Posted on 12/02/2003 11:27:45 AM PST by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Monday said his opposition to tax increases is based on the public's distaste for them, and if polls showed voters had changed their minds about taxes, he might consider raising them.
For now, however, taxes are off the table. Schwarzenegger remains committed to a series of spending cuts along with a constitutional limit on future spending growth as well as a
$15 billion bond package he hopes to put before voters in March.
He has begun a weeklong campaign to drum up support for his bond and spending-cap measures, visiting Democratic districts and urging voters to ask their lawmakers to approve his measures by midnight Friday, the deadline to get them on the March ballot.
But when pressed about options to deal with the state's stubborn budget crisis, the Republican governor said taxes were off the table -- if only for now.
"Right now, people no matter who you talk to despise the idea of taxes. They'd feel like the government has betrayed them again," he said. "They just feel like right now is the wrong time."
But that could change.
"We don't know what the situation is a year or two from now. It could very well be that you do a survey and you do a poll, and there is all of the sudden the 80 percent of people who say no taxes changed to, you know, 40 percent. And 60 percent say raise taxes -- then you can look at it," Schwarzenegger said.
"But I am against raising taxes in general, because the government has made a mistake."
Fictional crisis
In a sit-down briefing with reporters Monday, he gave a hypothetical example of an emergency that could prompt him to "go to the people" with a tax plan. His fictional crisis involved a sudden need to spend billions of dollars inspecting cargo ships in the state's busy ports.
He suggested his philosophy was more flexible than rigid.
"I always tell people that we have to look at this always at what is right at the moment," he said. "What is right, right now, is people felt there was irresponsibility, there was overspending and it was not because there was a lack of or not enough taxation. It was just overspending."
Bond proposal
To stem that spending, Schwarzenegger has proposed a $15 billion bond and a spending cap to ensure "this can never happen again."
He has begun negotiating a compromise on his spending cap, which he acknowledged would expand the powers of the governor.
"Yeah, it is an expansion of power; there are no two ways about it. But it's a safeguard, so (a huge deficit) doesn't happen again."
Some Democrats have suggested a temporary cap, and he said he was open to that.
But Schwarzenegger promised to fight to get his bond measure on the ballot and to get voters to approve it. He's barnstorming the state this week and will make a stop in Tracy on Friday to drum up support for his measures.
"I'm going to let them know about the March ballot. Let them know this is coming, that this will be on the March ballot. But before, it is the legislators (who) have to vote for it," he said.
He downplayed the suggestion he hoped to intimidate Democrats to vote for his plan by coming into their districts. In Tracy, he'll be on the turf of state Sen. Michael Machado,
D-Linden, and Assemblywoman Barbara Matthews, D-Tracy.
"I think some people interpret it that I'm trying to put the squeeze on the legislators. I think it is not as much the squeeze, but the people should be involved," he said.
He said he would offer Matthews and Machado, or any other lawmakers, to "come with me and stand up there on stage."
Machado, for his part, said although he hadn't personally been asked, he would welcome the invitation. And he said he would join Schwarzenegger in Tracy if his scheduled allowed.
Spending-cap support
But Machado noted the Senate would be in session Friday, and "it wouldn't be very helpful if I were down in the district instead of here working on the issues he's asked us to work on."
Machado supports the idea of a spending cap and a bond but thinks the administration's proposal to take as many as 30 years to pay it off "stretches the burden of this year's problems too far into the future."
"I would like to see something in the five- to seven-year range," Machado said. "I hope that's something we can negotiate with the governor."
Is this the same thing as saying, "if I thought I could get away with it I would raise taxes?"
It could very well be that you do a survey and you do a poll, and there is all of the sudden the 80 percent of people who say no taxes changed to, you know, 40 percent. And 60 percent say raise taxes -- then you can look at it,"
Since when was a poll or survey an emergency situation?
Why doesn't he ask McClintock for his plan to balance the budget without raising taxes?
So there it is...
No, it means that if all of a sudden, instead of only 20% of the voters liking higher taxes, 60% thought they were a good idea, they could be raised to pay for air traffic control for the pigs that were suddenly flying around, too.
Give Arnold credit for answering with an "its never going to happen" answer. He handles the press and his critics quite deftly.
Thanks, I needed a laugh today.
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.