CA finally has a *@#! budget

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
Budgets are for the weak! The federal government hasn't needed one for years now, so why do the states?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
He will sign it. The same problem will happen this year when the budget process is planned for the next year.
 
D

Deleted member 4644

Shockingly, its not THAT bad of a bill. It's actually a compromise, the gas tax was bullshit and is gone, and the open primary will be defeated.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
WTF gas tax increase is probably the best tax they could come up with. As far as taxes go, gasoline tax is probably the most beneficial one I can think of besides alcohol and cig taxes.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
The problem hereis the ridiculous 2/3 requirement to pass the budget giving the radical Republicans a veto, which they abuse.

Someone posted 'thank you' to the Republican who switchedhis vote to pass it - ya, thank him for his several demands all the way to changing our election system to his own benefit to let voters more easily change another party's nominee with the open primary, among other things. If we had a 51% vote to pass the budget none of this would have happened.
 

JeepinEd

Senior member
Dec 12, 2005
869
63
91
This budget is predicated on the hopes that state revenues will not continue to fall.
I'm willing to bet that by the time Arnold signs it, there will already be a several million dollar deficit.

This is not over. You can't increase state spending by 40% in 5 years, then expect to tax your way out of it when the economy takes a dump.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Shockingly, its not THAT bad of a bill. It's actually a compromise, the gas tax was bullshit and is gone, and the open primary will be defeated.
The call for open primaries is the most significant part of the bill...not surprising, the career politicians in Sacramento, who are largely responsible for the annual budget problems, are against it.

 

fuzzybabybunny

Moderator<br>Digital & Video Cameras
Moderator
Jan 2, 2006
10,455
35
91
Maldonado's demands seem to be quite good, no?

The gas tax is debatable I guess.
The open primary is a good thing because it levels the playing field?
The "no legislative pay increase during deficit years" part is just common sense...

What's wrong?
 

Pneumothorax

Golden Member
Nov 4, 2002
1,181
23
81
Originally posted by: Craig234
The problem hereis the ridiculous 2/3 requirement to pass the budget giving the radical Republicans a veto, which they abuse.

Someone posted 'thank you' to the Republican who switchedhis vote to pass it - ya, thank him for his several demands all the way to changing our election system to his own benefit to let voters more easily change another party's nominee with the open primary, among other things. If we had a 51% vote to pass the budget none of this would have happened.

Since my state is basically owned by Dems, if the budget vote was a simple 51%, our state income tax would be 25%, gas tax $3.00 per gallon, Vehicle fees would be 10%. We NEED the balance as so far all the Dems in the legislature haven't really shown any independent thought away from the ultra liberal Steinberg and Bass. In the 15 years I've been voting in this state, I have never seen a Democrat bill showing any cuts to the budget.

It's funny too, this state is so far liberal that the "right-wing" republicans in my state would be considered Specter's and Snowe's anywhere else. I'd leave in a heartbeat if it didn't mean I'd have to go into foreclosure, taking away the $30K in taxes I pay each year to this "tax and spend" state. Soon this state will be only filled with ultra-rich who don't care about taxes, un"layoff"able gov workers, illegals, and octomoms.

BTW, an open primary might actually do some good. Rule of thumb, if both Dems and republicans are against it, it usually means it's a good thing.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,890
55,160
136
Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
Originally posted by: Craig234
The problem hereis the ridiculous 2/3 requirement to pass the budget giving the radical Republicans a veto, which they abuse.

Someone posted 'thank you' to the Republican who switchedhis vote to pass it - ya, thank him for his several demands all the way to changing our election system to his own benefit to let voters more easily change another party's nominee with the open primary, among other things. If we had a 51% vote to pass the budget none of this would have happened.

Since my state is basically owned by Dems, if the budget vote was a simple 51%, our state income tax would be 25%, gas tax $3.00 per gallon, Vehicle fees would be 10%. We NEED the balance as so far all the Dems in the legislature haven't really shown any independent thought away from the ultra liberal Steinberg and Bass. In the 15 years I've been voting in this state, I have never seen a Democrat bill showing any cuts to the budget.

