California Budget-Makers Reach Deal by Making the “Tough Decisions”
You know: “tough decisions” like raiding local counties for billions. And waiting until the new fiscal year to send out a batch of paychecks — so, you know, that money doesn’t count.
In other words, it’s larded with the same kind of thievery and trickery they have always employed in the past.
What a shock!
And how does this utter piece of crap get portrayed by the L.A. Times? You guessed it: as an attack on the elderly, the poor, and children:
[A]s outlined by lawmakers and their staffs, the proposal would reshape some aspects of California government, significantly scaling back many services that have been offered to residents — particularly the elderly and the poor — for years.
Tens of thousands of seniors and children would lose access to healthcare . . .
And so it goes.
I have nothing but contempt for these lawmakers — and for the newspaper that castigates them for the few cosmetic efforts at actual budget-cutting that they tried.
UPDATE: DRJ posts a less outraged and more newsy account immediately below.
I haven’t lived here all that long. But it is a high-tax state, and aside from the universities being wonderful and affordable, I don’t see services that are outrageously good.
Our school district is fantastic, but LAUSD is not. I pay extra for the little services my municipality provides, and I pay for things like waste management and parking at many of the public parks (beaches). I can live with the DMV being closed on Friday, but it isn’t like they went out of their way to be open late (as they did in Michigan for a while) for working people.
I’m not complaining, but from the stories I hear, college used to be even cheaper and taxes even lower. Somewhere along the line, things got out of hand. What are people paying for, and who is paying?
MayBee (781c96) — 7/20/2009 @ 11:32 pmtough decisions?
you mean they quit spending money on illegals and told the government employee unions to go whistle?
/yeah. right…….
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 7/20/2009 @ 11:33 pm#1: “What are people paying for, and who is paying?”
we’re paying for all the tourists who think “hey! i’ll move to California…..”
Welcome to California.
Now, Go Home.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 7/20/2009 @ 11:36 pmand for the newspaper that castigates them
Those reporters and editors should spend more time worrying about themselves, about their own jobs, and stop wringing their hands and shedding tears — and, in light of how many employees of the LA Times likely are guilty of limousine liberalism, probably crocodile ones — over the plight of others.
Mark (411533) — 7/20/2009 @ 11:38 pmwe’re paying for all the tourists who think “hey! i’ll move to California…..”
Actually, US Census data indicates if it weren’t for the arrival of immigrants, mainly illegal and most of them from south of the border — and most of them of low-income background — the population of California would drop significantly. Of course, that assumes the absence of such people wouldn’t be offset by the arrival of others or an altered non-migratory pattern of existing residents of the state.
Mark (411533) — 7/20/2009 @ 11:43 pmThen what this means is the state is taking on more debt, no? That would be different than “cutting” I think.
happyfeet (c75712) — 7/21/2009 @ 12:12 amBy September we will be back into “crisis” mode when tax revenues again fall below projections, and the Dems start shouting that since they pushed the envelope in cuts in July the only choice is to raise taxes and put a prop on the ballot to repeal Prop 13. Scoundrels
in_awe (bc82df) — 7/21/2009 @ 12:13 amI am amazed that they cut $15 billion in expenditures, although I fully expect some of those to be illusions as well. I am also amazed that sin taxes didn’t double and that they didn’t tack another percent or two onto “the rich” (who have already arranged to take their capital gains while absent from the state).
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 7/21/2009 @ 12:14 amBy the way, why fight this. The Times knows what the real battle is: getting more Republicans in the legislature and a Republican businessperson as the next Governor.
We should be lauding the people’s will in blocking tax increases and lambasting the Democrats for being against the voters. Never mind the half loaf, call it victory and move forward.
After all, if we are to save the state, it will be Republicans that do it.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 7/21/2009 @ 12:19 amUmm .. and that should not be read as the Times being FOR more Republicans. THey’re doing their best to savage Arnold for throwing grandma out in the snow.
As if we had snow.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 7/21/2009 @ 12:20 amI really do feel bad for my California friends and family. One of the most beautiful places I have ever been. Such varied and marvelous regions. Some truly remarable people. But absolutely fucked-up.
