CA: Budget impasse down to $2 billion

Mercury News ^ | 7/4/03 | Ann E. Marimow

[NormsRevenge]

SACRAMENTO - The stalemate over how to fix California's massive $38.2 billion budget shortfall appears to come down to a dispute over what to do about less than $2 billion.

Republicans and Democrats -- at least in the Senate -- have reached agreement on cuts and borrowing that will plug most of the deficit.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

But what about the Children?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

But what about the children of the native born of the USA?

[Torie]

What about them? My sweeping agenda helps all children actually, except those who are deported perhaps.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

But you be happy with Arnold I think!

Should be :

But you would be happy with Arnold I think!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

And the funding for the sweeping agenda?

[Torie]

It actually saves revenue. That is the lagniappe.

[SierraWasp]

"It confuses even me sometimes."

Bravo! Well put!!! We've noticed. You have a wonderfully "Open" mind and soooooo flexible, at times. Interesting how it whips from pillar to post on each and every issue without the limitations of consistency. But you enjoy it that way as we do. It keeps us all awake, wondering!!!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

ROFL!!!!

[Luis Gonzalez]

It makes a whole more sense to kick the children of illegal aliens out on the street.

Then we can save the money we spend on their education, and use it to triple the number of police on the streets, build more juvenile detention centers, and clog up the legal system with their crimes.

Yeah!

That's the ticket!

[Luis Gonzalez]

"I will NOT favor any policy making children victims of culture wars, failed public policy, nativist fears, pinch pennies, or anything of that ilk, ever."

Some "conservatives" will fight to the death for the right of a fetus to life, demanding that the government give legal status to the unborn, then turn right around and deny the children of immigrants any rights, including the right to an education, because of their legal status.

Is it me, or do we really not make sense sometimes?

Shouldn't we be fighting for the rights of children of any legal status?

[NormsRevenge]

Happy 4th :-)

[rolling_stone]

I see educating illegals at taxpayer expense as aiding and abetting (encouraging) their illegal entry. One more lure to be here illegally, free education, without it less would come here.

Children throughout the world are underpriveledged and harmed by their parents actions, it is not up to me to pay for their actions and right their wrongs. Should privately supported charities care to do so, they have my blessing but not my money. Before free education the kids would stay in the home country while a parent would come and work illegally and send money home. While still here illegally it was lesss of a drain on education and health resources. Who pays for the medical care? I suppose you want all the illegals to have free medical care too?

Compassionate Ideology runs into a brick wall when it comes time to pay for it. We should take care of those here legally first before helping those that break the law....A showdown on the whole illegal issue is long overdue and about to explode as it does everytime the economy is not booming......

IMO Get rid of the illegals, import temporary workers who are not eligible for public services and must have employer paid medical benefits. No need for education for those working and whose families are not here. The nation should control its destiny, not those who come her illegally. Without effective controls we are not a self determining nation.

[101viking]

"You are victimizing the child of the illegal alien, who is not at fault"

I am not victimizing anyone. However, it us up to me to decide what charities I wish to support. I resent the Government mandating that I pay for the education of those who have decided of their own volition to come here in direct violation of the law. What basis do these individuals have to respect the other laws that we are obligated to adhere to, if from the get go, they know that there is only selective enforcement? What incentive is there for them to assimilate into our stuctured society if they are living on the fringes because of their illegal status? Don't you see that this promotes a sub-culture and does not benefit anyone, including those who are supposed to gain from the Government's policies? Wouldn't they be more succesful and less prone to being taken advantage of by employers, and those who prey on illegals if they were here with some sort of status? Taking a "look the other way" attitude towards those here illegally does not help these people, it sets them up to be an easily exploited sub-class of the population. To quote you: "I find that profoundly offensive. It doesn't comport with my values at all. I must oppose it."

[Torie]

It all comes down to values. I have my core values. They are a priori. I will fight for them, just as those with other core values fight for theirs. And I will fight for the rights of the fetus, to the extent I think that fetus has the attributes of a sentient human. I have made my decision on that. We each draw our own lines on these issues. If we have well thought out values, and are informed, then those who have come that far, and oppose my values, I respect, even while I want to beat them in the public square. Isn't that what being an American is all about?

[Torie]

See ya at the ballot box. Happy 4th.

[101viking]

I will be at the ballot box, enjoyed debating with youi...you have a happy 4th as well!

[4Liberty]

Politically it's hard to push for privatized government services. Public Labor Unions and Teacher Unions dominate Calif. politics. They are well aware that privatization is efficient - but ...they don't care. They only 'care' that they can't milk union dues from the efficient, innovating, entrepreneurial, privatized small businesses which would serve the public sector agencies under privatization - & so they work very ruthlessly & immorally, 24/7, to block privatization reforms and school vouchers with assorted lame, vague speeches and protests crying about social injustice and "risky schemes" etc. -- no matter HOW good private competition will be for the consumers (students & taxpayers). Don't mean to be pessimistic here but sadly this is the truth. Unions take 1% of unionized pay checks, and half of that membership money is used for political (democrat) activities. That is a lot of D.N.C. money, that Dems don't want to lose. As an economist & conservative, I know that this is a bitter political pill to swallow. But it's 'reality.'

Since they (Unions out here in California) obviously don't care about efficiency or competition, perhaps we can use moral arguments and jawboning to convince them to support free trade/private competition - Here: "Unions complain about 'greed' but - THEY'RE the Greedy, protectionist, bastards. They hide behind banners & protest signs with phrases like "Justice!" to cover for the fact that they are labor-market protectionists without a shred of honor & economic decency. They oppose competition among workers (I prefer to call them "small-business people" or entrepreneurs, rather than the socialist term, "Workers"), because they are subconsciously AFRAID of competition. They claim to be protecting employees from "exploitation", but then violently block 'scabs' - workers who WANT to work, and to honorably & peacefully compete with them - from forming voluntary contracts with private & public sector employers.

Sad, sad, sad. Dishonorable & immoral. Unions. What CAN you do with them?? Nothing. Shameful economic bullies.

[Grampa Dave]

Ann E. Marimow obviously suffers from left wing journalism where her wet dreams replace reality.

[AmericaUnited]

Close UCLA and Berkeley, torch the campuses and spread salt on the soil.

How about something with a half-life of at least 500 years?

[NormsRevenge]

LOL... I don;t know what I would do if I didn't have all these folks work to post here as examples of what happens when the Media usurps its duty to be fair and impartial.