Budget bill: passage requirements.
The proposed amendment affects existing legislative protocols within California's budgeting process. If ACA 9 is enacted, it would enforce stricter timelines for legislative authorities to fulfill their responsibilities concerning budgetary appropriations. This can significantly impact the operational framework of the state government, particularly in terms of ensuring that the legislature meets deadlines for passing necessary funding bills. Furthermore, the bill would prevent any appropriation from taking effect with only a majority vote if deadlines are not met, effectively increasing the threshold to two-thirds for any related budget measures that are late.
Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 9 (ACA 9), introduced by Assembly Member Obernolte, aims to amend the California Constitution regarding the passage requirements of the Budget Bill and related appropriations. The primary change proposed by this bill is that the Budget Bill must be enacted by midnight on June 15, alongside a requirement that related appropriation bills must be enacted by midnight on June 30. Currently, while the budget itself requires a simple majority to pass, appropriations from the General Fund necessitate a two-thirds vote. The amendment seeks to tighten these deadlines and define the passage of appropriation related bills to ensure timely budget approvals and prevent delays in state funding.
Supporters of ACA 9 argue that enforcing these deadlines will streamline the budgeting process and force the legislature to prioritize budget-related decisions, thus improving fiscal management. However, critics warn that imposing tighter timelines may limit the flexibility needed during complex budget discussions, particularly in years with emerging fiscal challenges. This could lead to conflicts and contention within the legislative body, especially among factions with differing priorities. The criticism focuses on whether strict adherence to deadlines might compromise the thorough evaluation of budget allocations and the broader implications on state funding for critical services.