JD (28f89b) — 7/21/2009 @ 4:03 amI’ve got a pic of one of your protesters here, begging Governor Schwarzeneggar and the legislature to “have a heart” and not cut spending. Perhaps the protestors have forgotten that, just two months ago, nearly two out of every three California voters rejected higher taxes to close your budget deficit, even though those increases were only temporary. [snort!]
Here in Pennsylvania, the Republican-controlled state Senate just rejected Governor Rendell’s attempt at a $29 billion state budget, with tax increases. For once, the republicans are standing up for lower spending, having passed a $27.1 billion budget in the state senate.
The Dana whose memory extends back to May 19th (3e4784) — 7/21/2009 @ 4:09 amDana – Did they cut the budget, or cut the rate of growth?
JD (28f89b) — 7/21/2009 @ 4:13 amThe Democrat Party is a criminal enterprise.
kazooskibum (a4dd38) — 7/21/2009 @ 4:38 amJD: In Pennsylvania, they may actually cut the budget. The state Senate’s $27.1 billion budget is lower than the previous year’s budget of $27.8 billion.
Of course, Governor Rendell originally proposed a $29 billion budget, and then made $2 billion in cuts to bring it back down to . . . $29 billion, saying that the recession mandated expenditures of $31 billion! That’s Democratic math for ya! 🙂
There’s a chance, just a chance, mind you, that Republicans in Pennsylvania will do the right thing, do what Republican voters have been demanding for decades, and actually cut spending. In the end, it may come down to whether the Republicans have the guts to shut down state government rather than knuckle under to a bigger budget.
Republicans control the Senate 30-20, while Democrats control the House 104-99.
The Dana in Pennsylvania (3e4784) — 7/21/2009 @ 4:39 amWill the last honest person leaving California please hsut off the lights? Thanks.
KingShamus (4fabb2) — 7/21/2009 @ 4:59 am15, King, the lights won’t even be on before that last honest person left because the Democrats won’t have paid the light bill, not even with a worthless IOU.
PCD (02f8c1) — 7/21/2009 @ 5:33 amYou don’t need to worry about that, KingShamus: pretty soon the electric company will shut them off for you, for non-payment of the bill.
The Dana who pays his own bills (3e4784) — 7/21/2009 @ 5:33 amSerious question: If I don’t pay my electric bill on time, the electric company charges me a late fee. As California keeps issuing IOUs, why shouldn’t the people owed by the Golden State be able to charge y’all 1½% per month interest, like they would any regular Joe?
The economist Dana (3e4784) — 7/21/2009 @ 5:36 amPeople who have left California and/or moving soon to escape draconian taxes ,will by leaving ,give future numbers of Democrats a majority to plunge the state deeper into hell.This is California irony.
mike191 (cf696c) — 7/21/2009 @ 5:49 amGood on them, Dana. This should get more coverage. Actual cutting of an overall budget is incredibly rare.
JD (28f89b) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:16 am“Tens of thousands of seniors and children would lose access to healthcare, local governments would sacrifice several billion dollars in state assistance this year and thousands of convicted criminals could serve less time in state prison. Welfare checks would go to fewer residents, state workers would be forced to continue to take unpaid days off and new drilling for oil would be permitted off the Santa Barbara coast.”
No bias there!
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:22 amSounds like another budget fraud to me.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:33 amI’m shocked, shocked the LA Times is giving cover to its Democrat legislators.
Alta Bob (6a9705) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:52 amThis agreement is just an outline. Full details won’t be disclosed until immediately before Thursday’s vote.
Wesson (03286d) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:56 amAs California keeps issuing IOUs, why shouldn’t the people owed by the Golden State be able to charge y’all 1½% per month interest, like they would any regular Joe?
I believe they are allegedly paying interest, although I don’t know the rate.
I also know that there is a market for the IOUs, and heard on NPR that the rate of return for people who invest in them is fantastic. What they didn’t mention: when there is an excellent rate of return on an investment, there is a reason: it’s damned risky.
Who here would invest in California IOUs? You’re counting on the state to pay you back, which means they have to come up with the money without trickery. Which they are patently incapable of doing.
People Who Do Not Read Patterico (cc3b34) — 7/21/2009 @ 7:03 amCalifornia will not have a blackout because of failure to pay the bill. The electric grid is in such poor shape and generating plants are so old and poorly maintained, I’m surprised we haven’t had rolling blackouts this summer. The only thing that will save California is the coming ice age.
Mike K (90939b) — 7/21/2009 @ 7:05 amthe Dems start shouting that since they pushed the envelope in cuts in July the only choice is to raise taxes and put a prop on the ballot to repeal Prop 13
I would probably support both [at least, to modify prop 13. with a split roll and repeal the clause requiring a 2/3 majority for a budget, which is all that is being talked about], but claiming that putting a proposition on the ballot can help resolve this year’s problem is preposterous. The earliest it could be voted on (without incurring significant extra expense for a special election) would be next June; how would that help with balancing this year’s budget?
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 7/21/2009 @ 7:47 amI am also amazed that sin taxes didn’t double
They couldn’t get any Republicans to vote for it.
The tax which made the most sense was the oil severance tax – most oil-producing jurisdictions have one, and it’s a peculiarity of California that we don’t – but that didn’t pass, either.
Here in my county they’re talking about imposing a use tax on parking lots.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 7/21/2009 @ 7:48 amAs California keeps issuing IOUs, why shouldn’t the people owed by the Golden State be able to charge y’all 1½% per month interes
The IOUs are interest bearing. Not at 1.5%/mo, but at 3.75% annually.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 7/21/2009 @ 7:50 am“And waiting until the new fiscal year to send out a batch of paychecks — so, you know, that money doesn’t count.”
Just out of curiosity, how many of us have postponed various payments to the following month (properly arranged, of course) in order to make ends meet? What is so criminal about the state being able to move a pay period forward one day in order to help do same?
One thing I have to ask about this budget deal: What would constitute a “full loaf, in one fell swoop” to you, Patterico and DRJ? Personally, progress on budgeting in CA happened when Arnold was able to get his decisions on furloughing employees to stick. This gave him massive leverage; the 5/19 vote gave him more leverage.
Be thankful for what has been acheived so far, and prepare for more in the next year.
Brad S (9f6740) — 7/21/2009 @ 7:56 amIf you raise tax rates as the California economy is contracting and while people are moving out of the state, you will get less revenue. Remember, even though tax rates are unchanged right now, California income tax and sales tax revenues are falling, year-over-year.
Official Internet Data Office (2bf66d) — 7/21/2009 @ 7:57 amBrad S – Given the gimmicks, and make npo mistake about it, these are gimmicks, what should lead people to believe that fiscal sanity is on its way?
JD (0a26e4) — 7/21/2009 @ 8:02 am#31 – Brad, just try to do that (delay issuing paychecks, that is) in the private sector and see how well the regulatory and taxing authorities like it.
Dr. K (eca563) — 7/21/2009 @ 8:18 amAren’t these the fiscal geniuses what are on the hook for 5 billion or so dollars they have to pay back for the stem cells they bought to stick it to Bush cause of it felt so so good to stick it to Bush? These are those ones, no?
happyfeet (c75712) — 7/21/2009 @ 8:19 amAren’t these the fiscal geniuses what are on the hook for 5 billion or so dollars they have to pay back for the stem cells they bought to stick it to Bush cause of it felt so so good to stick it to Bush? These are those ones, no?
No.
The voters of the state decided to borrow money for stem cell research. That fiscal error was not made by the legislature.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 7/21/2009 @ 8:32 amComment by Official Internet Data Office — 7/21/2009 @ 7:57 am
Actually, we had an increase of the Sales Tax on April 1st, and again on July 1st, plus the Income Tax on Very-High-Earners (those evil millionaires) was increased also for ’09.
