CA: Schwarzenegger to hold special election

AP: San Luis Obispo Tribune ^ | Mar. 01, 2005 | TOM CHORNEAU

[Carry_Okie]

I wouldn't say that he did more land grabs more fees more borrowing and more spending than Davis did. OTOH, he is no Reagan, by any means.

Then you are quite simply, wrong.

The Sierra Nevada Conservancy is the biggest land grabbing tool ever created in California. Davis vetoed it. Arnold pushed it.

His last two budgets have specifically increased fees, especially by his swiping local government revenue to prop up State spending, forcing them to increase taxes and fees instead of the State doing it. It is simply shifting a tax increase.

The currently proposed budget of $111 billion is 16% larger than the $98.9 billion of 2002-3. Not only had total spending increased under Schwarzenegger, the rate of increase has acclerated over Davis, and with less excuse.

When you increase non-discretionary debt service by 40% as Arnold has, that's a given.

[calcowgirl]

Here's yet another example from today's news of local fee increases caused by State raids on local funds:

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2005/03/02/news/californian/23_08_103_1_05.txt

LAKE ELSINORE ---- The local water district's 35,000 ratepayers are in for a surprise with their upcoming water bills. The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District plans to add a $4.13 monthly charge to each customer's bill starting this month to offset the anticipated reduction of $5.2 million in state property taxes over the next two years.

Under the terms of a deal worked out last year between Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and local governments on this year's budget, special districts throughout the state ---- including water agencies ---- were asked to give up a combined $350 million portion of their share of property tax revenues over a two-year period to help balance the state budget.

Ratepayers will see the fee increase show up on their monthly water bills starting this month through March 2007.

(snip)

[NormsRevenge]

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Have you forgotten that Mr. Davis took a surplus and turned it, almost overnight, into a nightmare of a debt? That is far more than 40% increase in debt.

[Carry_Okie]

Have you forgotten that Mr. Davis took a surplus and turned it, almost overnight, into a nightmare of a debt? That is far more than 40% increase in debt.

The bulk of that was due to two factors, the crash in capital gains revenue in 2000 (which Davis had nothing to do with) and SB-1777 class-size reduction which was passed but not fully implemented immediately before Davis became governor.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Er, I think that you are forgetting his short sighted buying of energy - which was an absolutely huge mistake.

[Carry_Okie]

Er, I think that you are forgetting his short sighted buying of energy - which was an absolutely huge mistake.

It was covered by bonds paid for out of your electric bill. It's not a budgetary item. I'm rather familiar with that issue.

Try again.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Oh, one of those notorious off-the-budget items. Still, it is incorrect for you to assert this, since it did add massively to the California debt burden - no matter how that burden was defined.

[Carry_Okie]

Oh, one of those notorious off-the-budget items.

At least you admit your ignorance, but then you insist on digging yourself in deeper:

Still, it is incorrect for you to assert this, since it did add massively to the California debt burden - no matter how that burden was defined.

The debt service is not part of the State budget. It has NOTHING to do with Arnold's current predicament regarding current budgetary cash flow. The debt due to the power crisis was $12 billion dollars. The total Arnold is incurring, $15 billion in Prop. 58, $3 billion more for that embryonic stem cell boondoggle, and now apparently another $8 billion in new debt AFTER promising to "cut up the credit cards," is a total far larger than what Davis accomplished, even if you attribute the power crisis to him in total (although the shortage was manufactured over many years and thus belongs to Pete Wilson as well). Further, Arnold has less excuse in that he has both failed to use his line-item veto and received his mandate having promised to cut spending.

The rate of growth in spending under Arnold has accelerated.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Methinks thou dost protest overmuch. Or do you not understand sarcasm? Percentage wise, Gray Davis' addition to the debt burdens of Californians was far greater than that of Arnold's.

This is not to say, by any means, that I'm happy with much of Arnold's spend and fleece government.

If the debt service is not a part of the official budget, it is unconscionable and dishonest in the extreme (also practiced routinely by the U.S. government). But it still a nasty drain on the economy and the citizens of CA. As such, to ignore it, as you are doing is less than, shall we say, perspicacious?

[Carry_Okie]

Percentage wise, Gray Davis' addition to the debt burdens of Californians was far greater than that of Arnold's.

False again, but I'm not going to bother proving it to you this time because you clearly don't read evidence when it's supplied, sic...

As such, to ignore it, as you are doing is less than, shall we say, perspicacious?

I have done anything but, however, your apparent refusal to read the link I gave you proves that educating you is a waste of time.