Posted on 02/15/2009 8:35:48 AM PST by SmithL
California's massive $40 billion-plus budget plan stalled in the Legislature early Sunday morning as Senate Republicans balked at a massive proposal containing $14.3 billion in new taxes.
After legislative leaders negotiated a tentative deal last week, the Senate wound up one vote shy of passing the budget plan, surprising those who believed Senate Republican Leader Dave Cogdill had locked up enough votes in his caucus.
Sen. Dave Cox, R-Fair Oaks, was widely believed to be the 27th Senate vote to pass the budget, but he stated early Sunday, "I'm not a prospect for voting for this budget." That sent Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger scrambling to negotiate with other Senate Republicans in search of one final vote.
Both legislative houses were pondering 27 hastily drafted bills that cover state budgets for two fiscal years: the current one that ends June 30 and the next one that begins July 1.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Possibly because Californian’s have taken all the abuse we can tolerate.
Their silence is telling.
Could Bustamante have pulled that one off? NOPE!
So, if the measure is who could have advanced the liberal agenda more, I give it to Arnold. Bustamante, being unpopular even in his own party, could never have "accomplished" the things Arnold did.
The Senate met, Cox voted no, and the Senate is now in recess pending the Assembly meeting at 1pm.
Please can we argue instead about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Bustamente vs. Arnold? I find there is no significant difference in politicians. They are all trying to find different ways for the government to run your life and take your money for their purposes,which are to increase the wealth and power of the political elite class. It has never been any different in human history. Periodically, the elite political class becomes so greedy and so powerful that the serf class wakes up and kills them off. We live in a historic period where the political elites have devised a method of convincing the serf class that they actually have some voice in the government: the vote. It is an illusion. Occasionally you will find an outlier like Mr. McClintock, but he will never achieve any measure of power. The elites will freeze him out as they freeze anyone out who challenges their hegemony. The oultliers like McClintock do not prove that “the system works”, they only prove that no system is perfect at keeping the serfs in line. But the system we have is about as good as it gets, because it outlasted communism and nazism and combined features of both. The idea that there is any freedom in modern democracies is a cruel hoax. You are a serf of the elite political class which includes Mr. Arnold and Mr. Cruz and anyone in between.
I'd rather not, thanks.
But when it comes to actual solutions for California, and what we can do about it, there are things to discuss. And electing liberal "Republicans" to office is no solution.
Welcome to FreeRepublic!
Arnold makes John McCain look like a rock-ribbed die hard Reaganist Conservative.
I tried watching on CalChannel last night but couldn’t get it to do anything other than show the annoying buffering icon.
Anybody else have any luck?
http://www.calchannel.com/channel/live/1
Actually, he doesn't. I find the two have many common traits and philosophies. They are more alike than not, IMO.
Read a little slowlyer for proper comprehension.
I had the same experience, then I tried the audio links and didn’t have any luck there, either. All I have available is good ole’ John Myers’ Twitter reporting. To quote Durante, “what a disgusting experience”.
http://twitter.com/KQED_CapNotes
Well, actually, to paraphrase Durante. In his case it was “humiliatin’”.
Dalereed from Post 50: iF YOU HAVE PAID ENOUGH DURRING THE YEAR THAT YOU DON’T OWE ANYTHING WITH YOUR RETURN THERE IS NO 5% PENALTY.
The difference between what he is saying and I am saying is this... I am saying that anyone who pays California State Income Tax is getting hit with the 5%... He is saying that only those who still owe a balance when they file have to pay the 5%.
You know, the confusion here is over the term “liability”, which makes it so difficult to find a short way of expressing the point you’re making. The only other thing I can come up with is “if the state doesn’t give you back everything that was withheld, you owe the penalty on everything they keep.” Probably not much better, but at least a different way of saying the same thing.
Well, now CalChannel seems to be working for me. Go figure!
Ooops.. spoke too soon. Assy is working, Senate is buffering.
I think their servers are overloaded.
As to Myers/Twitter, I stuck with him into the wee hours of the morning last night — until he said anyone still watching was “hard core.”
I figured that was a cue to go to bed, LOL.
It's calculated in for this year, or is it retroactive to 2008?
If they owe us money for 2008, will they pay interest on the IOU?
Can we have our employers stop taking out CA state tax until the IOU is fulfilled?
I tend to go with SCR's definition, solely by looking at the numbers in the Assy Budget Report and by the name they apply ("surtax" vs. "penalty")
They expect to generate $3.3 Billion in revenues in the next fiscal year (where total personal income tax revenue is between $45-50 billion). Hence, it appears the 5% applies to the total tax liability, before consideration for withholding or other payments by the taxpayer.
The estimates in the Assy Report show zero for the current fiscal year and a $3.3 billion dollar increase next year (at 5% surtax).
Some of the other shenanigans do apply to the current year (sales tax, VLF fee, etc).
See link above.
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.