Legislature Bonded to the Budget Debacle

Re “Democrats to Endorse Props. 57 and 58,” Feb. 10: What are they putting in the punch in Sacramento? We are being told now that state Democratic leaders are telling us that we should vote for Proposition 57 and 58. They wouldn’t vote for a $15-billion bond issue when it came to the Legislature originally, in December, but it’s OK for the electorate to pass it. Why are these guys rolling over for the action figure? I’ve heard of the power of charisma, but this is way out of the ballpark.

How can the voters be asked to pass a measure that would allow borrowing $15 billion from future California generations, as opposed to sucking it up and covering our debts when they are due? Isn’t that called taking responsibility? This is a strategy that dodges the blame for repealing the car license fees that, although painful, would have helped the problem right now instead of passing it on to our innocent offspring.

Tim Knipe

Studio City

Only when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger supports increasing some taxes to help deal with the budget crisis will I vote for Propositions 57 and 58. Borrowing from the future and draconian cuts to government services are not the only ways to balance the budget. This is trying to fight with one arm tied behind your back.

Lynne Small

Del Mar

At least your misguided Feb. 8 “Yes on Proposition 56” editorial had one correct point: The reason Proposition 56 is on the ballot is to make it easier to raise state taxes. That’s the last thing we need to do in California right now. We should be working to improve the economy by encouraging businesses to locate and remain in California and to hire more employees. Perhaps The Times should consider the full impact on jobs and businesses before supporting initiatives such as this. In the meantime, I’m voting no on Proposition 56.

Gregory N. Lippe

Calabasas