As during the Wilson years, increases in taxation cause changes in behavior (including siting of “official residences”) which will and have driven the actual revenues derived from those increased taxes lower.
aphrael,
AD - RtR/OS! (8d7b04) — 7/21/2009 @ 8:42 amas I believe I have mentioned before on this subject (split rolls), you should make a serious effort to learn how your local tax assessor deals with commercial/industrial property. You will find that those valuations are not frozen, but that those properties are continually reassessed as they are remodeled/improved. In the case of office buildings, every time a tennant moves, and a wall has to be relocated, that triggers a reassessment. In a factory, every time a new piece of equipment requiring a building permit is installed, that triggers a reassessment. It is only in theory that commercial/industrial/business property’s assessments are frozen seemingly forever since the properties don’t change hands as often as a private residence; but, if there is a significant change in stock-ownership in the corporation holding the property, that also triggers a reassessment.
The 2/3rds rule will be changed only over the dead bodies of the CA homeowners – that is the reality!
Comment by aphrael — 7/21/2009 @ 8:32 am
That vote was driven by the same resources that keep the Legislature heavily Liberal-Democrat – Hollyweird!
AD - RtR/OS! (8d7b04) — 7/21/2009 @ 8:51 amPlus, I seriously doubt if that initiative received all that much support in the “red” counties of the state, but it was overwhelmingly supported along the coast in the “blue” counties.
It was nothing but feel-good, look at me I’m doing something wonderful, BS!
$3,000,000,000.00 in bonds with an eventual cost of $6,000,000,000.00 to the taxpayer.
Bonds that IIRC pay a very nice 8.75% TAX-FREE dividend.
It is only in theory that commercial/industrial/business property’s assessments are frozen seemingly forever since the properties don’t change hands as often as a private residence; but, if there is a significant change in stock-ownership in the corporation holding the property, that also triggers a reassessment.
If there is no difference in practice, then there should be no opposition to changing the rule; it might be pointless to do so, but it’s harmless, right?
The 2/3rds rule will be changed only over the dead bodies of the CA homeowners – that is the reality!
I don’t understand this. The 2/3 rule for local taxes I understand homeowners insisting on. But I don’t understand why homeowners as homeowners care deeply about a 2/3 rule for approving a state budget or for adopting taxes unrelated to land. That is to say, they may care deeply about such issues, but it isn’t the threat to their homes, or their status of homeowners, which makes them do so.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:01 am“…If there is no difference in practice…”
Your words, not mine.
I gave you several types of triggers for the reassessment of non-residential property that do cause reassessements on an ongoing basis for much of the property on those rolls, contrary to popular, and your, wisdom.
The 2/3rds rule….
AD - RtR/OS! (8d7b04) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:12 amIt is a reinforcement upon the Legislature that they are not sovereign, the People are!
I think that once you’ve started arguing about which voters to blame for Proposition 71, you’ve conceded my point that the Legislature cannot be blamed for it. 🙂
Anyhow, Proposition 71 passed with 59.1% of the vote. It received more support than the state average in these counties:
Sonoma; Solano; Santa Cruz; Santa Clara; Santa Barbara; San Mateo; SLO; San Francisco; San Benito; Napa; Monterey; Mendocino; Marin; Los Angeles; Contra Costa; Alameda.
From that perspective it looks like a Bay Area plot which LA bought into.
But it was only defeated outright in these counties:
Amador, Calaveras, Colusa, Del Norte, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Lassen, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, Modoc, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Tulare, Yuba
Which means that, while the central valley and the rural areas opposed it, a majority in the (relatively conservative) suburban areas of Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, and San Diego counties supported it; and a smattering of seemingly random central valley / rural counties supported it as well (see, eg, San Joaquin county, or Mono county).
See here for more detail.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:13 amIf it makes CA denizens feel any better, my own state is deploying the exact same desultory practices in lieu of actually reforming the state’s budgetary structural deficiencies. Our new Gov. has trotted out the poor public sector union employees, and of course the aged and infirmed are right there on – camera, imploring the incredibly pissed – off IL taxpayers to “have a heart, please pass the income tax increase.” Keep in mind, residents of the city of Chicago are now ranked #2 in the nation in terms of total taxation, yet these assclowns are pretending that only another tax increase (on top of recent city and county tax increases) will save the state from Armageddon. The GOP is close to useless in this charade as well – I pray for another ballot initiative for term limits, it’s the only thing that will truly pave the way for real reform.
