Proposed CA amendment

From yesterday's Chronicle, an article on the Governator's State of the State address, in particular a proposed amendment to the CA constitution that would impose a floor for higher ed spending and a ceiling for prison spending in the state.

Currently CA spends about 11% of its budget on prisons and 7.5% on the state college/university system. The proposal would require no less than 10% of the budget be allocated to colleges/universities and no more than 7% on prisons.

Recognizing the current distribution is troubling (quoting the article..."What does it say about a state that focuses more on prison uniforms than caps and gowns?" Mr. Schwarzenegger said in his final State of the State address. "It simply is not healthy."), am I alone in thinking the proposed amendment is equally fraught with potential problems?

Assuming relatively static budgets, you're talking about cutting prisons by almost 1/3. What are the secondary and tertiary implications of that cut? What happens if the state is successfully sued for its new conditions of confinement, but is limited in what it can do to remedy that problem? What happens when the next bubble bursts and you have a ceiling on expenditures (for ANY industry/element of the state budget)?

Conversely, I'm not sure I'm a fan of saying you HAVE to spend a certain amount on any aspect of the budget. When the economy rebounds, can you spend 10% on higher education without wasting money to satisfy the mandate? Certainly we can assume the higher ed system could use some additional investment (my own school is somewhere around 1/4-1/3 of a billion dollars in the hole on capital improvements), once you catch up are you being wasteful in flush times?

Perhaps the Governor is simply trying to float the idea and realizes the starting point here is also not healthy. Perhaps the goal is something more moderate, like a requirement that the spending levels at least be on-par with each other (which at first though, I could probably back).

I will now pause so Dr. HnK can tell me the error of my thinking...

Bringing New Meaning to "Doing Shots"

"Guns Allowed in Arizona Bars Starting Wednesday"

[Arizona bartender Randy] Shields [is worried] about a new Arizona law that goes into effect Wednesday that will allow guns into Arizona bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

Under the law, backed by the National Rifle Association, the 138,350 people with concealed-weapons permits in Arizona will be allowed to bring their guns into bars and restaurants that haven't posted signs banning them.

Those carrying the weapons aren't allowed to drink alcohol.

The new law has Shields and other bar owners and workers wondering: What's going to happen when guns are allowed in an atmosphere filled with booze and people with impaired judgment?

P.S. Thanks to Kristy for the heads-up!