California Lawmakers stymied on budget (Schwarzenegger vows to take it to voters directly)

Sacramento Bee ^ | Dec. 6, 2003 | John Hill and Ed Fletcher

[FairOpinion]

The Legislature failed to act by a Friday deadline on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's first steps for addressing the state's fiscal crisis, leading the new governor to threaten to take part of his plan directly to the voters in November. The Senate rejected bills that would have put the Republican governor's budget measures, including a $15 billion bond and a new spending limit, on the March 2 ballot.

[FairOpinion]

Sen. Rico Oller, R-San Andreas, tries out a joke hat Friday that he had made with the words "Democratic Spending Cap" printed on it and a big hole cut in the top.

"He (Schwarzenegger) is disappointed that the Legislature won't even put his plan on the ballot so that the people can decide," spokesman Rob Stutzman said.

[goldstategop]

The wisest course of action is to let reality sink in for the Left that spending cap or no spending cap, the cupboard's bare and there's no cash left to pay for their pet projects. Right now the Democrats can deny reality all they want til they're blue in the face and their voting down Arnold's proposals doesn't change one iota the situation they're facing. If one is a liberal one has to be concerned but if one is a conservative, its simply good news. Happy Hannukah/Christmas friends and Freepers!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

"You bankrupted us," Brulte said. "It took you five years to bankrupt us. And you're not willing to give this governor five weeks to solve the problem."

I like that statement !

[FairOpinion]

The huges short term bond becomes due in June.

The Dem strategy is to push Arnold into a corner, so he will have no alternative, but to raise taxes.

But I think Arnold won't do that, he will go directly to the people and let them know what's really going on, and who are the ones preventing him from solving the crisis.

I think the incumbents better start thinking about November. They think they are invulnerable. Well, Davis thought so too...

[goldstategop]

I'm in favor of taking it to the ballot. The Democrats can put up a tax increase proposal too and the voters can have a choice between two philosophies. If I were a betting man, I'd say their verdict is no contest.

[FairOpinion]

That is all the legislature was supposed to vote on this time, to put the proposal in front of the CA voters in March, and they denied us the opportunity to vote on it, and let us decide.

That's what makes me so mad!

[SierraWasp]

"If that bond were to stand up in court, it would still be more than $4 billion short of the bond issue proposed by the administration. In addition, this year's budget included another $1.9 billion in borrowing to cover the state's payments into its retirement system."

How do you like that statement?

[45Auto]

The Democrats can put up a tax increase proposal too and the voters can have a choice between two philosophies. If I were a betting man, I'd say their verdict is no contest.

I'd like to think that, too. But the voters in Cal have a dismal history of approving darn near every ballot proposal to borrow money that came along over the last ten years; the election of Arnold hasn't changed their idea that all that money is free. Since over 50% of the tax revenues garnered in Cal go down the RAT hole of public education, and since the moron parents who have children in the system want the "best", they are likely to go along with any proposal to raise everybody's taxes to support the school system, such as it is. All the RATs have to do is scare the parents and bingo - more borrowing, more taxes. That formula has worked for the RATs over and over again.

[goldstategop]

Well if you had a long term to repay the money, it is essentially free. Why worry when your heirs pick up the tab for you? Enjoy your time on Earth today and leave the worries about the debt to the next generation when you're no longer around.

[Amerigomag]

California's governance is a sad excuse.

When the rules get in the way just ignore them (the filing dead line). When an imortant matter is before the legislature piss away tax payer money on worthless props (Oller's cap). When there is honest negotiation to be done, leave it to underlings (AS in Tracy).

[VRWC_minion]

Seems like the governatorisn't playing by the rat's rules. My money is on the voters.

[EggsAckley]

Davis, et. al. didn't believe the recall would make the ballot, and when it did, they still didn't believe it would pass. LOL!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Argh, I am losing track of the money.

Check this out:

Arnold's first defeat

[45Auto]

In the end, Arnold will raise taxes; there is no other choice. California's bond rating sank to pretty low levels as the state's fiscal picture grew dim earlier this year; the bond rating is directly tied to California's ability to raise revenue, i.e., steal money from the citizens. Over the decades, the RAT legislature with the duplicity of the majority of California voters, have gutted the Gann spending limits. Now, there are no limits to any of it. And the "tab" is coming due.

State governments, unlike the fed, cannot borrow indefinitely and simply "paper over" their debt. The books must balance sooner or later, and "funny business" with smoke-and-mirror economics (the RATs favorite kind) simply cannot be sustained. Even if the voters approve a rock-solid spending limit tied to personal income rather than revenue stream, it won't be long before the RATs have schemed to gut it, too.

After all, the founding principle of Marxist economics is that you CAN tax yourself to prosperity. I know many socialists here that say the state can raise all the money it needs by simply raising the income tax on corporations. Of course, they are stupidly ignorant because corporations pay no income tax at all - that taxes are simply considered a cost of doing business and passed on to the consumer. That leads to the second principle of Marxist economics - wage and price controls. Its going to be an interesting year, 2004.

[Amerigomag]

They think they are invulnerable.

They know that they are invulnerable. 27 of the key Democratic distrits in California are invulnerable thanks to the redistricting in 1998 and 2001.

Change the districts to allow competition either between parties or within a party and the legislature will more reflect the mood and will of the electorate statewide.

[Clintonfatigued]

I couldn't have said it better, myself.

[Clintonfatigued]

Well, maybe California voters need to have the state government shut down in order to see how bad their government has gotten.

[ridesthemiles]

You bankrupted us," Brulte said. "It took you five years to bankrupt us. And you're not willing to give this governor five weeks to solve the problem."

John Burton is termed out - this is his last year in office. He doesn't care about how much scorched earth he leaves behind himself. He is just a mouthier version of Davis. I predict that alot of Demorats are going to be surprised at the Nov 2004 polls in Calif.

Getting 800,000 signatures to get spending language onto the Nov 2004 ballot will be no problem. The same group that got Davis recalled can do it. They have the names of petition circulators (volunteers) and they have the structure to send out another round of petitions. Since more than 2 million signatures were gathered to recall Davis, I see no problem getting 800,000 to stop the bleeding.

Arnold is freezing all contracts, freezing all contract extensions, and freezing all NON-essential state worker travel for starters after this vote fell apart.

I think it's the best thing. Now Arnold has a very good reason to turn Donna Arduin loose and CUT, CUT, CUT all around the place. Why? Because we have so much debt, and it will be a year before we can get caps in place, thanks to the Dems.

As for the Republicans voting against the version of spending caps that was on the table Friday night....if reports are correct that Brulte and others felt it was too weak a piece of legislation, then good for them in saying no. Too many rules and regs have been written in the last 20 yrs in Calif that the Dems have cleverly crafted with truck sized holes to run themselves thru. They have snookered the Republicans over and over again.

Too many pieces of legislation are hundreds of pages long, and are presented and voted on with no real awareness of the contents. I think there should be a limit on the number of pages for any piece of legislation so there is no excuse for a legislature member not to read it. In addition to being allowed to vote, I think they should take an oath that they have read the legislation and understand it. See how fast some of this stuff grinds to a halt. Too many last minute re-writes and substitutions, also. That should not be allowed any more. Craft your papers, and then vote up or down. No screwing with it.

[ridesthemiles]

I suspect the caps Rico Oller came up with were paid for from his own campaign funds. Those would be donations, not Tax payer money.

[ridesthemiles]

I like the idea of a part time Legislature. Texas does this, and there is no reason to be giving so many people so much money to screw up such a large state 365 days of the year.