|
do people just expect too much from govt these days?
|
Posted on 12/07/2003 9:53:53 AM PST by NormsRevenge
The Democrat-controlled Legislature taught California's new Republican governor Friday night that in politics there isn't always a Hollywood ending. The good guy doesn't always get to blow into town, win the fight and save the state.
After a week of campaign-style stumping up and down California, with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger rallying supporters to pressure the Legislature to place his $15 billion bond and spending cap on the March ballot, the movie-star-turned-governor was handed his first political setback.
Struggling to beat a Friday night election deadline to place the measures on the ballot, Democrat and Republican lawmakers could not agree on the terms of the bond or the spending cap.
Democrats and some Republicans objected to the governor's proposed 30-year bond payback, noting it would saddle generations of Californians with paying the debts of today's spendthrifts.
But the real sticking point was the governor's proposed spending cap a guarantee to voters that if they approve the $15 billion bond, future legislators and governors will not be able to slip California into another financial abyss.
Democrats pressed for a temporary spending limit, calling the governor's proposal too draconian and warning it would result in drastic and harmful cuts to state programs. Republicans demanded strict controls, noting the excesses that led to the present multi-billion budget hole.
Republicans insist the hole be filled by borrowing and spending cuts. They and the governor have ruled out tax increases. Schwarzenegger's first act as governor was to roll back an unpopular car tax hike, enlarging the hole by another $4 billion.
The new governor's "recovery plan" hinged on the $15 billion bond and spending cap. Now what?
A Schwarzenegger spokesman said the governor will do what he has threatened to do go directly to the people, qualifying a spending limit (stricter than he was willing to negotiate) for the November ballot. He will go over the heads of legislators to the people.
Many Democrats contend that may have been the problem with Schwarzenegger's strategy last week. He should have spent more time negotiating with legislators and less time on the stump.
Ironically, the governor who vowed to end "politics as usual," left behind in Sacramento the "politics as usual" team of Republicans and Democrats to continue their partisan bickering, which led to Friday's impasse.
While this may be Gov. Schwarzenegger's first political setback, it should not be viewed as a permanent setback or stinging indictment of his "recovery plan." California's recovery strategy must including temporary borrowing to buy time to accomplish a sweeping, but thoughtful reorganization of state government and cuts in spending.
It must including a mandated limit on state spending that requires reserves money set aside to brace the state in economic hard times and emergencies.
California's financial problems cannot await the threatened "going over legislators' heads" in November. They require action now. They require Republicans and Democrats in the Legislature to work together with the governor.
A recall election brought Schwarzenegger into office just a few weeks ago. Angry voters believed a political outsider could provide the leadership needed to bring warring faction together in Sacramento and loosen the grip of special interests.
The job is not easy. There are no doubles and special effects. Leadership requires a lot of hard work.
Oh , really?
Increased taxes are a reality, Schwarzenegger's commitment or not. Bond approval or not.
Increased taxes will be necessary to qualify for a reasonable bond rate or to restructure the already committed indebtedness which comes due in June. Hopefully California will look past this necessary evil.
Persecute Schwarzenneger, if you must, if you believe he knew, during the campaign, which he probably did, that tax increases were necessary and hid their inevitability from the electorate but don't persecute him because he raises taxes. It is unavoidable. No amount of spending cuts in the next 6 months, save closing the government will avoid a restructuring or default of the pending bond redemption.
I guess I should have asked the quesion...
How do other states do it without a state income tax?
add to that .. and a myriad of other fees, taxes etc?
Or do people just expect too much from govt these days?
|
do people just expect too much from govt these days?
|
Neither do I wish an increase based on population since this would allow an unscruplous executive, working in league with President Fox, to pack the gallery.
Schwarzenegger to Fox: "I need a favor. I need to increase next year's budget cap by 10%
Fox to Schwarzenegger: " No problem. I'll start sending an additional 3 millon per month north."
Actually they do if you live in California. Certain types of approved medical therapy, sexual therapy, allows providers to uitlize "professionals" in their preapproved threapy plans.
No kidding.
It's becoming impossible to parody liberals.
They keep exceeding my imagination.
I'm still laughing even though, at this moment, I'm scrambling to wipe a mouthful of Diet Cherry 7up off my keyboard.
California Secretary of State
2003 Initiative Update
Initiatives in circulation as of December 1, 2003
1014. (SA03RF0048). Public Benefits. Driver's License. Eligibility. Immigration Status and Identity Verification. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
Summary Date: 12/01/03
Circulation Deadline: 04/29/04
Signatures Required: 598,105
Proponent: Ron Price, (714) 899-9631
Amends Constitution to require providers of public benefits to verify whether applicants are lawfully present in the United States. Prohibits state or local public benefits for any aliens classified as ineligible under federal law. Requires state and local officials to report immigration law violations to federal authorities; failure to report is a misdemeanor. Requires state to verify driver's license applicant's identity and lawful presence in United States. Prohibits the state and its political subdivisions from accepting identification documents not issued by a state or federal jurisdiction. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: This measure could result in increased annual costs to the state and local governments in the tens of millions of dollars to verify citizenship or immigration status of persons receiving specified public services. This measure could also result in program savings over $100 million annually to the state and local governments, primarily counties, due to reduced expenditures for certain public services.
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.