Posted on 01/14/2006 8:53:48 PM PST by FairOpinion
Gov. Schwarzenegger breezed into office in October 2003 announcing that he hoped to fix dysfunctional California government with some simple reforms, including an overhaul of the state's budget structure. Now he finally has acknowledged that it's not so easy.
A major reason is that more than 70% of state spending, which totals a projected $126.6 billion in the fiscal year starting July 1, is already accounted for before he even begins the budget process. That money is mandated to be spent for specific purposes and nothing else. It's a fiscal straitjacket that makes it impossible for the state to make logical choices and put its tax dollars to work where they may be most needed.
.. Proposition 98 in 1988, fixed education spending permanently at roughly 40% of the General Fund budget. Proposition 98 still is a major factor driving budget-making in the state. In the coming year, state spending on education from kindergarten through community colleges will total about $40 billion, or a little more than 40% of the General Fund.
The governor says nothing will solve the state's budget problem "other than getting rid of those automatic spending formulas." The only way to do that is a sweeping reform of state government, something that is not on the horizon unless people begin demanding it. All California voters can do for now is to keep things from getting worse by rejecting the new ballot-box budgeting initiatives that are certain to come.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
"The problem began in 1978 with the passage of Proposition 13....
No, the solution began in 1978 with the passage of Proposition 13."
I agree. That was a dumb statement in the article, to blame things on Prop 13, which cut and kept propoerty taxes reasonable. Of course they are still getting plenty of revenue from property taxes now that property values skyrocketed and there are a lot of sales. All the new owners are paying taxes based on their current sales price.
"I think the key is to way in advance educate the electorate over and over."
I agree. Of course, in the meantime the Dems want to start brainwashing kids starting at age 4 in public pre-schools.
I hope this latest proposition won't pass. But the ignorant CA voters voted in "tax the rich" to help the mentally ill, so surely they will "tax the rich" to "help the children".
Is there any doubt at all that the next proposal will be pre-preschool for 3-year-olds, followed by "Ah, what the heck, full-time care for every child from birth" after that? It's all about the teachers unions and unionized government employment for "welfare-to-work" losers.
Will the last productive person with an IQ over 60 leaving California please turn out the light?
Stick a fork in the place, it's done.
Your continued misrepresentations of Prop 76 as "cutting taxes" or "cutting spending" or "eliminating formulas" and saying that anyone who voted against it is a Democrat are getting really, really tiresome!
Prop 76 had some good things--and LOTS of bad things. It did not reduce spending, and it did not eliminate the Prop 98 formulas and it had NOTHING to do with taxes. It was a deceitful proposition that authorized more debt and bonds.
"The key is not to crank government spending down," said Tom Campbell, Schwarzenegger's former finance director, who left the post to campaign for the initiative. "It's just to spend no more than we have."
San Diego Union-Tribune, October 21, 2005But Campbell said he has looked forward starting in 2006, which is when the measure would take effect, and doesn't believe that the cap would have an impact on state spending until 2013. "That's because we start with three good years of revenue behind us," he said. "It completely depends on what year you start."
San Francisco Chronicle, October 22, 2005Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and his team insist schools won't lose money... "It actually increases education funding when the economy is down, that is unequivocal, that is without debate," said Tom Campbell, the governor's financial director. "Then when the economy is doing well, the legislature could put the money back in or not. It's up to the legislature. Its not automatic."
NBC11, October 11, 2005]:
"The village", i.e. "the state" can do a better job of raising kids from infancy, it will be all for the "good of the children". (/sarcasm)
Welcome to full communism, that they didn't even achieve in the Soviet Union.
Judge allows extra union dues to fight Calif ballot Props 75, 76, Nov. 4, 2005
THE CA PROPOSITIONS; Democratic and Republican activists discuss the propositions
Dean urges voters to reject measures governor supports [California]
Davis opposes Schwarzenegger's reform initiatives
CA: Feinstein to oppose Schwarzenegger's special election initiatives
John Alden (Marin cnty Dem Party chairman): Vote no on Prop 76 - we need better leaders
Top Democratic leaders at Penmar Park rally to 'swat' governor's special election measures. Key note speaker: Angelides, Dem candidate for governor
Liberal groups (Moveon.org) try to link special election to broader GOP agenda
Open letter from Phil Angelides (opposing Schwarzenegger and the Propositions)
McClintock's recommendations for CA Propositions
Summary of Recommendations on the CA Propositions by various organizations and parties
CA: McClintock stumps for governor's ballot initiatives
Ad watch: McClintock in radio spot supporting Prop. 76 (includes actual text)
Supporters of the CA Propositions 74-77 include CA Club for Growth, Howard Jarvis Taxpayer Association, Ray Haynes, San Fernando Valley Town Hall Conservatives, Republican Party, and many others. Click on the link for a more comprehensive list.
And you can see from links above who are the ones opposing them: Democrats, Unions, Gray Davis, Howard Dean, Phil Angelides, MoveOn.org, various Dem party chairmen, etc.
Unfortunately, the morons in Sacramento will never get it.
No! I prefer an honest straight forward initiative that addresses the problem, not one that includes unnecessary, destructive provisions while including a few non-substantive feel-good changes solely to deceive the public into voting for it.
California has already had its share of those--Prop 76 was just the latest.
For past deceptions, Read this article from the Reason Foundation:
Such a Deal: Californians Have a History of Buying Ballot Measures that are Deceptively Written and Advertised
The reason the lawmakers hands have been tied by the initiative process is that the legislature is paralyzed by inaction. They debate crap like drivers' licenses for illegal aliens and gay marriage.
When the people (or the special interests) want anything done, they go to the initiative process due to the failure of the legislature to take substantive action on anything.
"Voters are always all to willing to vote other people's wallets to extra taxation, but if it was going to hit them, boy all hell would break loose."
==
Exactly. An old joke goes something like this:
A communist is trying to explain communism to a peasant. He says: "If your neighbor has two cows, he has to give one to you".
Peasant: Great, I like it.
C: If your neighbor has two chickens, he has to give one to you.
P: "Wonderful, I like communism".
C: And if your neighbor has two shirts, he has to give one to you.
P: NO, I don't like communism.
C: Why not?
P: Because I've got two shirts and I don't want to give one to my neighbor.
Yep, there isn't as much responsible, ethical or logical voting as there should be in California.
This whole LA Times article wants one to believe that we can't do anything about the formulas, so we must get rid of Prop 13. We already heard Warren Buffet saying that, and Pete Wilson was a vocal opponent of Prop 13 from the beginning. The LA Times painting Arnold as the helpless victim is just furthering their leftist cause to raise taxes.
The fact is, while restrained by formulas, Arnold has *chosen* to not balance the budget and has been more generous to education than the formulas require. General Fund spending has increased by 37% in the past 3 years under Arnold--and that was not all due to formulas. The state ended 2005 (June) with a $9 Billion surplus. Arnold's proposed budget reduces that to $153 million by the end of this year.
Nope--no doubt.
It's all about the teachers unions and unionized government employment for "welfare-to-work" losers.
And the communists... they want to mold the minds of your children. I won't be surprised to see Jane Addams honored in the California Women's Museum at this point.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
How appropriate.
Are you claiming that this is not correct? If so, please provide proof.
"more than 70% of state spending, which totals a projected $126.6 billion in the fiscal year starting July 1, is already accounted for before he even begins the budget process. That money is mandated to be spent for specific purposes and nothing else. It's a fiscal straitjacket that makes it impossible for the state to make logical choices and put its tax dollars to work where they may be most needed.
.. Proposition 98 in 1988, fixed education spending permanently at roughly 40% of the General Fund budget. Proposition 98 still is a major factor driving budget-making in the state. In the coming year, state spending on education from kindergarten through community colleges will total about $40 billion, or a little more than 40% of the General Fund. "
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.