CA: Governor urges mayors to support state spending cap (Prop 76)

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger implored California's mayors Thursday to support Proposition 76, a ballot measure intended to stabilize state finances and end deficit spending. He warned that if the measure fails to pass during the Nov. 8 special election, state lawmakers would likely raid local treasuries for funds to close the state's persistent budget gap.

"I've already been informed in Sacramento that that's the very money they're going to go after next year if they don't have money," Schwarzenegger told several hundred officials at the annual conference of the League of California Cities. "Remember, they can. The state can still that borrow money."

Proposition. 76, dubbed the "Live Within Our Means Act" by supporters, would limit state spending to an average of the previous three years' revenue. It would also give the governor new authority to initiate spending cuts and would repeal Proposition. 98, a voter-approved funding guarantee to schools.

Democrats and their allied labor unions, including the powerful California Teachers Association, have campaigned forcefully against the measure, saying it would slash education funding to unacceptable levels and give the governor too much say over spending decisions.

The governor, a Republican, has called Proposition 76 the centerpiece of his "year of reform" agenda, which also includes measures to strip lawmakers of the power to draw political boundaries and make it harder for teachers to win tenure. Recent public polls show none winning majority support, with Proposition 76 in the weakest position of all.

A poll released last month by the Public Policy Institute of California showed 63 percent of voters opposed to the measure and just 26 percent supporting it. The Schwarzenegger campaign team said its internal polls indicate the measure is in stronger shape.

With the details of how the measure would still unknown or confusing to many voters, Schwarzenegger does not delve into specifics in his campaign appearances, focusing instead on what might happen if the measure fails. He has hinted repeatedly that he could be forced to raise taxes to plug the state's $7.5 billion budget hole if Proposition 76 goes down.

He shifted gears somewhat Thursday, tailoring his message specifically to mayors and other city officials who have complained for years that the Legislature abuses its authority to command local property taxes. Since 1992, state lawmakers have diverted $40 billion in local revenue.

Schwarzenegger joined local officials last year to promote another ballot measure - Proposition 1A, which was intended to prevent the state from diverting local revenue beginning in 2006. The measure passed overwhelmingly, but Schwarzenegger now says it doesn't give local governments the full protection they need.

"Proposition 1a was the original - this is the sequel now," Schwarzenegger, a former Hollywood action star, said of Proposition 76.

Nevertheless, mayors of several of California's largest cities - Antonio Villaraigosa of Los Angeles, Gavin Newsom of San Francisco and Jerry Brown of Oakland - jointly announced their opposition to Proposition 76, claiming it would slash funding for public safety and education.

"The California State PTA and education groups statewide have expressed concerns about how this initiative will drain billions of dollars from our public schools," Newsom said in a statement released by the Alliance for a Better California, a statewide coalition opposing Schwarzenegger's reform measures. "I'm opposed to this initiative on every level because it hurts the priorities our community cares about most."

The statement by three of the state's most visible Democratic mayors signaled a potential showdown looming for this Saturday, when the League of California Cities is expected to vote on whether to endorse Proposition 76. The League board has already voted to remain neutral on the measure, but supporters have pushed for a vote of the full membership.

Alan Autry, the Republican mayor of Fresno and a supporter of Proposition 76, said the mayors opposing the measure were being pressured by labor unions. He said he had resigned from the League's board over its refusal to endorse the measure.

"Almost every mayor knows in their heart of hearts that Prop. 76 is the right thing...The thing is, it's subordinate to union approval," Autry said. "When they control, and you have to ask permission to do the right thing, you've got trouble in River City."

A joint legislative committee held a hearing Thursday on the impacts of Proposition 76. Proponents, who included Chamber of Commerce President Allan Zaremberg, and William Hauck, head of the California Business Roundtable, said the measure would give both the governor and the Legislature more flexibility to set spending priorities.

Opponents, including representatives of the League of Women Voters of California and the California Parent Teachers' Association, said the measure would concentrate too much power in the governor's hands jeopardize public school funding.

Meanwhile, a new poll from San Jose State University has found Schwarzenegger's approval rating continues to be low, with 36 percent of voters saying they approve of the job he is doing and 53 percent disapproving. The conclusion is similar to other recent polls that show the governor's approval rating has fallen dramatically since January.

