Poor would be hard hit by proposed California budget cuts

Bradley, it’s hard to know whether to laugh or cry. Poor hardest hit. Really. I suggest that the Governator start with the cash grants for college kids.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. They know how to manipulate the populace using the instruments of culture that they have captured–the media, academia, etc.

Poor would be hard hit by proposed California budget cuts
The governor suggests dismantling welfare programs for families and ending CalGrants for college students.

By Eric Bailey and Patrick McGreevy
May 22, 2009
Reporting from Sacramento — With deficit forecasts growing darker by the day, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is considering a plan to slash California’s safety net for the poor by eliminating the state’s main welfare program, health insurance for low-income families and cash grants to college students.

The stark proposal surfaced in testimony by the administration at a joint legislative hearing Thursday that followed the governor’s decision to withdraw a week-old plan to borrow $5.5 billion to help balance the budget. . . </i?

My question is (and thanks for your post, Mike K – I’m sure that there’s a whole back story there), what is up with the CA GOP?

As a guy who drives around and listens to all those commercials at election time, I always get the impression (at least over the last 10 to 15 years) that the CA GOP just doesn’t care to fight for their side of the argument (I’m talking about the perception created by a typical ad campaign…I KNOW that in reality that there are people who DO care and fight hard).

Ok…so the unions have deeper pockets, but all I know is that I’m on the receiving end of a PR campaign that sends the impression that the left believes in their side of the argument more the the right. Again…just from the PR campaign part of it. And THAT’S what most Californians are exposed to…at least that what it seems like to me.

The left is good at organizing and getting TV time, convincing people who don’t have time to even do what I’m doing now. I imagine that they conclude “Gee…that must be the “good” side of the argument”.

Much of the time by the right is spent pointing out the obvious and continuous bias in the media. Understandable, but how do we combat the left’s winning tactics? Face it, they seem to really know how to manipulate the culture to get their way. It won’t take just a new conservative Governor. There needs to be more balance in the legislature, and that’s where the CA GOP comes in.

Voters have modified the Gann limit in a series of initiative measures. Proposition 99* (1988) and Proposition 10* (1998) exempted new tobacco taxes from the Gann limit. Proposition 98* (1988) required public schools to receive a share of revenues exceeding the Gann limit. That share was changed to a flat 50% by Proposition 111* (1990). Proposition 111 also added three exemptions to the Gann limit: capital outlay spending, appropriations supported by increased gas taxes, and appropriations resulting from national disasters. Most significantly, Proposition 111 changed the formula used for calculating annual adjustments to the Gann limit. Under Proposition 111, the population factor is based on a weighted average of population and K-14 school enrollment growth (instead of population only), and the cost of living factor is based solely on California per-capita personal income growth (and no longer takes into account the Consumer Price Index).

The changes to the Gann limit formula under Proposition 111 substantially raised the Gann limit, making it less likely that the limit will be reached in the future. Many observers believe that in its current weakened state the Gann limit has ceased to be a meaningful constraint on state spending.

Part of the blame goes to the Republican Party in California that chose a mutual disarmament with the Democrats in the 90s whereby they accepted safe districts in the redistricting and a permanent minority status. Each time there has been a chance to stop the slide into insolvency, the voters have been tricked by clever politicians. Willie Brown torpedoed a redistricting plan after the 1990 census and bragged after the election that he had tricked the voters.

To some degree, the voters are to blame for letting themselves be tricked. On the other hand, they should have a right to expect the media to fairly explain the alternatives. The recent election suggests that they have decided the media is not to be trusted.