Posted on 02/09/2006 6:00:45 PM PST by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO (AP) - Assembly Democrats, critical to the success of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's $222 billion public works program, on Thursday questioned how the proposal's bond money would be repaid and said their spending priorities differed somewhat from the governor's.
The issues were raised in a news conference after Democrats returned from their annual retreat and marked the start of serious closed-door negotiations over Schwarzenegger's so-called strategic growth plan, the centerpiece of his legislative agenda for the year.
Democrats said they agree on the concept of a plan to rebuild California's public works, but offered only a sketchy outline of alternatives to the governor's spending priorities. New classrooms, public transit systems and environmental protections should come first, said Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles.
Schwarzenegger's plan emphasizes spending on schools, but also puts on emphasis on rebuilding freeways, levees, ports, prisons and government buildings such as court houses.
"The fact that we need to invest in California's infrastructure - we are still committed to that," said Nunez, flanked by about half the Assembly's 48-member Democratic caucus. "We are also committed to re-prioritizing what our needs are in terms of infrastructure bonding."
Schwarzenegger proposed the building plan in January, intending to put the first of $68 billion in bonds before voters in the June election. Whether the differences can be accommodated in time to place an initiative on that ballot is unclear.
The governor's plan calls for voters to approve a series of bonds through 2014 to provide part of the money needed to rebuild California's public works.
He has said he is open to alternative views and expects to negotiate a compromise with legislative leaders. But he also has said he will resist any move to turn his plan into a one-year bond only.
On Thursday, Nunez said some members of the Democratic caucus favored just such an approach.
Speaking to business leaders Thursday in San Jose, Schwarzenegger promoted the building plan as crucial for improving the state's economy, as he has done in a series of recent public forums.
"Add all of these things up - better roads, better ports, better public safety, better air and water, better schools - and you see why the strategic growth plan is a necessity for California," he said. "It's good for the people, and it's good for business. It will lead to a jobs and construction boom all around the state, with all the benefits that go along with it."
The Assembly Democrats' news conference followed a three-day retreat in Monterey during which the caucus considered not just the governor's bond program but also the state budget and other issues. Their return to Sacramento marks the beginning of serious negotiations over spending and legislative issues.
Democrats said their goal in negotiating with Schwarzenegger over the bond proposal was to get more money for schools, public transportation and parks, but they provided almost no details about how they planned to fund the initiatives.
They said the governor's plan for paying back the $68 billion in borrowing, if approved by voters, put too much of a burden on the state's general fund. Yet they offered no alternative.
They also spoke about a broad initiative to upgrade schools, a 10-year plan to make California among the best in the country. But again, Nunez offered no details.
He said he preferred to discuss details with the governor before making them public.
Voters who travel our roads should be outraged by this.
They are over-crowded, underbuilt and falling apart before our eyes.
And they want to add a few bus stops to fix things up?
Please!
Either way, no matter who "wins", it will be more buildings, freeways and schools, whose debts will be paid for by future generations of California citizenry, that will likely end up being named for icons of gay, green and social activism lore.
questioned how the proposal's bond money would be repaid...
Now, if I were Schwarzenegger, my response would be, "What? You're in control. You tell me."
questioned how the proposal's bond money would be repaid...
Now, if I were Schwarzenegger, my response would be, "What? You're in control. You tell me."
This activity is reason #568 why I moved out of California. Last I heard education gets an automatic 50% of whatever money gets to Sacramento. Which means it's loaded with cash (and the kids still get a real deal on tuition).
But they do have to be taught by teachers approved by the CA Superintendent of Public Instruction. This tends to damped the skill curve jusssst a bit.
Democrats say their constituents should get all the money and help consolidate their power.
sshhhh,, It's OK,, 'WE' don't have to pay it back, yaknow.
Our kids do.
The floodgates are open! Name your project/pork!
You can listen to an interview the OC Register did with Arnold the other day at the link in this article.
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/local/article_983869.php
His logic went something like this:
His strategic growth plan isn't spending... it's investing.
In the past 5 years, the State has spent $42 billion in bonds with no direction (for parks, for water projects, for stem-cell research...)
Now there is direction... he has presented a plan.
If you take $42 billion and double it (10 years), you get $84 billion... and Arnold is only proposing only $68 billion in bonds.... so he is proposing to spend LESS. And the really great thing is he will leverage it (public private partnerships, etc) to get $222 Billion! And that is fiscal discipline!
When you have amigos in high places who needs to worry about the legislative minority. Life is a breeze for the Assembly majority leader.
Not so kind to its minority members. Assembly Republicans have seen the Wilsonegger gang ignore them these past three years. The gang simply works out a deal with the majority and then rest confidently that their man, McCarthy, will keep the Republican, assembly sheeple in line.
The Gang of Five
Delivering the goods for California.. ;-)
donors.
Willing to bet that when these same voters are asked to pay for play they will refuse and carp? Betya!
"You're going to charge me what every day to use the new freeway?" will echo around southern California in outraged tones.
They then say the deal had "bipartisan support".
What a boondoggle. It has become a contest to see who can piss away the most money the fastest. I wouldn't be surprised to see the freeway bond money used to remove freeways in the name of environmental protection.
Your tagline is the epitome of CA! Or, should I say CA is the epitome of your tagline!!!
EQUALS MORE ILLEGAL ALIENS, RATIONALIZATION FOR A GUEST WORKER PROGRAM.
THERE IS ALREADY a "jobs and construction boom all around the state" and any more "booming" will result in Manhattan from Coast to Inland border.
Improve our roads, YES...
[sarc]...but that might mean getting the unions to do more efficient work in CA, so, can't have that! [/sarc.]
Hahahaa, well said. As in, ain't it the sad, sad truth.
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.