The San Jose State poll also found that 49 percent of California voters said they would not vote to re-elect Schwarzenegger, with 36 percent favoring him and 15 percent undecided.

The poll was conducted among 636 voters during the four-day period ending Sept. 30. It had a margin of error of 4 percent.

"I've already been informed in Sacramento that that's the very money they're going to go after next year if they don't have money," Schwarzenegger told several hundred officials at the annual conference of the League of California Cities. "Remember, they can. The state can still that borrow money."

----

And so can you, Gub, whether the Prop passes or not.

And so can you, Gub, whether the Prop passes or not.

Exactly right! The campaign spin doesn't even remotely resemble reality.

From the LAO Prop 76 Analysis

Could the Governor’s Reductions Affect Local Governments?
Yes, the Governor’s reductions could potentially affect local governments (mostly counties) in two main ways.
• Shift of CalWORKs Costs. Some individuals who temporarily lose state-funded benefits might be eligible for county-funded benefits. For example, under current state law, counties make welfare payments directly to eligible families using a combination of federal, state, and county funds. If state and federal funds ran out before the end of the fiscal year due to a Governor’s reduction, it appears that counties would be required to pay benefits out of their own funds until the start of the next fiscal year.
• Increased Demand for Local Services. State law requires counties to be the “provider of last resort” for certain health and social services to people with low incomes. If support for similar programs operated by the state declined as a result of this measure, counties could experience increased demand for their programs. For example, if state funds for Medi-Cal and Healthy Families programs were exhausted as a result of a Governor’s reduction, some low-income adults and children could seek assistance from county indigent health care programs, thereby increasing county costs for providing such services.
The state also appropriates state funds annually to local governments to support local and shared state-local programs and services, including public protection, health, and social services. These appropriations could be reduced by the Governor.

This is really rich.

Schwarzenegger warns that if Prop 76 fails he will be forced to raise taxes and the legislature will accelerate their quest to divert more and more property, sales and use taxes from local governments (counties).

Rich because Schwarzenegger has been a leader in diverting local tax revenues and the acknowledged leader in borrowing large sums to finance General Fund expenditures. Prop 76 is, in effect, a disguised "son of Prop 58" in that it authorizes the state to borrow additional large sums to meet General Fund expenditures.

The arguments have become so skewed by both camps, the Democrat taxers and the Republican borrowers, that the media never even mentions the obvious any longer .... reduce spending.

I wonder if Hiram ever thought his ideas for using initiatives for redressing grievances brought on by "special interests" and wresting controls from same would ever become such a convoluted mess?

In some instances, when in doubt,
NO is not a negative response.

It is a response of caution brought about by the cold realities of the situation we find ourselves in.

It is obvious we can not afford the government we have and no one has stepped forward that is up to the task of taking the reins, imo.

The spending is the issue, not the borrowing or the debt that follows. Many on both sides still don't get it.

Obviously another agenda driven poll (the public education lobby) reaching a new low in tactics. They're polling only likely, conservative voters.

How low will they stoop to defeat Schwarzenegger?

From the San Diego Union-Tribune:

Continuing to court his strayed allies, Schwarzenegger pitched his so-dubbed "Live Within Our Means Act" by raising the specter that the Legislature will continue to raid local budgets unless he is given the power to act independently.
With state facing a $7.5 billion "structural deficit" this coming fiscal year, "Where do you think that money is going to come from?"
He answered: "They're going to take your money."

Gee, Arnold... might you consider CUTTING Spending?

I wonder if Hiram ever thought his ideas for using initiatives for redressing grievances ... would ever become such a convoluted mess?

He certainly did but the mess in his time was almost greater than ours. Johnson clearly understood the myriad of problems created by adopting direct democracy but he saw no alternative to defeat the stranglehold Southern Pacific had on state politics in the early 20th century.

Schwarzenegger, also a progressive, is following in Johnson's footsteps except the octopus he is attempting to derail are the public employee unions.

Schwarzenegger, also a progressive, is following in Johnson's footsteps except the octopus he is attempting to derail are the public employee unions.

While there are similarities, I see them as opposites. Arnold seems to want to wrestle the union octopus only to hand the power back to the likes of Southern Pacific which should make Hiram roll over in his grave.

And I believe Hiram stood in strong opposition to the UN, while Arnold seems to embrace their increased involvement in our lives.

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.