Posted on 02/18/2009 7:40:54 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
The game of chicken in Sacramento just claimed its first victim, one that has to send a chill down Democratic spines. Republicans in the state Senate ousted their leader, the man who crafted a deal with Democrats to resolve the budget standoff with massive tax increases as part of the package. The GOP has apparently accelerated their car, and the Democrats will have to decide whether to swerve or crash:
A state budget deal to close a $41 billion shortfall has been put further into question early this morning after Senate Republicans ousted their leader who had helped negotiate the long-awaited plan with other top lawmakers in California.
The unusual action occurred as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democratic lawmakers tried for a fourth night in a row to persuade at least one more Republican senator to cast the deciding vote on the budget, a move officials said is necessary for the state to avoid insolvency.
Speaking to reporters outside his office, the ousted Minority Leader Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, said, “It’s a shame it ended like this.”
Cogdill was one of the four legislative leaders who negotiated the emergency budget deal with the governor. Their compromise budget package, reached after three months of negotiations, contained nearly $16 billion in program cuts, $11 billion in borrowing and $14.4 billion in tax increases. The most contentious debate has been over the proposed tax hikes.
Republicans selected Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth, R-Murrieta (Riverside County) as their new Minority leader. Hollingsworth is part of the conservative wing of the Senate Republican caucus and he has been adamantly against raising any taxes.
I’d call that a statement. It certainly sends a message to party leadership that the California GOP will not willingly follow along with more tax increases in a state that already has become one of the worst for tax burdens in the nation. California did not get into its financial crisis through low taxes, and higher taxes won’t provide anything more than a Band-Aid on a gaping wound.
The budget needs more than just $16 billion in cuts. California needs a real austerity program, one that sheds government workers and government programs. The Golden State also needs to stop borrowing money, which comes from the massive spending. How massive? The governor’s office claims that they have kept spending level at $105 billion per year, but even at that rate, they spend more than 20 times what Minnesota does while only having about six times the population. (And we spend too much as well; we’re facing a $7 billion biennial budget deficit at the moment.)
Until the legislature gets serious about budget cuts, higher taxes only provide a junkie’s fix to addiction. The Republicans just signaled a cold-turkey approach, and they’re willing to throw their own leadership under the bus to get it. They look serious about fixing the real problems. Will the Democrats get serious, too, or go tharn in the headlights?
Here is audio of Maldonado’s position on the issue of Open Primaries... “good for Republicans” ... “Schwarzenegger knows that too” LOL!
(Click on the 2nd microphone icon in the text of the article)
http://blogs.kqed.org/capitalnotes/2009/02/16/what-maldo-wants/
Even if Maldonado caves, there is still the possibility that a proposition will be passed to overturn the new vehicle registration fees, and maybe other things will also be undone.
True. It is bizarre. But we have some saintly purists here who would crash the whole country because they suspected somebody, somewhere, might be getting away with something.
Well, then we should talk about undoing some other intitiatives, as well!
How about rescinding Prop 98? Or Prop 49. Or the stem-cell boondoggle. Let’s go back and rescind that one that gave us the $0.18 per gallon gas tax while whiping out the spending cap in the fine print. Etc, etc, etc.
They always talk about how those things can’t be undone because voters approved it, but it never stops them from going after more ballot campaigns, including constitutional amendments for their mismanagement-plan-dujour.
True. It is bizarre. But we have some saintly purists here who would crash the whole country because they suspected somebody, somewhere, might be getting away with something.
I despise Newt's stance on global warming, enabling Al Gore and his UN crooks in pushing world government through environmental hysteria.
Does that make me a purist?
Inquiring minds want to know.
"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
"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
“If they got their budget under control, wouldn’t this help sell their bonds?”
I would hope they could never sell another bond!
Just keep eliminating programs and employees until the budget is balanced.
The big programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, are not under their control. My guess is that California is also paying a lot for corruption.
Medicaid that they cover illegal aliens is by California and over and above Federal Medicaid.
Welfare for illegals is 100% California, passed by the legislature.
Medicare is Federal and has nothing to do with California expendatures.
Personally i’m waiting for an IOU for a tax trfund and will look for 2 other people that got them and file Chapter 7 bankruptcy against the State.
>>it is bizarre the hatred for Newt on this board
True. It is bizarre. But we have some saintly purists here who would crash the whole country because they suspected somebody, somewhere, might be getting away with something.
I despise Newt’s stance on global warming, enabling Al Gore and his UN crooks in pushing world government through environmental hysteria.
Does that make me a purist?
Inquiring minds want to know.
///////////
Yes.
The whole US national security establishment wants the USA off dependence on foreign oil—because the US is paying for the bad guys. On top of that — now the whole US money establishment wants the US off dependence on foreign oil so as to change capital flows ie: recycling petro dollars won’t work anymore.
These are immense changes. What’s more — they pretty much dovetail with environmental concerns.
Here we’re dealing with the level of policy —not on the level of science. Newt wants the US off dependence on foreign oil. His shop was the one that coined the campaign slogan: drill here drill now.
I would agree with you that the science behind global warming is flaky.
Yes, that makes me a purist?
You may have justified Newt’s actions relative to energy investment, but not his enabling of Al Gore et al. and the impact of international law and regulatory bodies on the U.S. as we know it.
I didn’t mention the science.
You may have justified Newt’s actions relative to energy investment, but not his enabling of Al Gore et al. and the impact of international law and regulatory bodies on the U.S. as we know it.
............
Al Gore is a bimbo. Newt’s not in favor of any of that stuff. Both men are out of the loop.
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.