Replies

One has to go back a couple of years to put the claim in context. Donna Arduin stunned Sacramento when she declared that the state had run up $25 billion in debt from three years of deficit spending, and projected that left unchecked, the cumulative deficit would reach $62 billion by June 30, 2007, including a $16.6 billion gap during the 2006-07 fiscal year.

The latter is the number that the administration has been citing of late.... She assumed that during 2006-07, state general fund spending would reach $99.8 billion but revenues would be just $83.2 billion, leaving a $16.6 billion shortfall.

Here's the way the numbers work out mentioned in the article. Revenues have increased, largely due to temporary income. And spending is only $2 billion less than the bloated forecast Arduin and Co. developed for the 2006-07 Budget year:

                   Arduin     Gov Budget  Legislature
                   ------     ----------  -----------
Revenue            $83.2       $92.0        $93.0
Spending            99.8        97.9         97.9
                   -----       -----        -----
Shortfall/deficit  (16.6)       (5.9)        (4.9)

These are the numbers Arnold quotes--what a classic sham job. Understate projected revenues and overstate spending obligations (Arduin did her job well--and then split town). It lowers the bar of expectation, making the leader's job easier and allows for a future performance to articifically appear positive. In fact, general fund spending has increased 37% under Arnold. I guess he doesn't want to tout that fact.

. All of these numbers mean one thing: Lower-than-expected deficits have almost nothing to do with Schwarzenegger's holding down spending. They have almost everything to do with the surprising vigor of the economy, which has pumped many extra billions of dollars into state coffers. The nonpartisan legislative budget office pegs the windfall of unanticipated revenues at $11.5 billion over three years.

How much infrastructure could we have purchased with $11 billion (without borrowing) had Arnold just reeled in spending?