Posted on 03/01/2004 12:42:50 PM PST by calcowgirl
Yes, heaven forbid that a RepublicRAT would have to take responsibility for padding the budget with PORK! Nope, can't let that out of the bag, it might "humiliate them."
Please, someone try to convince me that Ahnold is a fiscal conservative.
Like all RepublicRATs, he hasn't met a big-government snake oil he didn't like.
It's beginning to look like there's two types of Republicans --Those who get elected, then "grow the government" and the dupes who elect them.
The people who elected Ahnold certainly were duped.
It was ever thus...
I'll make it even easier: NO on EVERYTHING!!!!
I agree. The tax-happy legislature placed all these propositions on the ballot, any they simply want more of our tax money.
If Props 57/58 pass, they will serve as a precedent in CA history to permit borrowing money to cover general expenses. Although Prop 58 makes Prop 57 a one-time exception to the state Constitution, future legislatures with fiscal troubles can easily claim that they don't need to reign in spending; they can simply make another exception and pass another bond like we did in 2004.
To solve the deficit, there are really only two options: cut spending or raise taxes. That's the issue that the legislature needs to be forced to deal with. The bonds are no better than a tax. They will be paid for by taxes over time (with interest), vs. immediate tax increases. George Skelton's column in the LA Times, Arguments For and Against Propositions Are Based on Myths highlights the real issue. There is much more than what I am posting, but here's a couple of snips.
Myth 1: There's no alternative to Schwarzenegger's $15-billion bond Prop. 57 even if everybody does have to hold their noses to vote for it.In truth, there are alternatives that are more fiscally prudent. They're just deemed more politically painful by the governor and most lawmakers.
(snip)
Conservative Sen. Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks) wants to move the opposite way. His alternative is to cut spending by 13.5%, contracting out many state services to private enterprise. "If you can find it in the yellow pages," he asserts, "government shouldn't be doing it."
Raise taxes or whack services? "That's a legitimate debate," McClintock says. "What's not legitimate is to add $6 billion in interest to the problem and dump it in our children's laps."
I am definitely on the "Whack" side of this argument. :-)
In what parallel universe does the HJTA operate?
If it is not new debt why is Schwarzenegger asking the electorate to authorize it?
If it is not new debt then how did we escape the previous payments?
If it is not new debt why do we have to pay? Let the original debtor pay.
If it is not new debt then why pile more debt onto the old debt?
If it is not new debt is it a freebie since it was already borrowed once before?
If it is not new debt will we still get an interest deduction on our federal taxes?
Can anyone borrow twice using the original, approved, loan application ?
How can I get in on this creative action?
Do I have to know someone on the inside?
My jaw dropped at the quote you referenced. I started screaming when I read the above.
How can he say this? There is absolutely nothing to stop this legislature from doing the exact same type of short term borrowing they have done and get us in exactly the same place as we are today! Proposition 58 is a sham. And Jon Coupal and HJTA are shameless.
Question: why is HJTA lying? What interest do they have in this sham or how were they bought? I know that I will never trust another word coming out of the organization.
I think we will see increased taxes!
Apparently you two live in flush areas. For the rest of us we have to look no further than our March 2 sample ballot.
Hundreds of municipalities, counties and school districts state wide (three on my sample ballot) are asking our permission to raise local taxes in expectation of the passage of Prop 57/58, which incidentally raises the state component of the sales tax by 1/4% to 1/2%.
Yes, I do. None on the ballot this time around.
ABSOLUTELY - NO ON 56!
If you see the original post, I was referring to HJTA's position on Prop 57/58. Those are the positions that are inaccurate and misleading.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.