California Democrats got their legislative supermajorities

[Gass3268]

Demorats flip a seat that was centered in Orange County to get to 27 seats

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Sir Mohamed]

This is amazing. CA is the best state.

[smoltchanov]

Well, among California Democratic legislators there are more and more "business Democrats", who are progressive on social issues, but fiscally are at least somewhat conservative (as were liberal Republicans of not so distant past, whom they essentially replaced). So, i don't expect big changes in fiscal-budget policy (especially with governor Brown, who has some fiscally conservative streak too).

[publicunofficial]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

[publicunofficial]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

Same reason I hate balanced budget amendments. It's practically enshrining Republican economic policy into stone tablets.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

Same reason I hate balanced budget amendments. It's practically enshrining Republican economic policy into stone tablets.

My post was mainly satirical, but thanks for the through answer.

[rob in cal]

  I haven't heard about anything like this so far, but there must be some Cal Democratic legislators who would love to tinker with Prop 13 and get some more property tax money flowing into state coffers.  Wonder if anything is going to happen on this front. Also, any supporters of California secession out there, or are they waiting for Trump to do something once he's in office to get the movement started?

[Vega]

Well, among California Democratic legislators there are more and more "business Democrats", who are progressive on social issues, but fiscally are at least somewhat conservative (as were liberal Republicans of not so distant past, whom they essentially replaced). So, i don't expect big changes in fiscal-budget policy (especially with governor Brown, who has some fiscally conservative streak too).

The return of the Atari Democrat? But no, I don't think that's much of a trend in all honesty. Of course there are some more business minded Democrats who should be Republicans but can't win that way, but the majority are pretty normal New Dealers and Progressives.

[smoltchanov]

Well, among California Democratic legislators there are more and more "business Democrats", who are progressive on social issues, but fiscally are at least somewhat conservative (as were liberal Republicans of not so distant past, whom they essentially replaced). So, i don't expect big changes in fiscal-budget policy (especially with governor Brown, who has some fiscally conservative streak too).

The return of the Atari Democrat? But no, I don't think that's much of a trend in all honesty. Of course there are some more business minded Democrats who should be Republicans but can't win that way, but the majority are pretty normal New Dealers and Progressives.

Majority - may be. But Democratic "supermajority" consists of exactly 1 vote in state Senate and 2 - in Assembly. There are much more then that number of moderates. Think Dodd and Glazer in state Senate, for example, and at least 6-7 Assemblymen too. BTW, Dodd is former Republican, but everyone knows that it's extremely difficult for Republican to win in Bay area - hence the reason for party switch)))

[RINO Tom]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

[Young Conservative]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

and most people would consider balanced budgets a good thing too which is why we need that amendment.

[ApatheticAustrian]

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

depends on who has to pay for the tax cut.

and no, this is no oxymoron, this is a truth democrats are bad at communicating.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

[GlobeSoc]

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

depends on who has to pay for the tax cut.

and no, this is no oxymoron, this is a truth democrats are bad at communicating.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

depends on who has to pay for the tax cut.

and no, this is no oxymoron, this is a truth democrats are bad at communicating.

Pays for tax cut : it's that person money in the first place , maybe how about cutting costs to balance the budget and not raise our taxes 

[ApatheticAustrian]

Pays for tax cut : it's that person money in the first place

if you think you are entitled to your police, your hospital, your streets and your army...i politely disagree.

[RINO Tom]

I should be living in California.  It has it's sh*t together.

But but but you're just a Democrat because you are so educated and enlightened and you hate taxes and regulations, friend!!  Cali ain't fer you (that's how I talk, as a Republican).

[Maxwell]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

and most people would consider balanced budgets a good thing too which is why we need that amendment.

your team doesn't balance budgets

[RINO Tom]

I should be living in California.  It has it's sh*t together.

But but but you're just a Democrat because you are so educated and enlightened and you hate taxes and regulations, friend!!  Cali ain't fer you (that's how I talk, as a Republican).

When CalExits I won't have to continue paying a 33% rate to fix your roads and bridges by the mill my friend.

