Eliminate electoral college. President should be just straight popular vote. Bottom line, the Donald should never have been president from CAs perspective.
Never happen. Unfair to rural voters, which means that rural-oriented states will never support it.
Judicial confirmations. All confirmations need to be based on the population, not the states. Supreme court confirmations should be general vote. All other confirmations should be house. CA (and I assume TX) does not want small states having greater influence over who’s in the judicial system.
A better solution would be 10-year appointments for SCOTUS, Federal, and Appelate benches. The controversy over judges largely is driven by the “lifetime” apppointment matter; it gives individual judges outsized influence during their “terms”.
The issue with Marijuanna is a good one. Also the difference in Sanctuary cities.
Those should be state issues, agreed.
Support of the Paris agreement, etc. CA has a different perspective on these than the current administration.
The Paris Agreement incensed the right not because it was about climate change, but because it was an attempt by the Obama Administration to tie the hands of future administrations without a vote of Congress. Same with the Iraq deal.
Federal taxes. The US government’s power comes from the taxes and its ability to distribute the money back to the states. CA has been a net giver to the federal goverment. Right now its close because we have the expanded coverage on the ACA. If that is repealed, we’ll be back to getting only about 80%. TX has been a net taker.
TX is not really a “net taker”; our ratio is about 98%. This ratio is driven by the mix between agricultural, industrial, and military investment in the State, and as you mention, now health care is becoming a fourth major factor. Texas is a net push because it’s GDP is very balanced between all those factors.
You pay less than you get back. Time to make it so the federal government can’t do taxation without representation (which is what’s happening given how much the Republicans have gerrymandered the house). The tax repeal being proposed will make this even worse for CA (not making state taxes deductible, capping mortgage interest). All taxes need to be collected by the states. The federal government negotiates with the state governments on how much they get and what it goes for. This solves what the reds states have been calling for in terms of a balanced budge admendment.
Completely agree. If you end tax round-tripping from person to the state, and every state was having to tax to meet certain standards set by the Feds. (IOW, if there was a national mandate to cover everyone with a basic set minimum health care program, then the “taker states” would have to raise taxes to cover those minimums.
I’m not sure what your point is here. I’m not interested in a competition between the states on who is larger. The point is that “democratic states” versus “republican states” have the largest economies in the US. States like TX seem have a whole different view of what creates a robust economy than CA, IL, NY, CO, etc. Good luck with your view.
Thank you. Since the meltdown, eight of the top 10 states in terms of aggregate economic growth have been red states, with the “old traditional” states in the East either flat or shrinking.
To date the democratic state view seems to be working over the republican state view. I would guess in 10 years TX will be a blue state anyway. Houston, DFW, Austin are all democratic enclaves. They are growing much faster than the rural part of TX. You’ll be where we are in 10 years. You’ll want to join us.
Oh, yes. The “demographics is destiny” argument. The one that predicted that there would never be another Republican president, ever, and the “Blue Wall” would never fall down.
We in CA have a whole different view of what supports a robust economy than you in TX do. As it turns out, our view is supported by economic studies.
If you choose to believe that, there;s not much that can be done for you. It’s pretty easy to do the math and show that to be not true, not the least of which is the fact that CA is now growing slower than the freer market states, it’s population growth is slowing, and other blue states are actually shrinking in population as people seek jobs.
You might want to find some different economists. :-)
Your view which I assume aligns with the trickle down economy view has been debunked. But regardless, I don’t want to tell you what TX should do.
There’s really no such thing as “trickle down” economics. It;s a bumper sticker. We support the lowest tax levels that support a civil society, because it is morally corrupt for a government to take more than the people decide it needs.
Democratic party versus Republican party
Not in terms of growth.