it isn't enough to be "nice and pretty" for a position of such importance. That resulted in a Democratic state Senator making a formal demand for an apology, which the Assemblyman refused to do. Isn't this fun? But enough background. Cantil-Sakauye immediately reacted to the budget cuts by declaring that "the crippling cuts in the budget for the courts would be a blow against justice." Aw, hooey!

California courts are overstaffed, over-supervised and underworked--and that includes the Supreme Court. My home courts in Ventura County started the official day at 8:30 AM and finished at 5:00 PM, unless there was still unfinished business. I once had to stick around until 7:30 PM the day before Thanksgiving because the judge insisted that the prosecution finish its case-in-chief before we could go home. But those courts are an extreme rarity. In Los Angeles, San Francisco, Alameda and Orange Counties, the court day often started at 10 AM or so (depending on the mood of the judge), went to 4:30 PM (at the latest), and then the day was over even if a lawyer had to be stopped in mid-sentence. Actual court time was often three or four days a week, not the appropriate five. Lunches, breaks and continuances without good cause were extensive.

Again, outside of Ventura County, those courts had two or three clerks roaming around while Ventura made do with one per courtroom. Proceedings were often delayed because the court stenographer neglected to come back from lunch on time. There were often two bailiffs (marshals) in civil courts, to protect the judge, jury and public from angry litigants I suppose. My former colleagues (and a few of my law students now practicing) tell me that nothing has changed. One day's visit to the courts in Kern County (where my younger daughter works) tells me that Kern County is no exception.

I would tell the Chief that she needs to get a reality-check, but I'm afraid I'd be forced to call her by name, and I don't have a clue how to pronounce it. At least I could pronounce the name of her predecessor, Chief Justice Ronald George. Most of all, I would tell her that she needs to tighten her belt and take her medicine right along with the rest of us. Duplication, triplicaton, quadruplication of court tasks need to be eliminated just as they will be in all other sectors. Justice unnecessarily dragged-out is justice that is far too costly.