Replies

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.

"I vote against all bond measures. "
====

So do I. I also completely agree with you, that they put the "noble cause" bonds, like for schools, firefighting, etc. on the ballot, then they can squander the other money which should be spend on this.

I thought we already have a 2/3 vote requirement to pass bond measures, that's why many of them fail. I know the Legislature was trying to change that, but as far as I know, they haven't been successful. Am I missing something?

But Arnold is being very responsible, coupling the bond with a spending cut. And as I and others said before, we are facing a crisis, and there is no way to cut enough quickly enough, without some revenue increase, and a bond measure, the way Arnold is doing it, is vastly preferable to a tax increase, which would hurt CA's economy further.

"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

<< 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. >>

Hear! Hear!

Well said.

Thank you -- Brian