Schwarzenegger Proposes Billions in Cuts (No new taxes)

AP ^ | Jan 9, 2004 | TOM CHORNEAU

[TheDon]

By TOM CHORNEAU, Associated Press Writer

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (news - web sites) unveiled a $99.1 billion budget plan Friday and proposed cutting billions of dollars from public health and welfare programs to help pay for it.

AP Photo

Without cuts or higher taxes, California is expected to face a $14 billion deficit by June 30, 2005, the end of the upcoming fiscal year.

Schwarzenegger did not include any new taxes in his budget plan Friday, but in addition to the cuts, he requested higher state park fees and tuition increases of as much as 40 percent for college students.

"For the past five years, the politicians have made a mess of California's budget," Schwarzenegger said. "Now it's time to clean it up."

The biggest hits are aimed at the state's Medi-Cal program, which would lose close to $900 million next year under the governor's proposal. The state's program to bring welfare recipients into the work force is also targeted in his plan with a $800 million cut.

City and county governments, already upset by the loss of about $4 billion they were expecting from a car tax increase that Schwarzenegger repealed, also would lose out.

The governor proposed taking an additional $1.3 billion that the local governments are counting on and instead use it to pay state expenses. The move is a shift from Schwarzenegger's previous pledge to protect the local governments, though he said Friday that he would still find a way to replace the lost car tax revenue.

"We need to know what else is piled on top of it," said Pat Leary of the California State Association of Counties.

Schwarzenegger's budget is built on a rosy economic picture next year, projecting $2.9 billion in additional tax revenue to be available in 2004-2005.

Getting support for the spending plan won't be easy. Democrats, who control both houses of the Legislature, have said the burden of the state's fiscal crisis shouldn't fall on the poor and disabled.

The hit to public health under Schwarzenegger's plan would include caps on enrollments for the state's health insurance program for the poor and elderly and the elimination of some medical benefits for the poor and disabled.

University students would see higher fees under the proposal, with undergraduates paying 10 percent more, graduate students paying 40 percent more, and middle-income students being offered less financial aid.

Community college students would be asked to pay $8 per unit more — from $18 per unit to $26.

Some social service advocates say tax increases should be used instead of spending cuts to solve the state's problems.

"I expect that there will still be hard hits on health programs that will hurt children and working families very hard," said Catherine Teare, spokeswoman for the Oakland-based advocacy group, Children Now. "I just don't see how this all gets done."

According to estimates updated this week, the state will have a deficit of nearly $27 billion by June 2005 — created by an existing deficit of $12.6 billion run up over the past three years and a projected shortfall of $14 billion by the June 30, 2005.

Schwarzenegger and the Legislature have put a $15 billion bond issue on the March that would pay off the existing deficit, but the $14 billion projected deficit for next year remains.

A key underpinning of his plan to balance the state's budget without raising taxes had been backed by educators, who agreed to accept $2 billion less next year than they are owed.

But even if legislators approve Schwarzenegger's budget plan, which will be revised in May, it will mean little if voters don't approve the $15 billion bond deal in March. So far, administration officials said, early polls indicate voters don't like the measure and may not pass it.

[cpst12]

>>You don't want borrowing?
>>You don't want increased fees?
>>You don't want higher taxes?

NO, how about CUTTING THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT...oh yea, if he does that he might not get re-elected, and we all know that that is the overriding concern of all politicians these days.

[heleny]

Are these actual cuts, or just reductions in the previously proposed increases? I suspect the latter.

From the article:
"Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger ... unveiled a $99.1 billion budget plan"

From the Legislative Analyst's Office Budget Overview of the 2003-04 budget:
"The budget package, as passed by the Legislature, authorizes total spending of $98.9 billion. Of this amount, $70.8 billion is from the General Fund, $20.5 billion is from special funds, and $7.5 billion from bond funds."

From a May 2003 article in NewsMax about Davis' revised budget proposal:
"The revised $96 billion spending plan for the 2003-04 fiscal year"

---

It's not a real cut to the entire budget, but it's hardly an increase from this year's actual budget, either. CA revenues are increasing, although still not enough to keep up with the 40% increase in spending over the last five years.

Let's hope Schwarzenegger wields his blue pencil on all the additional spending the Democrats in the legislature are bound to try to include.

[Tempest]

You forgot about the part where Arnold was supposed to be no better than Bustamecha.

