CA: Proposition package fails the test ( Prop 57 , Prop 58 )

OC Register ^ | 2/17/04 | Op/Ed

[NormsRevenge]

Propositions 57 and 58 are a package. Either both pass, or both fail. If only one wins with voters, both still fail.

The package is advertised as a way to deal with the immense general-fund debt in the California state budget that was run up under the administration of recalled Gov. Gray Davis (Prop. 57) while making sure that overspending and going into debt will be prevented in the future (Prop. 58).

[NormsRevenge]

.

[goldstategop]

I agree. If Proposition 58 contained a real cap on spending and had Arnold held out for his original proposal, his bond might have passed. In any event, I see no good reason to make life easier for the Democrats in Sacramento by burdening the next generation with the bill for their pigging out at the taxpayers' trough.

[AgThorn]

OK, I'm voting NO - Now if only our 'electable' Swartznegger would start listening and speaking a lot more like our so called 'unellectable' McClintock, this state might be salvagable.

On a separate question, since Arnold has been silent on the San Francisco marriage zoo, has anyone heard anything from McClintock on this item? Not that his opinion would count for much but, again, since my voted in Governator has been so quite on this I was wondering if once more McClintock's might have said something that I wish would have come out of the Governors office.

[AgThorn]

Oh, yeah ... so that's NO on 56, 57 & 58!!!

 

          

click graphic to go to website

[seenenuf]

The whole editorial - Great! I hope Californians pick up on the last paragraph. Up until last week, I had believed a
GOP star (Spitzer), sent out on the GOP circuit to speak. He pleaded that we HAVE to vote yes on 57 'for Arnold's sake'. I won't. I surmise that the Gov doesn't want to fight the fight for cutting tons of redundant programs, and this is the best he could get. I'll take my marching orders from Tom McClintock, which includes voting for Gibson for Assembly in the 73rd.

[seenenuf]

The whole editorial - Great! I hope Californians pick up on the last paragraph. Up until last week, I had believed a
GOP star (Spitzer), sent out on the GOP circuit to speak. He pleaded that we HAVE to vote yes on 57 'for Arnold's sake'. I won't. I surmise that the Gov doesn't want to fight the fight for cutting tons of redundant programs, and this is the best he could get. I'll take my marching orders from Tom McClintock, which includes voting for Gibson for Assembly in the 73rd.

[seenenuf]

The whole editorial - Great! I hope Californians pick up on the last paragraph. Up until last week, I had believed a
GOP star (Spitzer), sent out on the GOP circuit to speak. He pleaded that we HAVE to vote yes on 57 'for Arnold's sake'. I won't. I surmise that the Gov doesn't want to fight the fight for cutting tons of redundant programs, and this is the best he could get. I'll take my marching orders from Tom McClintock, which includes voting for Gibson for Assembly in the 73rd.

[Digger]

Oh, yeah ... so that's NO on 56, 57 & 58!!!

Just say NO to all propositions.

[dmanLA]

Done deal. Did the early voting thing.

No on every proposition. Sorry Arnold. Try again.

BTW, while you're at it, arrest Mayor Newsome for violating state law (if you have the guts).

[calcowgirl]

Prop. 57 relies on more borrowing instead of more spending cuts and Prop. 58 offers only toothless limitations on spending.

Exactly!