When California politicians ignore political risks

The governors and legislators of California have a very bad habit of creating important programs and projects without fully examining their downward risks.

The most spectacular example occurred in 1996 when a Republican governor, Pete Wilson and a democratically controlled legislator decided to revise the California electricity industry.

Legislation was screwed out in lengthy and secret negotiations that the participants described the “Steve Peace Death March” for the senator of the state senator who aroused the efforts. It was only put into force with fleeting public inputs.

When an autopsy of the following catastrophe from 2003 became: “The law was celebrated as a historical reform that rewarded consumers with lower prices that would revive the flabeting economy in California at the time and a model for other states. Six years later, the reforms of the reforms were found in the ruins.

Other examples of the bad habit are in abundance Construction of a kettle pull Linking the two halves of the state with only rudimentary assumptions of its costs, the driver and other important factors – a project that limps almost two decades later.

Two others are immensely costly expansion of pension benefits for public employees A few decades ago, what the local government examinations hammered, and Large increases in unemployment insurance benefits Without increasing the income that led to a debt of 20 billion US dollars to the federal government that is still growing.

That brings us to us Senate Bill 769What appears to be a positive effort to expand the financing of the infrastructure could be another example of unexpected consequences. The measure introduced by sen., introduced. Anna CaballeroA Merced Democrat would create the Golden State Infrastructure Corporation, a state non -profit company that borrowing or borrowing money and would provide funds for public or private infrastructure projects.

The state treasurer Fiona Ma is the sponsor of the law and would appoint the company's top manager who would answer a five-member board of chosen officials and governors of the agents.

“The partnership with public and private capital enables SB 769 critical investments in climate management, water systems, energy infrastructure, living space and transport, creation of jobs and future -proof California for the coming generations,” claims Caballero's office.

“California cannot afford to wait for Washington or outdated financing systems to get the needs of the 21st century,” she said in an explanation. “SB 769 is about building a resilient, modern California by creating a more intelligent, more flexible opportunity to finance infrastructure that protects our communities, creates good jobs and prepares us for the upcoming challenges.”

There are aspects of the proposal that should trigger alarm bells.

There is no limitation of how much debt the company could arise. The state would also not be liable if its financial structure collapses. The decisions about the financing of private projects could be secretly made because the company exempted from an open session and the laws are opened.

The risk is that with a potentially unlimited amount of money without public contributions, the political figures of the company committee could be affected in order to play favorites for reasons that are separated from the improvement of the infrastructure.

We saw scandals of this kind elsewhere in the state government, for example in the Land use decisions of the coastal commission and the Investments of the California Public Employment Retirement System of the System.

Without better protective measures and more sunshine, this is another scandal that is waiting to be passed.

By Dan Walters. This article was originally published by Calm.