Posted on 06/30/2006 4:53:53 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a $131.4 billion budget Friday - the first on-time state spending plan in six years - after vetoing $112 million for programs ranging from court translators to air pollution control.
"It's a great day to celebrate. It's a big day for California," Schwarzenegger said at a signing ceremony that included legislative leaders of both parties.
The former Hollywood star took the unusual step of holding the ceremony in the Capitol rotunda, where tourists looked on from the wings and a second-floor gallery, about 12 hours before the start of a new fiscal year.
Lawmakers approved the budget Tuesday night, avoiding a repeat of the partisan deadlocks that have held up budgets in most recent years.
"This was a budget that was done the way it ought to be done," said Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland.
The budget uses a revenue windfall to fund one of the largest increases ever for California schools. It also sets aside billions to pay down debt and build up reserves.
But it still leaves a deficit of at least $3.5 billion for the fiscal year that starts July 1, 2007.
Overall, it's about 11 percent bigger than the $117.3 billion budget Schwarzenegger signed last July, 11 days into a new fiscal year.
The new budget will give schools $55.1 billion, an increase of $5.1 billion. Hundreds of millions of that extra money will go to programs like music, art, physical education and guidance counselors that were neglected in recent years.
It also provides for a $6-per-unit cut in community college fees and avoids an increase in fees for students at California State University and University of California campuses.
Other key provisions would set aside nearly $4.9 billion to pay debts and build up $2 billion in reserves, increase funding for drug treatment programs, pay for as many as 50 new judges, provide cost-of-living increases for the elderly, blind and disabled poor, expand anti-gang programs, and expand child-care and foster-care programs.
"This is a great budget...," Schwarzenegger said. "The real winners here today are the people of California."
But his Democratic opponent in the November election, state Treasurer Phil Angelides, said Schwarzenegger hadn't "squarely faced up to the state's deficit spending, as he promised to do."
"The fact is, if Arnold Schwarzenegger is re-elected governor, next year we know what he is going to do...," Angelides said. "He's going to cut schools, he's going to raise college tuition and fees."
A spokesman for Schwarzenegger's re-election campaign, Matt David, said Angelides was "blinded by partisanship."
"If Phil Angelides had his way, California would have a budget that increases spending, increases taxes and raids the state's rainy day fund," he said.
The line-item vetoes made by Schwarzenegger before he signed the budget hit agencies ranging from the tax-collecting Board of Equalization to the smog-fighting Air Resources Board.
Among the appropriations cut or eliminated were funding for housing, health care for the poor, workplace-safety inspectors, dental services for children and West Nile virus control efforts.
"Even though we have experienced an increase in revenues, we realize there are some areas where we need to continue to control costs and the rate of growth and spending," said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for Schwarzenegger's Finance Department.
"There are areas where we don't think an augmentation to a certain budget is justified on a policy basis or on the basis they are not needing or not being able to hire a certain amount of personnel. It varies from department to department."
Associated Press Writer Don Thompson contributed to this report.
Whats that? Hey did somebody steal my wallet?
An 11% increase in spending? In one year?
Talk about vote-buying!
"This is a great budget...," Schwarzenegger said. "The real winners here today are my New Majority, business cronies in San Diego ... and of course, the public spending keeps the price of my properties stabilized."
Wow, Arnold should run for Congress!
Wonder what McClintock thinks of the budget?
Caption Time..
State Sen. Tom McClintock, R-Northridge, watches as the final vote for the state budget is posted on the tally board in the Senate at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., Tuesday, June 27, 2006. By a 30-10 vote the Senate approved the nearly $131 billion 2006-07 spending plan and sent it to the Assembly, where is was approved by a 54-22 vote. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is expected to sign the bill before the June 30th deadline.(AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)
Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, center rear, laughs at a comment made by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, seated, before the governor signed the 2006-07 state budget at the Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., Friday, June 30, 2006. Schwarzenegger, accompanied by lawmakers, including Senate Republican Leader Dick Ackerman, of Tustin, left, and Assemblyman John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, right, signed the $131.4 billion budget, the first state spending plan to be approved by the June 30 deadline in six years. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, accompanied by lawmakers, Senate Republican Leader Dick Ackerman of Tustin, left, state Sen. President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, second from left, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, second from right, and Assembly Repubican Leader George Plescia of La Jolla, right, walk through the Capitol to a budget signing ceremony, in Sacramento, Calif., Friday, June 30, 2006. Schwarzenegger signed the $131.4 billion 2006-07 spending plan, the first state budget to be signed by the midnight June 30 deadline in six years. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)
Did you read the article? It funded programs that haven't been funded in recent years. 3.5 bil out of 131. bil budget is nothing and can easily be overcome by revenue.
Yes, I did read the article. Restored programs or new, it is still a double-digit increase in spending in an election year.
I would have added:
Move to California. Pay the taxes. Then shoot your mouth off on this forum Topic.
This is what you call a reelection year budget deal. The gov needed to quickly put this to bed so that it wouldn't become an election year issue...people will forget about this in about 2 days. I know it stinks but the reality far outweighs the perception. The GOP has absolutely zero clout in Sacramento. Spending will continue to climb...Angelides can bitch all he wants but he would have signed the same damn bill if he were gov...in fact, he would have signed a bill with even more spending. At least there aren't any new taxes. It's still abominable that we still don't have property tax reform here in CA. The property tax exemption should be raised to at least $75K, if not $100K. In the meantime, look for several cities and/or counties to try to pass sales tax/property tax increases in November...Long Beach is going to try.
And they've got money set aside for a rainy day fund, etc. Sounds like a balanced budget to me. What more do you want?
"Angelides can bitch all he wants but he would have signed the same damn bill if he were gov...in fact, he would have signed a bill with even more spending..."
But don't you see, all the anti Arnold posters on FR would rather see Angelides get elected.
Yay. Go Arnold. Might as well be Arnold. Yippee.
Angelides will be no Arnold.
"But don't you see, all the anti Arnold posters on FR would rather see Angelides get elected."
Let's be real about this. Most freepers don't understand CA politics. The reality is that we need to reelect Arnie so that we can prevent tax increases. Arnie is not exactly an anti-spend fanatic, but he certainly understands that we don't need to raise taxes. Arnie could bitch and moan and string this thing out about the spending, but what good would that bring him in an election year? Arnie needs Dem votes to be reelected. Now that he has put the budget to bed, he appears to be productive. Moderate Dems like the fact that a budget was passed without a tax increase. Really, what's the difference between the budget that the CA legislature passed and what Congress has been passing for years? The only difference is that Congress has passed significant supply-side tax cuts.
Most of the CA freepers don't understand CA politics. I've been accused of being an outsider even though I was born and raised there, spent 28 years of my life there. But you see, I'm not there now so I most obviously don't have a clue. Right.
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.