A Dose of Reality for Schwarzenegger (MClintock opposes California bond measure)

LA TImes ^ | Nov. 20, 2003 | Gregg Jones and Evan Halper

[FairOpinion]

"... the governor faced concerns from fellow Republicans over his plan to deal with California's fiscal difficulties without a tax increase.

Brulte said he expected the borrowing proposal to pass the Senate eventually. But Sen. Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks) said he would vote against it, and other Republicans interviewed Wednesday echoed concerns already raised by Burton and other Democrats.

"I think it's fiscally irresponsible to use long-term, general obligation bonds to meet state expenses," McClintock said after the Senate session. "That is why, for over 100 years, the state Constitution has prohibited that practice — to prevent a prodigal generation from running up a huge debt while it parties, then passing the bill on to his children."

He added, "A deficit bond will not have my vote."

Brulte said the key to Schwarzenegger's fiscal recovery plan was a cap on state spending, a central Republican demand. "If the price I have to pay for a spending cap is a willingness to support a deficit bond, I'm willing to look at that," Brulte said. "But our prime objective is the spending cap."

[EllaMinnow]

Hey CC! Long time no see.

[FairOpinion]

"The bond issue will not pass.

Schwarzenegger knows this, as does McClintock.

Even the Democrats oppose it, which is why they want to engage in more illegal financial shenanigans.

Methinks Schwarzenegger and McClintock are playing the Dems like a Stradivarius. "

===

I disagree with you this one time.

The bond measure IS the only way out, short of raising taxes. The Dems want to put Arnold into the position to end up raising taxes -- remember GHW Bush?

Arnold will put the bond measure in front of the people, if the legislature won't pass it. It's either the bonds or immediate tax increases.

I always vote against bond measures, but if it will come in front of the voters, this is one bond measure I will vote for.

McClintock is being his usual obstructionist self. He opposed everything other Republican governors tried to do too: both Deukmejian and Wilson.

[EllaMinnow]

And the easiest way to make Arnold fail is by forcing a tax increase.

I heard yesterday that Arnold has hired one of Jeb's aides to be his "ballot initiative coordinator" in California, so it looks like Donna Arduin isn't the only member of Jeb's brilliant team to be working for the Schwarzenegger administration.

[FairOpinion]

"And the easiest way to make Arnold fail is by forcing a tax increase. "

===

I was just saying the same thing, at the same time, we posted simultaneously at 9:27 am.

This is what I said:

"The Dems want to put Arnold into the position to end up raising taxes -- remember GHW Bush? "

And the sad part is that McClintock, yet again, is helping the Dems against the Republicans, to push CA further into the crisis, instead of lifting it up from it.

[RKV]

If you don't keep the pressure on the legislature (i.e. don't ask for bond election) then they will NEVER cut spending. Shut down all non-essential state government functions if you must, but don't give in. If you give in once, then taxes will be raised, and you know they will never come down. We collect quite enough money to do the things a state government should do. The problem is that we do many things a state government should not do.

[b9]

Arnold reached out to McC, but apparently McC doesn't want to get on board, he wants Arnold to fail

That certainly seems the case, but why would he want California to fail in the process? I still don't understand Tom McClintock.

[FairOpinion]

"If you don't keep the pressure on the legislature (i.e. don't ask for bond election) then they will NEVER cut spending"

==

Arnold was very specific, that the bond measure would be tied to spending caps.

"Schwarzenegger said the bonds must be linked to a constitutional spending limit that will prevent the state from overspending and developing deficits in the future."

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20031119-9999_1n19legis.html

[BibChr]

...Tom McClintock ...[and] other Republicans interviewed Wednesday echoed concerns already raised by Burton and other Democrats....

Doesn't that say it all?

Dan

[RKV]

I guess I have a different view of cause and effect than you do. The cause of California's fiscal problems is that we spend too much, not that we take in too little. If the RATs won't cut programs then take an initiative to the voters to limit income and other taxes. The governor of California can then line item veto spending items in the budget to achieve revenue balance. The RATs are holding the legitimate functions of government hostage to their vote buying schemes. If you want to drive more people (and tax base) out of the state then raise taxes. Further, there is a strong need to eliminate burdensome and counterproductive regulation. This can also be dealt with by initiative if the RATs won't produce appropriate legislation.

