Posted on 09/02/2005 2:59:40 PM PDT by calcowgirl
SACRAMENTO -- Facing widespread opposition to his special election, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Friday that if voters reject a proposed spending restraint on the November ballot, he might be forced to raise taxes.
Schwarzenegger previewed a campaign theme in a morning radio interview, predicting that new taxes might be the only alternative if voters reject Proposition 76, the "Live Within Our Means" act.
Asked on Sacramento station KTKZ-1380 AM what he might do to avert future budget deficits if the spending control is defeated, Schwarzenegger said:
"Then we have to look at raising taxes, because this is the only option we have, in order to create the money. And this is why I tell people vote yes on Proposition 76 and make sure that we do everything that we can to pass this proposition so that we force our legislators once and for all to live within their means and not to continue spending money and to keep making promises to people that they can't keep."
Schwarzenegger's comments came amid a new statewide poll showing little appetite for the Nov. 8 special election that he depicts as central to his "year of reform" agenda.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
That'll work.
>>Allowing the governor to make mid-year cuts could do wonders. Right now he's boxed in by a lot of mandates...
The deficit spending is NOT a result of mid-year expenditures. For two years in a row now, Arnold has passed a budget that is structurally out of balance (i.e. spends more than revenues). What good is the power to impose mid-year spending cuts if he won't even use the powers he has now to cut at the beginning of the budget year? Not only has he not cut, those budgets were the result of HIS proposed spending levels.
This whole measure is a ruse to get the voters to approve more borrowing, IMO. If he really wanted a spending cap, he would have backed the measure proposed by John Campbell, et. al.
>>I haven't read the prop yet...
Maybe you should before trying to defend it.
Why would Tom support 76?
Because as Arnold said last week on his interview with Hugh Hewitt said "No. We don't want to cut anything"
You'll have to ask him.
The proposed budget with increased spending is his and his alone. I would have him stay true to his campaign promise of cutting up the credit cards. So far all he has done is run up the balance.
Are they more powerful than the multitudes of F-Bombs I want to drop whenever one one the Politicians in Sacratomato want to raise my taxes again to pay for their useless social(vote buying)programs?
I value Tom McClintock's opinion on fiscal matters (I'm surprised you don't). It's good enough for him. I will read it however. How would you handle the inevitable political warfare if he made cuts? He didn't even make education cuts and look at the union's efforts. We need to give him breathing room. Redistricting and paycheck protection can give that. I don' t mind some borrowing when it's done in the name of substantive reforms.
Governors in CA *had* this mid-year correction power for about 50 yrs until the Duke was governor. It's a tool we could use. I don't know specifically why Arnold is shy at making cuts but, hell, Bush has never vetoed anything including the transportation pork farm. Bush has much more political capital left than Arnold.
I fully expect Arnold will face an ugly GOP primary (if he runs), may well lose that and the GOP's goat will be mowed down by the next Democrat governor who will surely raise taxes as the sun rises. The recall will have been totally squandered. We need to salvage it and I for one will support the gov's reform agenda and two other measures.
Too bad so many like Sean Hannity were willing to sell out principle to get a Republican into office.
Memo to Arnold: Borrowing another $10 BILLION is not "creating money." This is what happens when you don't cut up the credit card.
"Cut, cut, CUT!!!" Arnold is like a drunk who promises to quit drinking.
Thank you.
Across the board cuts, just like McClintock said he would do. It's the only way the spending mandates can be observed while cutting total spending. It sucks, but that's what the voters wanted. If Arnold was ever going to get the voters to rescind spending mandates and give him some discretion, it was his only option, but the goofball lacked the guts to do it.
Sqirminator.
Frankly newsjunkey I scratching my head trying to figure out why you're posting on this thread. This is, after all, a conservative forum.
Even teenagers soon figure out that extorting money from parents under false pretenses and borrowing money from friends with a promise the parents will pay the money back is not a viable alternative. Living within your means is pretty basic stuff. The only other classes of folks that would agree with your statement are liberals and the chronically dependent underbelly that the liberal philospohy conceived under FDR.
Right Schwarzenegger is boxed in by .... lack of support from .... too many Freepers here
And you would expect a group of conservatives to support a liberal, especially a liberal deceitfully pretending to be a conservative because?
My suggestion would be, if you support Schwarzenegger is to:
1) Stop bashing conservatives. They didn't support or vote for Schwarzenegger. It's not their fault a liberal was elected nor is it their responsibility to support a liberal.
2) Have a little talk with your Austrian friend and remind him that without the support of conservatives (which obviously represent up to 13% of the electorate based on the recall results), which he can only achieve by implementing conservative values, he's got a long row to hoe in the next gubernatorial election.
What I really fear is huge windfall $'s from recent R.E. sales/reassessments that'll result in continued overspending.
Yo Arnold, what have you accomplished:
Not even the piddly consolidation of state agencies/advisory boards.
>>I value Tom McClintock's opinion on fiscal matters ...
Really? Did you value his opinion about borrowing and vote against Prop 57/58, then?
Then you should be truly concerned that the budget he submitted included an 11% increase in spending that relies upon continued borrowing to stay in "balance."
As long as you can use it for purposes of posturing. If you really valued his opinion you wouldn't have supported Arnold in Props 57 & 58 and would have demanded budget cuts instead.
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.