Posted on 07/07/2005 11:23:37 AM PDT by calif_reaganite
Mr. President:
I am sorry to interrupt the chorus of self-congratulations, but I feel compelled to state an obvious fact – that this budget is $6 billion out of balance; that the state’s chronic deficit spending is getting worse, not better; and that the growth of general fund spending is growing and not shrinking.
Nor can I join applauding the “painstaking negotiations” that have produced this document. The fact is, in May the Governor proposed spending $88 billion (General Fund), the Democrats countered at $89 billion, and they have now compromised at $90 billion. I suppose it is a blessing that the negotiations didn’t go on any longer.
Let me run through the vital statistics of this spending plan. According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office in June, inflation and population will grow 5 percent and revenue will grow 6 percent. But according to the budget staff analysis, spending will grow by 10 percent. That makes it measurably worse than the plan the Senate rejected on June 15th.
On June 15th, we rejected a $5 billion operating deficit. This budget spends $90 and takes in only $84 -- for a SIX BILLION DOLLAR shortfall – THIS YEAR.
On June 15th, we rejected a 9 percent increase in state spending. This budget is a 10 percent increase – averaging 7 ½ percent over the last two years. Spending increases under the Davis administration averaged 6 percent.
Let me repeat: This budget spends $6 billion more than we take in. Last year we spent $2 billion more than we took in. That means that this year’s operating deficit is THREE TIMES bigger than last year’s.
Now, I’m sorry to throw cold water on the celebration, but that is not progress. That is the opposite of progress.
And yet, once again, we’re told that the budget is balanced. But the blunt truth is that it is only balanced with borrowed funds carried over from last year.
We’re told that there is additional debt repayment in this budget. But listen carefully: you’re using borrowed money from last year to repay borrowed money. That gets you precisely no where.
And by next year, according to the staff analysis, we will have completely maxed out on our Prop 57 credit card and we’ll still be about a billion dollars short. And our cumulative budget deficit will have grown to nearly $30 billion. That’s more than $3,000 in taxes that an average family will be obligated to repay just as surely as the balance on their credit card statement.
IF this budget is adopted today, I believe that it can be safely said that “Never in the field of California finance has so much been owed by so many … because of so few.”
And this is only if everything goes perfectly. And that requires us to ignore the urgent warnings of the Anderson Forecast – and others – that difficult economic times lie directly ahead.
If there is so much as a hiccup in the economy, this state will be plunged into a financial crisis that will make 2003 look like the good old days.
There is, however, one good thing that this budget accomplishes. It makes it absolutely imperative that we restore to the governor the authority that he held from 1939 until 1983 to make mid-year spending reductions without having to return to the legislature.
This authority served this state extremely well until it was bargained away – over my objections, I might add – back in 1983.
Restoring the authority of the governor to halt this state’s chronic deficit spending is at the heart of the “Live Within Our Means Act,” and with the adoption of this budget, it is now about the only thing that stands between our state and financial insolvency. We would be well advised to adopt that measure right here as an adjunct to this budget.
This is my 19th state budget vote. It might surprise many of you to know that I voted to support five budgets in the 1980’s – budgets that were actually balanced and that had prudent reserves. The concept seems almost quaint today. Those were days when we had a Triple-A credit rating and our debt service was 1.3 percent of the budget.
And then in the late ‘80’s we saw the budget process gradually shifted from the legislature to the so-called Big Five. And we began passing budgets that were brazenly unbalanced or that included massive tax increases that brought even bigger deficits as they crushed the economy.
And we are now dragging along the cumulative result of this folly. Some $25 billion of deficit-related general fund debt – growing to nearly $30 billion by next year. Our credit rating is the lowest in the nation and our debt service costs have quintupled as a percentage of general fund spending.
I don’t know how much farther we can go down this road before the state’s credit will be completely exhausted. At that point, we will not only have failed to provide the sound management of our generation’s affairs – but we will also have stripped our children of their ability to meet their generation’s needs as they struggle to repay the mountain of debt with which we have crippled them.
I’m sorry to rain on this parade but those are the facts, and as John Adams said, “Facts are stubborn things.”
First Karl Rove installed Gerald Parsky in California to push Richard Riordan for governor. Riordan lost to Simon by a huge margin in the primary, because Republican voters rightly saw him as a leftist RINO.
Then Rove and Parsky pulled their support from Simon, and with the help of a furious media attack on him and a corrupt judge, Simon was defeated by a narrow margin.
Then Rove and Parsky jumped into the recall situation and pushed Arnold forward. They said if the voters didn't vote for Arnold, then Bustamente would be elected. So conservative voters bit their tongues and voted for Arnold instead of McClintock.
Arnold could never in a million years have beaten McClintock in a primary election, but because of this maneuvering, he didn't have to try.