It's funny too, this state is so far liberal that the "right-wing" republicans in my state would be considered Specter's and Snowe's anywhere else. I'd leave in a heartbeat if it didn't mean I'd have to go into foreclosure, taking away the $30K in taxes I pay each year to this "tax and spend" state. Soon this state will be only filled with ultra-rich who don't care about taxes, un"layoff"able gov workers, illegals, and octomoms.

BTW, an open primary might actually do some good. Rule of thumb, if both Dems and republicans are against it, it usually means it's a good thing.

Completely false. California is well known as home to some extremely conservative politicians. The coastal areas around LA and San Francisco are so heavily Democratic that they ensure California always goes blue, and that CA's senate representation will be blue, but the inland areas are extremely conservative, and hatch out some pretty ultra right house reps.

As for your idea that Democratic dominated state legislatures lead to crazy high taxes, it simply isn't supported by reality. CNN's broad measure of taxes by state shows that Democratic dominated states probably have a bias towards higher taxes, but it is VERY slight. Hell, ultra liberal California is hanging out right between Kentucky and Arizona. Furthermore, the reddest of the red states, Utah, is #9 while Commie loving Massachusetts is down at #32.

Simply put, California is an interesting mix of very liberal and very conservative. Almost like two different states. The parts of California that everyone actually thinks of are liberal, but that's because the inland empire where all the conservatives live is a complete shithole.
 

Pneumothorax

Golden Member
Nov 4, 2002
1,181
23
81
But that's the problem, the coastal areas that provide the majority of the legislature are ultra-liberals electing ultra-liberals to the legislature. I wouldn't mind it so if it were more centrist. Ergo, why I'm starting to like the open primary idea. Make the budget 51% vote and basically every bill will be ultra-liberal and beholden to the welfare/union lobbyists.
 

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,303
144
106
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
Originally posted by: Craig234
The problem hereis the ridiculous 2/3 requirement to pass the budget giving the radical Republicans a veto, which they abuse.

Someone posted 'thank you' to the Republican who switchedhis vote to pass it - ya, thank him for his several demands all the way to changing our election system to his own benefit to let voters more easily change another party's nominee with the open primary, among other things. If we had a 51% vote to pass the budget none of this would have happened.

Since my state is basically owned by Dems, if the budget vote was a simple 51%, our state income tax would be 25%, gas tax $3.00 per gallon, Vehicle fees would be 10%. We NEED the balance as so far all the Dems in the legislature haven't really shown any independent thought away from the ultra liberal Steinberg and Bass. In the 15 years I've been voting in this state, I have never seen a Democrat bill showing any cuts to the budget.

It's funny too, this state is so far liberal that the "right-wing" republicans in my state would be considered Specter's and Snowe's anywhere else. I'd leave in a heartbeat if it didn't mean I'd have to go into foreclosure, taking away the $30K in taxes I pay each year to this "tax and spend" state. Soon this state will be only filled with ultra-rich who don't care about taxes, un"layoff"able gov workers, illegals, and octomoms.

BTW, an open primary might actually do some good. Rule of thumb, if both Dems and republicans are against it, it usually means it's a good thing.

Completely false. California is well known as home to some extremely conservative politicians. The coastal areas around LA and San Francisco are so heavily Democratic that they ensure California always goes blue, and that CA's senate representation will be blue, but the inland areas are extremely conservative, and hatch out some pretty ultra right house reps.

As for your idea that Democratic dominated state legislatures lead to crazy high taxes, it simply isn't supported by reality. CNN's broad measure of taxes by state shows that Democratic dominated states probably have a bias towards higher taxes, but it is VERY slight. Hell, ultra liberal California is hanging out right between Kentucky and Arizona. Furthermore, the reddest of the red states, Utah, is #9 while Commie loving Massachusetts is down at #32.