And you're right there is already one person. Notice his join date. That's complaining of how a usage fee on extended education is somehow a tax. It's almost laughable.

[Tempest]

"NO, how about CUTTING THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT...oh yea, if he does that he might not get re-elected, and we all know that that is the overriding concern of all politicians these days."

Oh I guess you must live in a cave then. The governor commented yesterday as to how he already has his auditors combing throught the books to abolish redundant and frivilous state agencies. But I suppose that you have a special plan that wouldn't take the worlds 5th largest economy into the bankruptcy sinkhole that would also magically diffue the billions of dollars in debt the state already faces under brain-dead liberal control.

[drypowder]

All of the public agencies throughout the state need to be audited. I know of a few special districts in my area that have over a million $ of tax payer monies in their bank account. Since public agencies are budgeted annually I fail to see any reason why they need to hoard tax dolors. Surely they should have an emergency and growth fund but $1 million in a Mosquito Abatement District's account is a bit much. That money ought to be returned immediately to whom it belongs.

[mrs tiggywinkle]

Well said, Tempest.

I'm still waiting to hear what fees have been raised several hundred percent. That hasn't been answered yet. sigh.

[mrs tiggywinkle]

See post 44. :o)

[Tempest]

It seems to me that you understand that California needs to have financial stability in order to attract business. And well you see businesses increase revenue.

Neat concept eh???

[Tempest]

I'm interested to find out what fees he was refering to as well. I'm sure it'll be quite colorful.

[mrs tiggywinkle]

Ah, but notice he has avoided the question from two FR's. Hmmm.

[mrs tiggywinkle]

Perhaps you didn't notice a couple FR's asking you about raising fees. I'd appreciate knowing which fees have been raised several hundred percent, as you claim. Thank you kindly.

[Ajnin]

I probably haven't read even half of the threads debating whether or not Arnold is a Rino but the ones I've read had little to do with taxes and more to do with his liberal bent towards gun control and abortion. Although I'm pleased with what Arnold has done so far I'm waiting to see how Freepers are going to defend Arnold when he initiates more gun control.

[WOSG]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (news - web sites) unveiled a $99.1 billion budget plan Friday and proposed cutting billions of dollars from public health and welfare programs to help pay for it.

"Cutting billions" implies that the budget for LAST YEAR was well over $99 billion... anyone know how much it was?

[Quix]

We shall see, perhaps most quickly from Arnold and CA . . .

if Socrates/Plato were right or not.

Do the representatives of the people have the courage to preserve the Republic, or not.

Or does individual greed still work to sabotage the decent and good . . . in suicidal ways.

This should be interesting, very interesting.

[WOSG]

I take it that the previous year budget was around $96 billion.

So the claim that this $99 billion budget include "billions in cuts" is FALSE.

he's merely stopped the shopping spree of excessive increases.

[Tamzee]

he already has his auditors combing throught the books to abolish redundant and frivilous state agencies.

Bump :-)

[heleny]

The $96B budget was what Davis proposed. The legislature passed a $98.9B budget, and Davis didn't make any significant changes before signing it.

If Schwarzenegger sticks to his $99.1B proposal by line-item-vetoing all additional spending from the legislature, the 0.2% increase would be insignificant.

The problem is that $99B is still 40% more than five years ago, and revenue growth hasn't caught up yet.

[WOSG]

I was thinking that guy was a troll, he seems to have nothing but sarcasm for anything the Republicans do ... then I read this he wrote and realized he's just sarcastic period:

">>This is the first I heard this, did anyone else know this about Kerry?

I don't think he was in Vietnam...he probably would have mentioned it if he had been..."

LOL. I think he's an AI posting program with the sarcasm
toggle set to "on".

If the Cali voters wanted budget CUTS, they wouldnt have voted for a moderate RINO like Arnie, promising to 'cut,cut,cut' so we can save moeny to spend on the important stuff like "kids, welfare, hydrogen pumping stations, environment, etcetera etcetera".

oh well, Big Govt Supplyside-ism beats Socialism any day.

[WOSG]

Right.

So, you think it would ever occur to this leftist journalist to write: "This budget is 0.5% higher than last years budget" NOooo ... he's gotta say "billions in cuts" from a baseline that only exists in his imagination!!!

Grrr. I hate that kind of media bias and mis-information.

[tubebender]

It would appear that Arnold is cutting the rate of growth and that is a positive for me but as you posted there is no reduction from the proposed budget from last summer