Still No State Budget

Aloha!  I’m back from a week in Oahu with the family and a quick read of the papers tell me there is still no freakin’ state budget.  The LA Times George Sketon reports that Abel Maldonado was the lone Republican supporting the Assembly’s budget resolution, so I’m sure that the Conservative Republican Mafia will be out for his blood come the next election cycle.

Writes Skelton: The Assembly-passed budget is a Republican budget. It hits society’s most vulnerable. It cuts funds for inner-city transit. It reduces the budget deficit to $700 million — half of what Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had proposed in May — and the governor has promised to whittle that down to zero with line-item vetoes. The budget sets aside a record $3.6-billion reserve. And there’s no tax increase.
This extended drawn out affair, with cheerleading from the conservative blogs, shows the weakness of the Governor in dealing with members of his own party.  If the Governor has aspirations of replacing either of California’s US Senators after he is termed out, he should flex his muscles and start twisting some arms on the Senate Republican caucus. 

The reality is 82 of California’s 120 elected officials are behind the new proposed budget.  We are one vote away from enacting it.  I can only hope that those voters most affected by the delay on the budget take it out on Republicans in the House and Senate in 2008. 

Since the Republican blogs keep encouraging solidarity for the Republican caucus, let me wish the Democratic majorities in the Assembly and Senate stick to their guns on the Assembly-backed budget resolution.  The Governor can trim additional programs, but the Republicans who all worked so hard to re-elect the Governor no longer trust him. What can you expect from the politicians who place party before people?

 

  4 comments for “Still No State Budget

  1. August 9, 2007 at 11:56 am

    Aloha and welcome back Dan.

    Can I lend you a pair of my reading glasses?

    Having participated in numerous multi-million dollar Contract negotiations I can say that we did not pick up our marbles and leave when both parties didn’t agree on specific specifications, pricing, delivery or Terms and Conditions.

    That said, where is your venum against Senate Dem Leader Perata for sending the members home with unfinished business?

    Until you can address that question you should not be attacking those who themselves were elected. Again, speaking for myself, if I am short of funds and have a list of “wants” or “needs,” we assess them one by one and decide where to cut, eliminate or postpone said expenditures until our financial picture is clearer and brighter. Why can’t every Senator act with the same fiscal responsibility, especially when it’s OPM?

  2. Dan Chmielewski
    August 9, 2007 at 1:26 pm

    Larry — let me lend you my glasses and remind you that Republicans are in the minority here. The Governor can also cut the budget further in line with what Republican senators may want as long as he gets it. This Republican stalemate on the budget is a stunt. Perata sending senators home is also a stunt. Doe your pot call my kettle black Larry?

    And Larry, re-read your last paragraph and apply it to the GOP reps in DC who spend like drunken sailors…without criticism from the right wigers here in CA. Assessing wants and needs is one thing; but there is a difference of opinion between Reps and Dem over what is a want and what is a need. And for my tax dollars, your priorities and mine differ greatly.

  3. August 9, 2007 at 2:15 pm

    Dan.

    Across town, at the Orange Juice, I recently posted a story of abuse by a REPUBLICAN Senator inside the beltway. Specifically, the “Bridge to Nowhere” that cost you and I over $230 milion of Federal funds. Alaska Senior Senator Stevens got this “pork” to build a bridge to an island with less than 50 inhabitants. Therefore your comment about my prioritites is off base. In fact I was just reviewing a list of around 114 earmarks that total just over $one billion dollars. Very few of those listed were for projects inside CA.

    As to the gridlocked State budget. So is it your position that the majoirty of Demorats have completed the budget and have the final say in which projects will be included and how much money they are to receive?

    I am so glad that we still have the two-thirds rule regarding matters dealing with funding.
    Perhaps you can use your contacts in the state’s Democratic Party and get the majority party members to return from Hawaii or wherever they are hunkering down to fullfill their responsibility to submit a balanced budget to the governor.

    And lastly. While I enjoy the on-line debate we are leaving for the east coast early tomorrow morning and will not return until the 21st. As I have no intention to be on-line during that 10 day trip do not think that I am dodging your response or those of any other poster. We all have choices to make. If I get on-line and don’t get re-acquainted with my family I may end up sleeping in our garage.
    Best regards to the Liberal OC family.

  4. August 10, 2007 at 8:57 am

    Larry,

    Enjoy your vacation. I feel a little guilty about posting this while you’re away, but, sorry, I just can’t let it pass.

    “I am so glad that we still have the two-thirds rule regarding matters dealing with funding.”

    Well, again, you’re in the minority. There’s only two other states in the US that do the same thing.

    James Madison, in Federalist No. 58
    “It has been said that more than a majority ought to have been required for a quorum; and in particular cases, if not in all, more than a majority of a quorum for a decision…in all cases where justice or the general good might require new laws to be passed, or active measures to be pursued, the fundamental principle of free government would be reversed. It would be no longer the majority that would rule: the power would be transferred to the minority.”

    If they acknowledged this 200+ years ago, can’t you?

Comments are closed.