Posted on 12/12/2007 10:42:47 AM PST by goldstategop
But work on Schwarzenegger's agenda may be overshadowed next year by his failure to resolve the issue that helped bring him into office four years ago in a historic recall election – a chronic budget deficit.
The governor entered office facing a $15 billion shortfall in a general fund that spent $79 billion. Avoiding deep spending cuts, Schwarzenegger used a voter-approved, $15 billion bond to plug a hole in a budget he inherited from former Gov. Gray Davis. Increases in tax revenue from a growing economy helped fuel spending since then.
Schwarzenegger now faces an estimated shortfall of at least $10 billion – and potentially much more – in a general fund required by law to spend $111 billion next year. The budget gap has grown dramatically since summer, the result of an economy slowed by the troubled housing market and accounting maneuvers that unraveled.
Yesterday, administration officials acknowledged the possibility of a bigger shortfall, though publicly they wouldn't give a hard figure.
“I have heard numbers floating around. Somebody said $13 billion, $14 billion, $15 billion,” said Mike Genest, Schwarzenegger's finance director. “Maybe they were guessing; I don't know.”
(Excerpt) Read more at signonsandiego.com ...
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I hate to say "I told 'em so." But I did. Recalling Davis and electing AS was a HUGE mistake for the R's. The budget deficit is the result of a socialist assembly and Senate. It will never go away until the socialists no longer control the assembly and the Senate.
But note in the article who is being blamed. The Republican governor has "failed" to resolve an issue that is unresolvable, given the choices the voters of CA have made for their representatives.
Responsibility for this problem was squarely on the D's until AS was elected governor. Now it's the R's fault. CA voters will never throw out the scoundrels in the legislature until blame is squarely fixed where it belongs.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
All these budget articles should be grouped together on one thread.
Not to worry, the mandate for 20% of the State’s electricity needs to be supplied by renewable sources is sure to take the sting out of any temporary budget shortfall.
Responsibility for this problem was squarely on the D's until AS was elected governor. Now it's the R's fault. CA voters will never throw out the scoundrels in the legislature until blame is squarely fixed where it belongs.
Although I know that Ahnold is really a Democrat running as a Republican, I like the affable lug. Furthermore, the Gubinator pushed hard for several Propositions a couple of years ago that would have helped to 'fix' the budget. They got trounced at the ballot box. He then steered hard(er) left, but that was the message the voters gave him.
I can't blame him for that. He offered some reasonable solutions. He pushed them as Propositions -- to by-pass the Reds in Assembly -- and the people said 'no'. We want our budget deficit and endless 'free' bennies. People are nuts.
And we'll have to disagree about the recall. You are absolutely correct that the media and Dems can (and will) blame the deficit on the Governor. Nonetheless, I thought it was important to get the message across to elected politicians that they can get fired...
Absolutely wrong.... and I suspect, based on ignorance of the California legisltive process.
1) These deficts were introduced, encouraged and approved by the Republican governor.
2) There are enough Republicans in the legislature to prevent the fiscal mismanagement.
3) Were if not for a Republican governor, the legislative minority would have hamstrung the spending spree.
4) The Austrian not only refused to exercise his veto, but also worked with the Democrats to disenfranchise the legislative minority.
Wrong again ... and again I suspect an ignorance of the proposals before the voters.
The measures involved, were essentially self serving and provided greater benefit to the Austrian's campaign donors than the electorate. The measures were so transparent they didn't even survive Republican scrutiny.
Who proposes the budget? Who has to approve the budget? Who has line-item veto power?
The fact is that the outrageous spending and borrowing was proposed by the governor and every effort by Republicans to curb that growth has been opposed by the governor in favor of the democrats' spending plans.
It is not "the R's fault," but the fault of the "post-partisan" governor and the democrats.
Not so. He pushed hard for Prop 76 (masked as a spending fix) that would have authorized even more borrowing and made it easier for him to raise taxes. The devil is in the details. The soundbite commercials and media coverage were as accurate as labeling Schwarzenegger a conservative--a complete lie.
...not so...
Hah! Seems like we have a consensus...
2 years is a long time ago, so I was thinking my mind was a bit fuzzy on the details - so you force me to go to 'Wikipedia' ('its on the internet - so it must be true...') ...
Looks about the way as I vaguely remembered it. Reasonable sounding Propositions pushed by the Gubinator that got squashed by the citizenry of California...
Proposition 73: Parental Notification
Summary
Amends California Constitution to bar abortion on unemancipated minor until 48 hours after physician notifies minor's parent/legal guardian, except in medical emergency or with parental waiver. Permits judicial waiver of notice based on clear and convincing evidence of minor's maturity or minor's best interests. Physician must report abortions performed on minors and State shall compile statistics. Authorizes monetary damages for violation. Minor must consent to abortion unless mentally incapable or in medical emergency. Permits judicial relief if minor's consent to abortion is coerced.
