Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gov.'s Wins Leave Deficit on Hold (Schwarzenegger)
Los Angeles Times ^ | December 21, 2003 | Joe Mathews and Peter Nicholas

Posted on 12/21/2003 11:56:16 PM PST by calcowgirl

Gov.'s Wins Leave Deficit on Hold
Political triumphs haven't made problems go away.
The state's credit has sagged further and financial pressure has increased.

SACRAMENTO — Arnold Schwarzenegger wins.

Victory has been a constant in the life of the bodybuilder-turned-actor-turned-politician. And it has been the political story of his first month as California governor. Schwarzenegger has shown a knack for fashioning political triumphs: repealing a tripling of the car tax, rescinding a law granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, making a deal with Democrats on a deficit bond and balanced budget constitutional amendment, and deftly going around the Legislature to provide money to local governments.

But as the governor wowed even his critics with this winning streak, the state he leads racked up losses. Two bond agencies downgraded the state’s creditworthiness, pushing the rating on nearly $30 billion in general obligation bonds closer to junk status. Schwarzenegger’s repeal of the car tax boosted next year’s structural deficit — the gap between anticipated revenue and promised spending — from $10 billion to an estimated $15 billion. And his guarantee of money for local governments has increased the financial pressure on the state’s other programs and agencies.

Those two forces — the governor’s appetite for victory and the state’s seemingly intractable problems — have thus far been on separate tracks. Schwarzenegger’s political victories have largely been made possible by delaying any financial reckoning.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: bondrating; budgetcrisis; calgov2002; deficit; schwarzenegger
Another snippet:

Jean Ross, director of the California Budget Project, a nonprofit that studies the budget, noted that Schwarzenegger’s deficit borrowing plan means that the state, instead of borrowing $10 billion to be paid back over five years as Gov. Gray Davis planned, could borrow $15 billion over as many as 13 years — if voters approve the borrowing on the March ballot.

"The fundamentals have moved in the wrong direction" since Schwarzenegger took office, Ross said.


1 posted on 12/21/2003 11:56:17 PM PST by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
The five year plan would carry approximately a finance charge of 50% over the $10 billion bond issue. The thirteen year bond issue of $15 billion at the same interest rate would carry a financing charge of 135% percent over the principal amount.

The total charge paid by California on the five year plan would cost $15 billion. The thirteen year plan will total $15 billion + $20.25 billion financing charge for a total of $35.25 billion. $35.25 billion versus $15 billion. I can readily see where the 13 year plan is going to NOT help California's problem.

2 posted on 12/22/2003 12:21:43 AM PST by meenie (Remember the Alamo! Alamo! One more time. Alamo!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
Ahhh... the "non-partisan" California Budget Project.

Check out the homepage - http://www.cbp.org/

Barbra Streisand is even one of its benefactors.
3 posted on 12/22/2003 12:28:45 AM PST by Tamzee (Pennsylvanians for Bush! Join http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PA4BushCheney/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: meenie
... and the underwriters are salivating at the prospects!

No on Proposition 57

No on Proposition 58

4 posted on 12/22/2003 12:44:31 AM PST by calcowgirl (No on Propositions 55, 56, 57, 58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
Do you dismiss all information if you don't like the source?
Do you dismiss the source if you don't like the message?

What exactly did this article adress from cbp that is not objective or a reasonable opinion?

5 posted on 12/22/2003 12:54:43 AM PST by calcowgirl (No on Propositions 55, 56, 57, 58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl
I could return your questions right back to you - you assume much from one post.

I merely pointed out the (yet again) use of the leftie "California Budget Project" being presented as an objective source in criticizing a GOP governor. Usually that type of garbage annoys conservatives...
6 posted on 12/22/2003 1:05:45 AM PST by Tamzee (Pennsylvanians for Bush! Join http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PA4BushCheney/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
I don't live in CA but what affects the GOP affects all of us and I think my concerns personally about this guy is that he is a plant. And he could do more damage to the GOP than do good.
Just my humble opinion.
7 posted on 12/22/2003 3:46:07 AM PST by stopem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tamsey
I merely pointed out the (yet again) use of the leftie "California Budget Project" being presented as an objective source in criticizing a GOP governor

You did. You stuck to the issue and did your homework before replying. Thanks.

Above and beyond the petty peeves of this forum...

Merry Christmas to you and the best to you and your family during the holidays.

8 posted on 12/22/2003 12:20:02 PM PST by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson