What’s worse than reckless spending of your tax dollars? Reckless spending of your tax dollars on a credit card.

Proposition 4 would rack up another $10 billion of state debt to fund a grab bag of programs said to be needed to reduce climate risks and impacts. It’s certainly important to have safe drinking water and to prevent wildfires, but those programs can and should be funded in the state budget, without borrowing money and paying billions of dollars in interest charges.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that the new debt from Proposition 4 would cost California an estimated $400 million every year for 40 years. That money will have to be diverted from future budgets to pay back the investors who loaned the state money by buying these bonds. The total cost to taxpayers could be as much as $18 billion when interest charges are added.

In February, the Legislative Analyst’s Office reported that the state already has $79 billion in outstanding bonds, with another $30 billion authorized but not yet issued. The LAO said the state is currently paying nearly $8 billion a year in principal and interest payments to service that debt. 

Then in March, voters narrowly approved another $6.38 billion in bond debt by passing Proposition 1.

Proposition 4 would add $10 billion to the state’s debt ledger. Before we commit future generations of Californians to pay these debts for 40 years, ahead of meeting their own needs, we should take seriously our responsibility to ensure that the money is being spent on things that will endure and provide tangible benefits for decades to come.

Bonds can be an appropriate way to raise money to build projects that are long-term investments, such as bridges, roads or hospitals. But Proposition 4 is loaded up with what the legislative analyst called “activities within eight broad categories, each with different goals.”

To read the entire column, please click here