Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Carry_Okie; SierraWasp; Amerigomag; FOG724; NormsRevenge; FairOpinion; doodlelady

Excellent post, C.O.

There are a few things to like in Prop 76, but there are also many things to dislike. At this point, I think the cons outweigh the pros. Authorizing yet more bonds is the one that sticks in my craw.

The "Test 3" language as it exists today is the one provision that would actually allow spending on education to reduce, given a decrease in revenues, population, etc. Deletion of that single phrase guarantees that spending can never be reduced below the prior year's level. In the event we could ever send home the illegal aliens populating out school system, population would definitely decrease, but spending would continue, regardless.

Also, the "Cap" that has been proposed, can be waived by the Governor at any time.

Prohibiting the raiding of the Prop 42 funds is another misnomer. It specifically provides that those funds can continue to be raided for yet another year. I agree with your take--why do we need a new law when we already have one that simply needs enforcing?

The debt we have run up from Prop 57/58, combined with the additional long term borrowing in Prop 76, is only bolstering the current socialistic spending levels of today and deferring the obligations to future decades.

I just read this article that says the economy may be ready to slow (or tank) next year. The combination of a slowed economy, with all this borrowing, is a formula for disaster.

'Weak Growth' Is Forecast for California Economy
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1492605/posts


43 posted on 09/28/2005 4:44:58 PM PDT by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: calcowgirl
Authorizing yet more bonds is the one that sticks in my craw.

I hear you there, but I didn't see where "bonds" per se were mentioned specifically in the LAO report, although they did discuss several financing schemes for repayment against "revenue transfers" (which are plainly illegal). Is that language in the Proposition itself (haven't read it all yet)?

On balance, I would rather have seen restoration of the Gann limits already in the State Constitution. I may yet vote against this for its destructive effects on the separation of powers. Ballot iniatives have protected the legislature from accountability.

44 posted on 09/28/2005 4:56:58 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson