California Propositions 1A thru 1F

It pains me to write this. My father, Cliff Graham, was one of the founders of the Palos Verdes School District, served on the School Board during the '60's and '70's, and I attended from kindergarten thru Rolling Hills High Class of '66. But like a lot of people, I've pretty much had it with the continual ballot measures to raise money, and here's why:


In 1984 the State Lottery was sold to the public as the panacea for school funding problems. The pitch was that the schools would get all that additional money, which could only be used for "educational purposes", meaning not for facilities. Everyone voted for it on that basis.

When it passed, the State Legislature immediately and cynically (and clearly contrary to the intent of the voters) removed the money that was then being spent on schools and replaced it with the Lottery income. Who knows where the former school funds went, but it wasn't to the schools. I'm sure this is a major reason there have been constant complaints about school facilities falling into disrepair since then -- none of that Lottery money could be used for upkeep, and the former money was spent elsewhere.


This kind of subversion of the will of the voters by their elected representatives should not happen in this country. The sleazy sleight of hand and arrogant disregard on the part of those entrusted to look out for our interests, will erode the voters' trust in the entire system. Every time there is a bond or other form of tax increase to solve some funding crisis with the schools (and it's always sold as a crisis), I can't help wondering what will actually happen to the money once it arrives in Sacramento. So you will pardon me (and apparently a majority of California voters) if I can't get too excited about voting for Propositions 1A thru 1F. I'm sure those in Sacramento will find a way to ignore any spending caps, pay caps, or other provisions put in there to make it attractive. They're going to have to regain the trust of the voters before asking them for more money.

The California State Lottery

This is the kind of thing that makes you cynical about politics. Every time a California State bond measure comes up, it is this sort of thing that keeps me from voting for it. Maybe I'm the only one who is exercised about this, but if the following is true, I do not understand why this is not a huge scandal:

Remember when we all voted on the State Lottery in in 1984? Do you remember what the appeal of it was? Apart from a one in a billion chance to be rich, the primary sales pitch was that it would provide extra money for the schools without raising taxes. Am I the only one who remembers that? Am I the only one who wonders, in light of that, why the schools are still continually starved of money? Even if I am, here's what I understand happened:

When the Lottery was passed, somewhere between the ballot and the budget, the money that the Lottery was projected to raise was extracted from the State schools budget and (presumably) blown on other stuff! Welfare perhaps? Maybe making sure illegal aliens have all the benefits they're entitled to? Whatever, the effect was that there was no net additional revenue for the schools. And this was almost the entire argument for voting for it in the first place. To make it worse, the Lottery money came with the attached string that it could only be used for "educational purposes", meaning not on facilities. So the old school budget could be used as appropriate, but it was supplanted with money that was "earmarked", to borrow a term currently in vogue. Am I the only one who remembers the constant lament over the condition of school buildings over the past 25 or so years? Gee, I wonder why. Clearly there's no extra money now, but think of all the money that was supposed to go to the schools during the flush times and all the repair, updating, and construction that our students would now have the benefit of.

So how does Sacramento get away all these years clearly and cynically subverting the wishes and intent of the voters without so much as a peep from anyone? If there wasn't the constant moaning and wailing about how badly the schools need money, I suppose it wouldn't be as bad; but, in view of all the school fundraising drives, ballot initiatives, etc, we've seen over the years, isn't anyone else the least bit worked up over what clearly looks like the torpedoing of the solution?

If I'm wrong about this, I sure would appreciate someone setting me straight.