[FairOpinion]

"why would he want California to fail in the process?"

===

Why did he want Bustamante to win? Because he thinks that California going down the tubes will improve his, McClintock's personal chances in the next election for Gov.

I haven't said anything about McC after the election, trying to follow Arnold's example, but McC is obviously making it clear, that he will try to obstruct Arnold and the Republicans every step of the way, in their efforts to reform California. What I don't understand is why is he still a registered Republican?

[FairOpinion]

"The cause of California's fiscal problems is that we spend too much, not that we take in too little. "

==

I don't disagree with that. Under Davis CA budget went up 39% in 4 years.

Obviously things need to be cut, but it can't be done overnight.

[Dan from Michigan]

Bonds sometimes raise taxes(retiring bonds)

The last bond measure I voted on had a $180 price tag for property taxes (something like that) for a school building measure.

[RKV]

The legislature has managed to get around Gann limits before and will do so again. My recommendation is to constitutionally limit taxes and fees so there is no more money to go for. Then the fight becomes what it should be - what is important for the state to do given limited resources.

[FairOpinion]

"echoed concerns already raised by Burton and other Democrats...."

==

EXACTLY!

Bottom line: McClintock is voting with the Democrats, against the Republicans.

Who is the real RINO around here, then?

[river rat]

I propose a novel idea......Cut Spending!
- No tax increases
- No new taxes or fees
- No new borrowing.

Fire all State employees hired since a hiring freeze was "announced" and violated.
Freeze all State salaries, benefits and hiring.
Discontinue ALL non-salary perks to the legislature and their staff.
Identify eligible state jobs for sub-contract to the private NON-Union sector.
Cut EVERY Department's budget by 20% until a balanced budget is in place..
Eliminate each and every State Department/Commission/Committe/etc...that can not show an outside audited positive ROI to the State..
Stop all State Legislature checks until a balanced budget is implemented.

A SMALL BEGINNING.....

Semper Fi

[Sabertooth]

I think McClintock would serve the interests of California and those of Republican better, if he would come up with a list of suggested spending caps and cuts, instead of criticizing the bond measure, which is the ONLY solution, short of actually raising taxes, to tackle the budget problem.

Distinction without a difference.

Today's bond measures are tomorrow's tax increases.

I'm glad McClintock is voting against it. I will too. I vote against all bond measures.

Bond measures are the wiggle room politicians use to fund things voters would never approve. Money is fungible.

Ever notice why we only have bonds for schools, police, fire, and environmental spending? It's because voters wouldn't approve social spending. When you vote for any bond, you're giving the politicians license to spend and waste.

We're in our current predicament precisely because of earlier bond measures. Time for cold turkey.

While we're at it, let's get a proposition on the ballot requiring supermajorities for the passage of bond measures.

BTW, McClintock has a plan to balance the budget without taxes or bonds; it was in his campaign.

[CounterCounterCulture]

As usual you are full of crapola

We now return you to your idol worship

[CounterCounterCulture]

Ah, a voice of reason. Thank you.

[BibChr]

You got it. This is why I was never with the "Oh well, the election's over; go, Tom, go" crowd. Not as long as his comporture during this CRITICAL WINNER-TAKE-ALL / LOSER-RUIN-ALL CAMPAIGN stands as a representation of his ideas of leadership and teamwork.

Dan

[daviddennis]

The bond is actually roughly the sum of Davis' previous bonds. Davis used dubious loopholes to issue the bonds, and now the bill is coming due.

His attitude seems to be, reasonably, that putting the whole mess into this year's budget would be too much for people to stomach. But he has to balance the budget moving forward, which is why we have that nice Florida lady and others chopping away.

I think that's a very fair approach. It's probably the best that can be done under the circumstances.

A tax increase isn't a magic bullet either, even if he hadn't promised to avoid them. If you increase our taxes by 15%, to get that $15bln, no matter how it's done, you're going to stall the economy badly.

The bond isn't a great solution, but there IS no great solution to this problem. I think it's the best we can do.

D