Here is one of the reasons Pete Stahl thinks you should vote against a proposal to withhold raises from California elected officials when they fail to balance the state budget:
"Members of the Legislature are deeply caring, diligent, patriotic people who truly love the communities they represent and serve."
Pete Stahl does not live on Mars. Nor has he been in a coma for the past 25 years.
He lives in Mountain View, where he designs Web sites and plays the oboe in a community orchestra.
He is also the author of the argument against Proposition 1F, which will appear on the May 19 special election ballot. The measure would prevent legislators and state constitutional officers from receiving pay raises in years when California is running a deficit.
In a state of roughly 37 million people, Stahl was the only one to submit a ballot argument against the idea to the secretary of state's office by Monday's deadline.
"I have no idea what to expect over the next two months," says Stahl, who is 49 and hosts a Web site that features opinions on state ballot measures. "My argument may turn out to be somewhat controversial."
He may be right. After all, a survey released this week shows only 21 percent of the populace approves of legislators' job performance, and only 33 percent of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's.
And Stahl is telling people in the ballot argument that the $116,208 annual salary of a legislator, in most of the state, "is solidly middle-class compensation." Not only that, but compared with executives' salaries at large companies, the pay of state elected officials "is a terrific bargain."
Proposition 1F, which legislators put on the ballot, is meant as an incentive for lawmakers to keep the state on an even financial keel and minimize the partisan bickering that characterizes most budget deliberations.
But Stahl says the measure itself is "petty, vindictive and childish." He argues that legislators are not motivated by their salaries, and will not be persuaded to vote against their political natures (Republicans hate taxes; Democrats hate cuts) in future years simply to get a few more bucks in their pay envelopes.
"It's ludicrous," he wrote, "to think that the mere threat of a salary freeze will somehow cause our polarized elected officials to rush into each others' arms and magically overcome their political differences."
In an interview Thursday, Stahl says he was inspired to file an argument against Proposition 1F over the weekend when he saw the secretary of state's office was seeking proposed ballot arguments.
"This is my rookie effort," he said. "I faxed it on Sunday. ... I have no illusions that Prop. 1F will fail. I just wrote why I am against it, and what I thought were the best arguments, and that's all you can do. ... Maybe it will change a few minds."
Call Steve Wiegand, Bee Capitol Bureau, (916) 321-1076.
About Comments
Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.