Posted on 04/30/2005 7:51:05 PM PDT by calcowgirl
Early last year, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger recruited Democrats for a bipartisan campaign for twin ballot measures he called vital to restoring the state's fiscal health.
In a Sacramento Bee commentary he co-wrote in February 2004 with Democratic state Controller Steve Westly, he said Propositions 57 and 58 would "make sure we would never face another deficit crisis."
"Under Proposition 58, California would have to live within its means," Schwarzenegger said.
This year, as California again faces a multibillion-dollar deficit, the governor has proposed asking voters to approve another new measure - one titled the "Live Within Our Means Act."
He and his fiscal team say last year's measures only started to fix a problem that took years to build.
But with well-financed groups including teachers unions already opposing the new spending control effort, political experts say Schwarzenegger must walk a careful line in explaining to voters that he meant what he said last year - and he means it again now.
"He's going to have to develop a message that says this really is the most important and here's why, and explain why last year didn't do it," said Barbara O'Connor, director of the Institute for the Study of Politics and Media at California State University, Sacramento.
Schwarzenegger has called the "Live Within Our Means Act" the most important of all the potential ballot measures on his current agenda.
His supporters are racing to gather signatures for the spending control initiative, seeking to qualify it for a fall special election ballot.
Backers said they're confident they can gather enough signatures, but they're cutting it close. The governor's allies debated for weeks over the details of the proposed limit before beginning to circulate the measure a month ago.
The secretary of state's office says Friday is the "prudent and practical" deadline for turning in signatures if Schwarzenegger wants to call a special election for November 8. Supporters of his spending control measure concede they might not make that cutoff date.
A coalition that includes school groups and teachers unions launched a new television ad Friday fighting the new spending control measure - which they say will harm schools and undercut Proposition 98's minimum guarantee for education funding.
But the Republican governor said the latest measure is necessary to prevent out-of-control spending by lawmakers in Sacramento.
Last year's budget measures, Propositions 57 and 58, authorized the state to sell up to $15 billion in bonds to help pay off the state's mammoth accumulated deficit, required lawmakers to enact a balanced budget and build up a reserve, and prohibited further borrowing to shrink deficits.
The new measure would restrict the percentage in growth in state spending to the average growth in state revenues from the three previous years. Any surplus revenue would be funneled into a reserve account or be used to pay debts or pay for buildings and highways.
The measure also would give the governor the authority to make emergency mid-year budget cuts if revenue dips below the state's expenses, and lawmakers fail to agree on cuts or revenue increases.
Garry South, a Democratic political consultant who worked for former Gov. Gray Davis, said he thinks voters believed that they were solving the state's budget problems last year.
"How many times can you go to the voters and say, 'This is a once-and-for-all budget reform act that will cure deficit spending?' " South asked. "He has a credibility problem on this."
Allan Zaremberg, president of the California Chamber of Commerce and co-author of the new spending control measure, said he does not think leaders sold last year's measures as a cement-solid fix to all of the state's budget woes.
"If that perception is there, then I would explain to the voters that that was a first step," he said. "It did provide some tools to prevent future budget deficits, but this takes the next step and will give the Legislature and the governor and the constitution more tools to ensure that the state, as the title says, lives within our means."
Schwarzenegger and Westly did, at times during last year's campaign for Propositions 57 and 58, call the measures a first step to healing California's fiscal woes.
In television ads, however, Schwarzenegger said the measures were designed to "resolve our fiscal crisis" and make changes so "that we never get into this mess again."
"That's the bill of goods that people were sold in March of 2004: 'Vote for 57 and 58 and our deficit spending days are over,'" South said. "He's already gone to the people on budget reform and oversold it."
Schwarzenegger won support from Democrats for his ballot measures last year in part by threatening a stricter spending cap. Republicans complained that the measures that ultimately went to the ballot were weak and toothless.
"I think from our standpoint we realize the 57 and 58 package was just a 'spending limit light,' if you will, so I think it's going to be easy to explain to the people that we need more rigorous controls on the Legislature," said Senate Republican leader Dick Ackerman.
Ackerman said the governor and supporters of the "Live Within Our Means Act" would seek to show voters that Democrats who oppose the measure simply want to raise taxes. He pointed to Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata's recent assertion that the state should spend $4 billion more for schools, even if it means raising taxes.
"I think some of our (Democratic) colleagues will help us sell it," Ackerman said.
Assemblyman Joe Canciamilla, D-Pittsburg, said lawmakers knew Propositions 57 and 58 were not a final answer. He opposes Schwarzenegger's current effort and says lawmakers need to confront the state's budget problems without repeatedly going to the ballot.
"The governor chose to campaign for these measures (in a way that) made them appear to be, through the commercials, more of a solution than they were," Canciamilla said. "They were a partial fix."
"If that perception is there, then I would explain to the voters that that was a first step," he said. "It did provide some tools to prevent future budget deficits, but this takes the next step and will give the Legislature and the governor and the constitution more tools to ensure that the state, as the title says, lives within our means."
Yep. The first step was to borrow $15 Billion dollars, and this initiative, his second step, will allow them to borrow $10 Billion more.
Zaremberg seems to think "live within our means" equates to borrowing to your margin limit. Debt is just a "tool" to him, to make it appear that the state isn't in the financial crisis that it is.
.
This time for sure! Yeah, that's the ticket!
$10 Billion dollars for your thoughts, California taxpayers.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Regardless of what people think Bonds ain't FREE.
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.