« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

California’s budget slate must be defeated

The California Constitution requires that our state government’s budget be balanced every year. Having a RiNO* in the Governor’s chair and Democrats controlling the entire legislature make that a fantasy though. They spend, and spend, and when tax revenues fall, they cry about Republican failures to approve tax increases.

Thanks to the Governor and a few other turncoats, they got a sales tax increase this year, but even that’s not enough to balance the budget. So now the Democrats turn to the voters to approve of a massive shell game that will let them tax and spend without consequence. I ask Red State readers to join me in opposing the entire slate, forcing us to live within our means, and giving our Republicans in Sacramento support in fighting runaway spending.

Proposition 1A (on Ballotpedia) is being sold with the most conservative-sounding rhetoric, when it is the most unfriendly of the lot. Both Ballotpedia and the state Legislative Analyst concur that the primary effect of the measure is a $16 billion ($16,000,000,000) tax increase, which will be used to fund our current ridiculous spending levels, which are far beyond anything ever countenanced by Governor Davis.

It also calls for a token “rainy day fund,” but that rainy day fund only prevents spending of up to 3% of revenue in years with extraordinary revenue growth, and even then only after certain spending is allocated (such as the NEA’s pet Proposition 98 fund). The tax increase is what the purpose of 1A is, and so it must be defeated.

Proposition 1B (on Ballotpedia) is the first of a number of shell-game propositions on the ballot. As 1A only raises taxes in future years, spending must be shifted this year in order to pretend we’ve met our Constitutional requirement of a balanced budget. Proposition 1B moves money in future years to the Proposition 98 school budget, in exchange for money moved from it to the General Fund this year. No spending is cut or limited, and no revenue is raised. Money is shifted around. As I said, it’s just a shell game, and 1B pays off the NEA for going along with it.

Proposition 1C (on Ballotpedia) shifts more money around. This time, we borrow against projected future lottery revenue to balance this year’s budget to feed the beast of radical left-wing spending. It would also allow further borrowing in the future! Ballotpedia points out that this effectively would allow the state to deficit spend indefinitely.

Proposition 1D (on Ballotpedia) continues the shell game. It takes money to fund this year’s spending from Rob “Meathead” Reiner’s tobacco tax revenue, which ordinarily is mandated to go to county programs which serve little kids. Democrats would rather keep more union jobs alive, than help poor children whom they constantly harangue us about. It’s all about the unions in the California Legislature.

Proposition 1E (on Ballotpedia) plays the same game as 1D, only instead of taking money from little kids, it shifts money from the “millionaire’s tax” that was sold to California voters as being necessary to fund “mental health” programs. The money instead goes to a program that, surprise, is funded from the fungible General Fund.

Proposition 1F (on Ballotpedia) is the last, and least, of the six. It doesn’t do anything about taxes or spending. It just promises to prohibit automatic pay increases to state elected officials when the budget isn’t balanced. It sounds great, except that it’s only being used to sell the above scams, and the above scams would ensure that we’ll be deficit spending without technically doing so, thus defeating the measure anyway. It’s meaningless except as a propaganda tool, so I urge a vote against it.

So in conclusion, please join me in opposing this entire slate, and tell your friends and family to do the same. Especially mention to them the secret tax increases, and how the Democrats are taking money from little kids and the mentally ill in order to keep fatcat union bosses happy.

* I don’t say RiNO because the Governor is to the left of the party mainstream. He is, but I say he’s a RiNO because he joins Democrats to attack our legislative caucii, he appoints Democrats to the bench and as his Chief of Staff, and already sees himself as an independent.

COMMENTS

  • navychick1993

    When I heard that they were going to have these special initiatives, I just shook my head. I am so tired of these people trying to “nickel and dime” us for every d**n thing! And if I hear one more teacher talk about how cutting spending will hurt the “children”, I am going to scream! I live in Los Angeles and let me tell you…it’s pathetic.

  • IJB

    …Though I agree it’s pretty meaningless, but I’ll vote No on all the others.

    Can’t wait to see what actual people-sponsored initiatives show up on the ballot on 2010. If any of them are about firing the *entire legislature* at once, I’ll definitely be voting YES on that!!

  • Josh

    I’m ashamed I ever voted for him. I’m just glad that he’s more associated with the Democrats and it’s giving Meg Whitman a boost amongst her potential Democratic challenger.

  • $peciallist

    All I see on TV is ‘Yes on’ ads…it’s going to be a tough battle….word of mouth is what we need to do…Tell your friends and family..

    NO…1a through 1f

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Field Poll looked OK but there’s a long way to go.

  • http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lifelibertypursuitofconservatism Ann “Babe” Huggett

    I’ve already sent in my mail-in ballot and voted a resounding, “NO!” on ALL of the Propositions! They are written specifically to be confusing and misleading. California has too many bad laws as it is. We don’t need any more.

  • Thomas_Hauber

    Don’t forget to support the recall efforts underway on some of these turncoats, I mean legislators.

    Maldonado should be at the top of the list.