BTW, anyone want to guess what my yearly property tax bill for my two – bedroom condo here on the North side is? Did I hear you say $3K? No, guess again. What, did you say $5K, HA! Guess again.
Dmac (e6d1c2) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:18 amI pray for another ballot initiative for term limits, it’s the only thing that will truly pave the way for real reform.
Term limits do not appear to have paved the way for real reform in California.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:19 amJust remember, that paying back that $6B is money that could have been spent on the actual, real needs of the State of California, and not trying to get Christopher Reeve out of his wheel-chair.
AD - RtR/OS! (8d7b04) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:20 amComment by Dmac — 7/21/2009 @ 9:18 am
Suburban L.A. 3/2 single-family detached house on a 5K foot lot, but thankfully grandfathered by Prop 13: less than $1K/yr.
For those of us not constantly moving, Prop-13 is that proverbial third-rail: Touch it and Die!
AD - RtR/OS! (8d7b04) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:25 amJust remember, that paying back that $6B is money that could have been spent on the actual, real needs of the State of California, and not trying to get Christopher Reeve out of his wheel-chair.
I voted against Proposition 71.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:31 amSo far the state of California has paid 88 billion dollars for the George Bush War in Iraq.. you know the one he started so he could dress up like a war hero and strut on to that aircraft carrier after finding all those WMDs in Iraq?
And funny how short Reptilian memories are because Bush assured us that those tax breaks for the rich he gave us would result in a great economy and a balanced budget unlike the one Clinton left him. Hope you all enjoy your new found prosperity….
No.. lets not stop senseless wars and needless tax breaks for the very wealthiest because war means we support the troops and taxes on the wealthiest is Marxism.. Instead cut funding for the poor and needy ’cause we are a Conservative Christian country with Conservative Christian values.
Ah!! but then I am guilty of such crazy rants!! and I have learned I support a man who is not a citizen, who is a secret member of the Muslim Brotherhood and wants this country to fail, covets white women, will confiscate your guns and is soon to initiate his mandatory organ donor program!! Thanks for warning me oh great Conservative defenders of truth and sanity!!
VietnamEraVet (8918ab) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:48 amProblem with stem cells is they don’t hold their resale value. What probably holds resale value better is tamales at least if you freeze them right away.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:50 amVietnamEraVet, your one-note tune got old a long time ago, but trying to tie the budget of the state of California to your favorite irrational obsession is even beyond your usual incoherence.
SPQR (5811e9) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:57 amVietnamEraVet you sound very bitter. Hey maybe someone might could want to make a movie about your sufferings and anger and how you found peace and forgiveness when you learned to view life through the eyes of disadvantaged child what pried open the door to your heart, a door you thought had closed forever.
I’m seeing Ed Norton? Yes. Or maybe David Arquette in the role he was born to play. Work with me here.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:58 amI hope the democrats follow the attack in post 47. Attack BUSH! for spending too much money! That’s just the way to defend those democrats!
Bush spent a fourth of what Obama is spending, and for a republican, that’s just too much. For a Democrat… no big deal, but for a republican, it doesn’t even matter if the money freed 50 million people! And for the Democrat it doesn’t even matter if the money basically does nothing but inflate away our nation’s wealth.
I hope the Democrats keep running against Bush.
Juan (bd4b30) — 7/21/2009 @ 9:59 amThank goodness I’m from Texas, where Rick Perry seceded us from having to pay for the Iraq war. It’s basically the reason Texas has money in a rainy day fund while those suckers in California are broke!
Juan (bd4b30) — 7/21/2009 @ 10:03 amoh… *a* disadvantaged child… and by disadvantaged I’m thinking not just poor but a kid what has to overcome a handicap or something… not blind or anything super serious but like maybe a bum leg or a wicked overbite or… something with dramatic potential what hasn’t been done to death is what I’m going for here…
happyfeet (71f55e) — 7/21/2009 @ 10:04 amSo far the state of California has paid 88 billion dollars for the George Bush War in Iraq.
Huh? So far as I know, the state governments are not responsible for paying for undertakings of the federal government. Perhaps I missed that day in civics class?
