That does it.
If the 2009-2010 budget was enacted in February, why are we having this conversation? Why were Props 1A-1E "necessary?"
Do you know the definition of "enacted?"
I'm done with the word games and the totally useless sophistry.
Have a nice day.
Don’t get all huffy just because you weren’t familiar with the details.
After passage of the 2008-09 budget last summer, it was determined that revenue was not adequate to sustain the authorized spending levels. A “fiscal emergency” was declared which forced the legislature into a special session. During that process, they decided to tackle changes to the 2008-09 budget and pass the 2008-09 budget at the same time. That budget was passed, including tax increases that covered both of those budget years. When they talk about “$42 billion deficits,” that is a 2-year number. What was on the ballot (prop 1A/1B) was the extension of those taxes into the following years (2010-2012) and required voter approval, as did the raiding of previously voter directed funds (Prop 1D/1E) and borrowing associated with the state lottery (Prop 1C). The budget had assumed successful passage of those measures. Since they did not pass, they will have to go back in and revise the budget.
http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/11522/
02/20/09
Gov. Schwarzenegger Signs Budget to Move California Forward
http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/11510/
02/19/09
Governor Schwarzenegger Issues Statement on the Passage of Historic Budget Package that Solves California’s $42 Billion Deficit