Simply put, California is an interesting mix of very liberal and very conservative. Almost like two different states. The parts of California that everyone actually thinks of are liberal, but that's because the inland empire where all the conservatives live is a complete shithole.
A budget package was on the table for weeks which contained about 50/50 spending to program cuts and yet the GOP caucus STILL refused to get on board with a very pragmatic and balanced package which, coincidently, NO ONE REALLY LIKES including the Dems and the Governors office.

They acted like 4 year olds sitting at the dinner table refusing to eat their vegetables.

That isn't how moderates operate. The GOP state senators acted brashly and arrogantly. Their new caucus leader made statements yesterday that make him look like an idiot and by extension the 10-11 or so holdouts that sat on their hands and bitched and complained about raising taxes for the poor (Yeah right like they care about California's poor) all the while never offering any realistic solution.

And I hope people remember this during the next election.

edit: sorry for the run-ons!
 

Pneumothorax

Golden Member
Nov 4, 2002
1,181
23
81
Originally posted by: OrByte

A budget package was on the table for weeks which contained about 50/50 spending to program cuts and yet the GOP caucus STILL refused to get on board....

I don't call a reduction in FUTURE spending a REAL cut lol. That's like saying: "I'm making $500 this week, spending $700, and planning on spending $1000 next week and now being "smart" with my money I'm now only going to blow $750 next week. Now that's a cut!" I would've rather dropped the income tax and/or vehicle tax raises than dump the gas tax. I'll take this compromise, although not entirely happy with the outcome as these changes are still going to cost me and my wife $15,000 over the next 5 years and most likely $30,000 in 10. Hopefully my home loan will finally be right side up by then so I can move out. (Also, do you honestly believe these taxes are temporary? lol)
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,890
55,160
136
Originally posted by: Pneumothorax
But that's the problem, the coastal areas that provide the majority of the legislature are ultra-liberals electing ultra-liberals to the legislature. I wouldn't mind it so if it were more centrist. Ergo, why I'm starting to like the open primary idea. Make the budget 51% vote and basically every bill will be ultra-liberal and beholden to the welfare/union lobbyists.

And what I'm saying is that your assertion is unfounded in reality. Massachusetts, one of the most liberal states in the union, right? They hold an 87.5% majority to 12.5% in the state senate, and an 88% majority to 12% in the state house. Their taxes by that chart I listed were the #35 in the nation. So, it would appear to me that your ultra-liberal-pocalypse that you're afraid of doesn't really seem to be a problem.

Oh, and by the way... 'welfare/union lobbyists'? Welfare people have lobbyists now? How are they paying for them and who the hell are these people? Sounds like you're listening to too much right wing talk radio.

It seems that you dislike the radicalization of politicians and that's fair enough. The polarization of politicians isn't their fault though, its the fault of the electorate. The people themselves have become vastly more polarized in the last 30 years, and the people that they elect merely reflect that. (for interesting analysis on this read some papers by Keith Poole, or a book called 'The Big Sort') Being a moderate isn't a virtue in and of itself anyway.

I'm down for the representatives of the people being as ideological as the people want them to be without false controls forcing moderation. What I DO mind is a screwed up Constitution that makes passing a state budget, the fundamental requirement for the state to operate, subject to a 2/3rds supermajority vote. Bad idea, period.
 

JeepinEd

Senior member
Dec 12, 2005
869
63
91
Originally posted by: JeepinEd
This budget is predicated on the hopes that state revenues will not continue to fall.
I'm willing to bet that by the time Arnold signs it, there will already be a several million dollar deficit.

This is not over. You can't increase state spending by 40% in 5 years, then expect to tax your way out of it when the economy takes a dump.

Just thought I'd bump this up.
As I said in my post, this is not over. The new budget is already $8 Billion in the hole.
They just passed the biggest tax hike in American history. Something tells me another one is on the way....
Text

Edited to add link.