Uh, California isn't paying for a road or bridge by a mill in the Midwest, genius.  They have a hard time paying for their own things.

Find the most elitist liberal (should be an oxymoron) in the entire world with even half a brain and they will tell you that the basic idea of economic "liberalism" (as in, the economic policies put forth by modern American liberals) - that egalitarian polices will help everyone and lead to a better society - literally REQUIRES higher taxes.  Those taxes are usually boogeymanned onto the "rich," but they WILL be raised to fund such a vision in any case.  Period.

[Figueira]

I should be living in California.  It has it's sh*t together.

But but but you're just a Democrat because you are so educated and enlightened and you hate taxes and regulations, friend!!  Cali ain't fer you (that's how I talk, as a Republican).

When CalExits I won't have to continue paying a 33% rate to fix your roads and bridges by the mill my friend.

Uh, California isn't paying for a road or bridge by a mill in the Midwest, genius.  They have a hard time paying for their own things.

Find the most elitist liberal (should be an oxymoron) in the entire world with even half a brain and they will tell you that the basic idea of economic "liberalism" (as in, the economic policies put forth by modern American liberals) - that egalitarian polices will help everyone and lead to a better society - literally REQUIRES higher taxes.  Those taxes are usually boogeymanned onto the "rich," but they WILL be raised to fund such a vision in any case.  Period.

Which is why raising taxes is sometimes a good thing.

[RINO Tom]

I should be living in California.  It has it's sh*t together.

But but but you're just a Democrat because you are so educated and enlightened and you hate taxes and regulations, friend!!  Cali ain't fer you (that's how I talk, as a Republican).

When CalExits I won't have to continue paying a 33% rate to fix your roads and bridges by the mill my friend.

Uh, California isn't paying for a road or bridge by a mill in the Midwest, genius.  They have a hard time paying for their own things.

Find the most elitist liberal (should be an oxymoron) in the entire world with even half a brain and they will tell you that the basic idea of economic "liberalism" (as in, the economic policies put forth by modern American liberals) - that egalitarian polices will help everyone and lead to a better society - literally REQUIRES higher taxes.  Those taxes are usually boogeymanned onto the "rich," but they WILL be raised to fund such a vision in any case.  Period.

Another brilliant post.  You do realize how federal funding for highways and bridges works right?  No I guess you don't. 

Haha, I will stop trolling you if you will admit just how out of line you are with your part on economic justice.  It's fine, I guess, but you are not going to get the Democratic Party to come around to stop pushing for progressive economic policies, wealth redistribution and a more strongly regulated economy anytime soon ... in fact, it appears the party is pretty damn committed to heading in the other direction.

If you are fine being the odd duck (I certainly am fine being an odd duck in a socially conservative party), that's cool.  But stop pretending there is this legion of people who are only Democrats because of social issues and don't care about things like regulating Wall Street or raising the minimum wage and want to cut taxes ... there isn't.  Even affluent Democrats buy into the vision of the party, which apparently you don't.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

There is nothing inheritly evil about a tax increase, or a tax cut. Reducing federal tax revenue is a morally neutral concept.

[RINO Tom]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

There is nothing inheritly evil about a tax increase, or a tax cut. Reducing federal tax revenue is a morally neutral concept.

Well I didn't necessarily disagree, I just provided insight into why a bunch of representatives elected by a bunch of people would never go for a two-thirds threshold for lowering taxes.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Reminder that the 2/3 to raise taxes law is stupid.

Yep.
While we are at it why not we require a 2/3 to cut taxes to be fair?
*conservative Republicans go insane upon hearing this*

Because most people would consider a tax cut a good thing and raising taxes to be a bad thing?

There is nothing inheritly evil about a tax increase, or a tax cut. Reducing federal tax revenue is a morally neutral concept.

Well I didn't necessarily disagree, I just provided insight into why a bunch of representatives elected by a bunch of people would never go for a two-thirds threshold for lowering taxes.

To be fair, I was satirizing the idea of a two-thirds requirement for cutting taxes. It was never a serious suggestion, placing the same requirement on tax cuts. It would be a terrible one as well. Increases and decreases in tax levels should be treated the same in this order of things.