Now we see what we got. A big talking, big spending, pro-abortionist, pro-homosexual blowhard. Arnold made some good movies, but he couldn't be a worse governor. Even Gray Davis was better, because at least he was a Democrat who was making his party unpopular.
A lot of this is Rove's doing. He is a smart operator in many ways, but he has a foolish fondness for imposing pro-abortion RINOs on the party. Specter is a more recent example. I hope Rove has begun to learn his lesson, namely that you don't get votes by favoring abortion, perversion, and big spending, especially if you are a Republican.
Better late than never.
Tom is my hero as far as the GOP is concerned in CA. God knows, there are very few in this state. When he runs for Lt. Gov. in 06 I hope he gets elected.
Damned Cassandra!
< /sarc >
A little hyperbole goes a long way.
Anything is better than Bustamante.
The only way Arnold could have done better (without a budget fairy) might have been across the board real 5% cuts; no exceptions.
The support just wasn't there.
And the budget fairy is still AWOL...
Yup, Arnold was a pig in a poke and the Rove/Parsky GOP is now accountable for this mess.
(/sarcasm)
Exactly. That's why I $upported Tom McClintock.
bottom line.... We are another $6 billion in the hole this year...what was the recall all about again?....tell us again how your vote counted
I don't necessarily dispute that. But if McClintock had run against Bustamente without Arnold entering the race, as the annointed candidate of the White House, he probably would have beaten him.
Taking it back earlier, if Parsky hadn't refused to do any fund raising for Bill Simon, an outstanding candidate, Simon would have beaten Gray Davis and the whole business never would have happened.
There was a myth out there that Bill Simon was a poor campaigner. Well, that was mostly a Democratic propaganda ploy, given some credibility because the Democrats had the whole California media machine on their side, and Simon had no advertising money to counter it, because his wonderful fundraiser Parsky was taking a vacation, while frightened Republican country clubbers were ponying up to Gray Davis for fear of what he might do to them after he was re-elected.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Looks like we will only have 26 billon in the PORK FUND now.
This advanced math is probably a little bit over the heads of the legislature.
I thought that everything, everywhere was Bush's fault.
I want Governor McClintock and a solid supporting cast.
That's partly true. His handlers ignored some good advice from someone working on the campaign, and went with the party line.
It's absolutely wrong that the GOP won't support anyone but their anointed ones.
McClintock would have most likely been our governor if he was supported and the field was cleared.
But Arnold was the chosen one.
They had to do it or Parsky would not release the funds.
It's absolutely wrong that the GOP won't support anyone but their anointed ones.
I'm sorry to say that I don't concur. Simon was screwed by his own Party offals. Gerald Parsky was hired because of his supposed fundraising ability. Parsky had a personal vendetta against Simon's father, Bill Simon Sr. The way he ran the operations of that campaign was payback. Nothing was spent until the last minute and the momentum Simon had through the primary was lost. Parsky dictated that he accept Wilson-Jones as a consultant, when Russo Marsh had got him through the primary. Parsky wouldn't release funds for GOTV organization, even to buy computers to track registrations. Parsky insisted Russo put Simon's signature to the Log Cabin letter, else he would not release funds. That upset a lot of Simon's base. Rove made sure every dime raised by the President in California went through Parsky's hands.
| Candidate | Votes | Pct. | Spent ($MM) |
| Steve Westly | Moderate Democrat | 45.4 | $10.6 |
| Tom McClintock | Conservative Republican | 45.1 | $2.0 |
| Result? The conservative got no support from the GOP, was outspent 5:1 by a moderate Democrat, and nearly won anyway. |
|||
| Candidate | Votes | Vote Pct. | Spent ($MM) |
| Cruz M. Bustamante | Leftist Democrat | 49.5 | $4.6 |
| Bruce Mc Pherson | Moderate Republican | 41.8 | $2.8 |
| Result? The “moderate” Republican darling of the GOP got lots of support, was outspent only 1.6:1 by an extreme leftist with no credibility, the "electable" GOP "moderate" LOST by a margin NINE TIMES larger than the unsupported conservative in the same election.
|
|||
I'm sorry to say that I don't concur. Simon was screwed by his own Party offals. Gerald Parsky was hired because of his supposed fundraising ability. Parsky had a personal vendetta against Simon's father, Bill Simon Sr. The way he ran the operations of that campaign was payback.
I didn't know the whys and wherefores that you point out in that statement. But that was my point. He was done in by his own people, from the top down to his closest "allies"
Sad that he used a personal vendetta to Pars(e)ky his words against Simon.
A friend of mine worked on the campaign, and told me that they wouldn't listen to her advice. Now I understand why.
I'll FR mail you her name as she has left public life.
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.