Proposition 74: Public School Teachers Tenure
Summary
Increases length of time required before a teacher may become a permanent employee from two complete consecutive school years to five complete consecutive school years; measure applies to teachers whose probationary period commenced during or after the 2003-2004 fiscal year. Authorizes school boards to dismiss a permanent teaching employee who receives two consecutive unsatisfactory performance evaluations.
Proposition 75: Union Dues - Political Contributions
Summary
Prohibits public employee labor organizations from using dues or fees for political contributions unless the employee provides prior consent each year on a specified written form. Prohibition does not apply to dues or fees collected for charitable organizations, health care insurance, or other purposes directly benefiting the public employee. Requires labor organizations to maintain and submit to the Fair Political Practices Commission records concerning individual employees' and organizations' political contributions; those records are not subject to public disclosure
Proposition 76: State Spending Limits
Summary
Changes state minimum school funding requirements (Proposition 98), permitting suspension of minimum funding, but terminating repayment requirement, and eliminating authority to reduce funding when state revenues decrease. Excludes above-minimum appropriations from schools' funding base. Limits state spending to prior year total plus revenue growth. Shifts excess revenues from schools/tax relief to budget reserve, specified construction, debt repayment. Requires Governor to reduce state appropriations, under specified circumstances, including employee compensation, state contracts. Continues prior year appropriations if new state budget delayed. Prohibits state special funds borrowing. Requires payment of local government mandates.
...the Gubinator pushed hard for several Propositions a couple of years ago that would have helped to 'fix' the budget.
As to Prop 76, it did not curb spending--it authorized more borrowing as well as many other contentious changes. Schwarzenegger's budget chief admitted it would not reduce spending. You have quoted Wikipedia--the same type summary level soundbites that I mentioned were pure myth. Arnold couldn't sell this to Republicans or Democrats and it wasn't because Republicans wanted spending to go unabated. Read the fine print--Prop 76 was a sham.
==> OK, I meant 'reasonable' propositions (i.e., somewhat 'conservative'). It has been a couple of years, and I just remembered Arnold pushed for several Propositions that I thought were very sane. I morphed this to mean 'fiscal responsibility'. I stand corrected.
As to Prop 76, it did not curb spending--it authorized more borrowing as well as many other contentious changes. Schwarzenegger's budget chief admitted it would not reduce spending. You have quoted Wikipedia--the same type summary level soundbites that I mentioned were pure myth. Arnold couldn't sell this to Republicans or Democrats and it wasn't because Republicans wanted spending to go unabated. Read the fine print--Prop 76 was a sham.
I'll take your word for it.
The measures the poster was referring to is the 3 ballot propsitions that went after the public employee unions in this state. Had they been successful, it most certainly would have curtailed spending and brought sepnding for govenment employees back in line with the private sector.
Arnold had the courage to go after them and it was the right thing to do for future fiscal solvency. After losing the ballot measures, he veered left and never returned. It’s not his fault the majority of Californias are selfish idiots.
Can name a single other elected politition from any party in the last 30 years who has tried to bust the union control over government employees to the extent Arnold tried? Didn’t think so.
Time to roll up the sleeves. Accurate analysis of the 8 initiatives is in our archives. Example; The net effect of Prop 76 was to indemnify Prop 58 bond holders.
Those pesky little facts: Schwarzenegger withheld his support for several of these propositions until the 11th hour. On Prop 73, he could only muster that "He agreed in principle" Which were they? Hint: Those that failed by the smallest margin*.
Take the time. Do the research. Eliminate the perception of foolishness.
*Many pundits concluded that if the Austrain had left Prop 73, 75 and 78 alone, they would have passed.
The propositions are listed in Post #11. Only one dealt with unions (Prop 75). Props 73, 74, and 75 did not deal with spending in any way.
Had they been successful, it most certainly would have curtailed spending and brought sepnding for govenment employees back in line with the private sector.
Only one proposition dealt with spending and it did not curtail it--it enabled more of it. It authorized more borrowing and made it easier for the Governor to raise taxes--and that means any Governor, R or D. Prop 76 was a sham--nothing more than snake oil.
This is a trick question? Right?
Not only did Reagan bust their control. He fired them ... all.
Doh, forgot about that. Living in California will do that to ya.
Too bad Reagan didn’t go after the other 99.99% of the Federal employees. But it sure was nice to see the Federal no-strike law finally used 30 years after passage. And after other presidents had opportunities to use it. I was working with a guy who quit and became an air-traffic controller right after that strike.
Not all the controllers were fired btw, 10-20% crossed. Although, I think the vote to strike was like near unanimous. But that’s union math for you.
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.