  • larryp

    the nationwide ones. It was created by KFI640 radio hosts John and Ken. The Left-Angeles Times chose to cover 12 protestors atthe Federal Builing that Saturday. But at the rally there were 15,000 people! And there were 20 to 40 yr olds and moms with babes in strollers, And Dad and Democrats and Republicans etc. It was fabulous. and now there is another one coming up to
    support No on A-F

  • http://janicecantore.com Janice Cantore

    The only bright spot here is that so far, the initiatives are losing. Even my mother, a “never vote for any one but a democrat” is voting no on the initiatives. But this could change once the union money starts saturating the airwaves. And the bottom line, no matter how angry democrats say they are about taxes, every single elected state democrat will be re-elected, every single democrat responsible for the mess this state is in will be re-elected. Some turn coat republicans will lose, but they are inconsequential anyway.

    There is such a disconnect here. When I remind my liberal brother, who complains about high taxes and illegal immigration, that it is is liberal democrat policies that have bankrupted this state, he tells me I’m wrong and I just don’t understand how government works. My fear is that the majority of people in this country see things just the way he does. This country is doomed to follow California’s example, especially with the little tyrant in the white house.

  • http://andrightlyso.com/ civil_truth

    It’s up to the legislature to come up with a budget that makes the hard decisions – cut spending or face the heat from raising taxes. Voting these propositions down will send a message for the legislature that tax increases and illegal borrowing (if the courts really wanted to enforce the CA constitution rather than wink at these “borrowings”) are not acceptible.

    Besides, even if these measure pass, the state still has a growing budget deficit to deal with.

    Now I recognize that someone may argue that voting these measures down will lead to the next step by the Democrats of putting an initiative on the 2010 budget to end the 2/3rds vote on budgets, which would open the door to massive tax increases and remove that last bit leverage the Republican Party has in the state (barring an unlikely conservative Republican win in the 2010 governor’s race).

    But the left is going to put such a initiative on the ballot anyway – even if the propositions pass – so this is a red herring. And also, elections have consequences – if the people succumb to deception and vote for fiscal apocalypse and one-party dictatorship, so be it. I just hope I could find a way to leave the state in time in that case.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    No political situation is permanent. We’re just not in a great spot right now, and I blame almost entirely the Supreme Court and its illegal decisions on abortion.

    If we could get past that insane, unconstitutional polarization on abortion, we’d be much better off.

  • kweiss01

    Even the Democrats are getting wobbly on 1A, at least. The party won’t support it or go against it – they’re too divided. Maybe the message of the tea parties is starting to penetrate some thick heads in our legislature. Or maybe I’m a foolish optimist, but…

  • IJB

    That’s pretty much a given.

    The kind of people Janice refers to are all over this state, and are totally immune to reason or persuasion.

    And it’s not just about abortion – many, many California’s are true blue socialists (or worse) in every sense of the word.

    That said, I’m personally hoping that the current residents of CA make it so unlivable for themselves that they all decamp to Mexico and Europe, allowing a bunch of newcomers to come to the state and start over…

  • IJB

    I’ve been arguing for ages that the 2/3 budget provision has actually been insulating the CA electorate from its own worse impulses – allowing them to be “saved” time and again from their own insane politics by Republicans in the CA legislature.

    The quickest way to see a rebound in Republican fortunes in CA is to remove the 2/3 budget requirement, and let the loony Left in the Legislature start indulging their budgetary and fiscal worst impulses to their hearts’ content.

    I guarantee, even some deep blue voters in this state would quickly change their tune if that happens.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Politics have a tendency to change quickly.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I see no evidence that voting habits would be changed. The supermajority keeps us from ruin. I don’t want to have to jmmove.

    Do you live here?

  • drothgery

    I think all the initiative-created special funds in the CA budget are absurd, and so is the supermajority rule (heck, that CA has never been broken up into three or four smaller states is absurd, but that’s another story…), but I’m still voting against this set of sham propositions.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • Mike gamecock DeVine

    won’t be respected no matter what it says.

    Hence, the importance of the GOP to use the upcoming Souter replacement hearings to educate.

  • LibRick

    Some here forget that in the past, we voted Reagan for for Governor, and passed Prop 13 that many homeowners continue to benefit from … even if they got around it a bit by adding all kinds of assessments to property tax bills.

    Even though I’m a lib, I prefer a conservative Governor (not Arnold) to check the excesses of a liberal legislature. California seems to work best in this configuration. Doubt the legislature make up will change but a conservative Governor is doable.

    California may be down right now but we are far from out.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Republicans win for Governor and AG, plus majorities in the Assembly and the Senate. That was only 15 years ago.

    As for a conservative Governor… too bad we haven’t had one since Deuk. I’m not even old enough to really remember him.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Rep. McClintock favors 1D and 1E. I can buy that, though I disagree with giving the Democrats cover right now.

    He agrees with me on the rest, it seems, and even makes another point against 1F though: 1F gives legislators incentive to raise taxes to raise their own salaries.

  • drothgery

    Changing tax rates is a normal function of government (we prefer to reduce them, the Donks prefer to increase them). You can’t govern effectively when supermajorities are required to carry out normal government functions.