Posted on 07/25/2005 9:55:19 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Legislators and the governor celebrated the passage of the 2005-06 state budget that some call a victory for taxpayers - no new taxes, no new borrowing, and the largest single annual increase for the education budget. It is also argued by some that this budget is moving the state's finances towards structural balance.
Such wishful thinking! This budget not only ignores the structural deficit, but it unfortunately paves the way for future tax increases that will become necessary to finance future spending.
Let's begin with the budget's proposed spending plan. As shown in the accompanying chart the enacted budget contains $90 billion of general fund expenditures by various state agencies. This is an increase of about $8 billion from an estimated expenditure level of $81.7 in the 2004-05 fiscal year - an increase of 10.2 percent. Ironically, the adopted spending plan of $90 billion is $12.4 billion higher than former Gov. Gray Davis' 2003-04 budget - an increase of 16 percent over two years.
Of course, there are some one-time expenditures in this budget that will not be incurred in subsequent years. These include the repayment of $1.2 billion of Vehicle License Fee Offset programs that local governments lost between July and October of 2003. But even after adjusting for all one-time spending items, the enacted expenditure plan shows a substantial increase compared to the previous fiscal year. In fact, since the 1997-98 fiscal year, total general fund expenditure has increased at an annual average compounded rate of 6.9 percent - an increase of about 70 percent over eight years.
This rate of spending increase is sharply higher than the 40 percent combined growth rate in inflation and population in the state over the same period.
--snip--
(Excerpt) Read more at ocregister.com ...
Maybe, given the salient factors in this proposed split, instead of East and West California, the two new States should be named Greater and Lesser California. ;-)
Sure glad we didn't vote for that "unelectable" McClintock...
This could work.
Thank you, but the real credit for the initiative perspective overstepping the state legislature goes to CRA leadership.
My only contributions to this proposal were tinkering with the unusual split, finding where the split would best occur and presenting it for consideration to the CRA and other groups and individuals.
Except for a single negative response a few weeks ago, all other responses have been encouraging and supportive. Some have posed very strong questions that should be posed before a real effort is solidified.
If the voters did approve an initiative splitting the state, and through some fluke interpretation of the law, the state legislature were given final say on the issue, and disapproved it, it might well create such resentment among voters that a host of state legislators would be removed from office in a simultaneous statewide recall efforts and replaced with advocates for splitting the state.
There are some major hurdles yet to be overcome before the initiative can become a reality.
I am pretty sure that far northern, or "superior" California would not want to have its water resources drained to the populous southland by vote of an overwhelming majority. We certainly don't share cultuiral values with them. Besides, we have a longstanding arrangement with disaffected conservative rural southern Oregon to form the State of Jefferson. That arrangement has existed since before the bombing of Pearl Harbor. We even have our own flag - a Gold Pan with 2 - Xs (double cross) to represent being double crossed by the State legislature.
The fact that such a thing could be proposed and have serious support would be earth shaking on its own, not just to the state but to what's left or our "country". The leftists have always operated on the assumption that the rest of us will simply go along with their mad ride into hell because, well, we had no place to go and no way to escape them.
Something like this would show the world that we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it: we want the world that we want, not the world they are trying to jam down our throats.
I'm all for it.
I actually have begun to feel sorry for Arnold. I think we all knew what he was in for. I think he thought it would be tough at first. Sadly for him, the interests aligned against him have no idealogical core or value other than win at all costs. They elevate their own selfish desires above what is best for our state.
So we Californians get to look forward to more taxes, more spending and less than ever in return. But at least we can rest at night knowing we're exporting tax dollars to illegals! We're educating the best Mexico has to offer!
Maybe it IS time to move to Nevada. Maybe we can make a last stand in the desert...
But, and do what? There are a certain percentage of people here who still refuse to recognize Schwarzenegger for what he is. They're mad at those who were right about him, but not much else. The time to get off our asses, when real change could have been affected, was two years ago. Now that has passed, and I think it's too early for the next opportunity.
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.