Advertisement

May 21, 2013

As Budget Vote Looms, California GOP Demands Transparency

State Integrity grade 'bolstered' need for reform 

As the California legislature gears up to vote on the state budget, Republicans are demanding  greater transparency in the process, citing a C- grade for the budgeting process from  the State Integrity Investigation. California ranked 4thout of all 50 states overall with a grade of B-.

On Monday, Republicans called for a 48-hour public review of the budget plan, allowing time for citizens to voice their concerns to representatives before it goes to a vote. Lawmakers face a constitutional deadline to approve a budget for the new fiscal year by this Friday;  the fiscal year kicks off July 1. California Democrats control both legislative chambers, as well as the governor’s office.

“While Democrats talk about openness and accountability, all we have seen from them are smoke-filled rooms and back-room deals, shutting out taxpayers and the news media,” Senate Republican Leader Bob Huff (R-Diamond Bar) and Assembly Republican Leader Connie Conway (R-Tulare) stated in a press release. “Budgets thrown together behind closed doors or passed in the middle of the night are one of the main reasons why California is facing chronic deficits today.”

Sabrina Lockhart, communications director for Assembly Leader Conway, said that California’s grades on the State Integrity Investigation “bolstered our opinion that more transparency is needed,” but she also noted that Republicans have sought open government legislation for years.

Among their proposals: Bills to increase legislative transparency, eliminate late-night legislative sessions and promote an open and honest budget process.

On its corruption risk scorecard, California earned only a 31 percent for the question, “Can citizens access the state budgetary process?” One source referred to the public hearings as “a kabuki theater,” with the major decisions being made by legislative leaders behind closed doors.

John Vigna, press secretary for Assembly Speaker John Perez (D-Los Angeles), noted that the Legislature has held more than 75 hearings on the budget, including a meeting this week to review the proposed budget in its entirety. “The Speaker is committed to approving a balanced, on-time budget by our June 15 constitutional deadline, and we continue to work towards that goal,” Vigna said in a statement. 

Assembly Republican Leader Connie Conway (R-Tulare) Rich Pedroncelli/AP

Assembly Republican Leader Connie Conway (R-Tulare) Rich Pedroncelli/AP 

Reprinted by Permission © 2013, The Center for Public Integrity®. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Staff Writer

Caitlin Ginley joined the Center in July 2007 as the University of Delaware’s 10th James R. Soles Fellow. She graduated cum laude in May 2007 with a bachelor’s degree in English and political science, concentrating in journalism. She worked for two years on the editorial staff of the university’s award-winning student newspaper, The Review, and was an intern for Delaware Today magazine and Court TV.

202-466-1300

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.