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 7/21/2009 @ 10:14 amaphrael, you gotta miss a whole lot more than a day to follow VEV …
SPQR (5811e9) — 7/21/2009 @ 10:17 amComment by AD – RtR/OS! — 7/21/2009 @ 8:42 am
Remember, even though
tax rates are unchanged right now,the sales tax already went up on April 1 and on July 1, and the top marginal income tax rate was already raised for 2009, California income tax and sales tax revenues are falling, year-over-year.Fixed.
Official Internet Data Office (b7fd11) — 7/21/2009 @ 10:24 amComment by aphrael — 7/21/2009 @ 9:31 am
Do your neighbors know, and they still let you live there?
AD - RtR/OS! (8d7b04) — 7/21/2009 @ 10:27 amHappyfeet – Thank you for #50. You should email that to carin.
JD (0a26e4) — 7/21/2009 @ 10:34 amComment by Official Internet Data Office — 7/21/2009 @ 10:24 am
Yes, there was a comparison of year-year data for the months of March and April, where the fall-off for April (with the new rates) was $25M+ (or was that a percentage figure, I forget?)over the fall-off for March (which was down due to the slow-down in economic activity, but nothing like April). Yet, time after time, the tax&spenders refuse to recognize that people alter their economic activity in response to negative influences.
AD - RtR/OS! (8d7b04) — 7/21/2009 @ 10:35 amJust as in the Wilson years, it will take several years for revenues to recover even if the economy comes back. Yet, they will refuse to scale-back spending to match the new reality, and dig us into an even deeper trench.
Term limits do not appear to have paved the way for real reform in California.
This is an excellent point which I overlooked – because almost every congressional district has been gerrymandered beyond belief in order to protect incumbents and their hand – picked ideological successors, it would appear that it has mostly negated the effect of term limits.
Dmac (e6d1c2) — 7/21/2009 @ 1:24 pmDmac – but Prop 11 passed in 2008, so unless there’s even more criminal activity from our D & R criminals in Sacramento, there should eventually be a dilution of that problem.
Apogee (e2dc9b) — 7/21/2009 @ 3:38 pmThe VietnamEraVeterinatian wrote:
Somehow, some way, you seem to have forgotten that it was the voters of California who decided that they didn’t want to raise taxes to pay for the things you want. Should the will of the voters, directly expressed, simply be ignored?
The economist Dana (474dfc) — 7/21/2009 @ 4:49 pmWell, when you carry a little red book of Ch.Mao’s sayings…
AD - RtR/OS! (8d7b04) — 7/21/2009 @ 5:00 pmAh!! but then I am guilty of such crazy rants!!
Yes, good of you to confess. Now, I prescribe a period of silence, say five years ?
The term limits in California have not worked well because the government in Sacramento, and in DC, is run by staffs who are permanent residents. The politicians do not know half of what they sign. The only way to get control would be to go back to the old schedule of a session every two years with the intervening year for budget only, no new legislation. Jesse Unruh gave us the annual session and things have gone downhill since.
Mike K (db3eb5) — 7/21/2009 @ 5:08 pmBrad S #31:
I’m not sure what you’re asking. If you’re asking what I would do to solve California’s budget crisis, my answer is “I don’t know, and I don’t live in California.”
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/21/2009 @ 5:25 pmComment by DRJ — 7/21/2009 @ 5:25 pm
Your gain, is our loss.
AD - RtR/OS! (8d7b04) — 7/21/2009 @ 5:31 pmI’ve visited California on many occasions. It’s beautiful but expensive, which is why I only visit.
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/21/2009 @ 5:35 pmAD wrote:
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao,
The late John Lennon (474dfc) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:06 pmYou ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow
The budget deal with reportedly lead to the release of 27,000 inmates. That’s the bad news. The good news is it may help the housing market.
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:16 pmThe budget plan also would create a sentencing commission to reexamine the state penal code, which would not save money immediately but would advance plans under discussion by lawmakers for years. The commission would be charged with establishing new sentencing guidelines by July 1, 2012.
What does that mean? I bet Mr. Patterico would know.
happyfeet (c75712) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:20 pmwhat does “accelerate income tax withholding at workplaces” mean?
I don’t like all these whispers and intimations of nefarious dirty socialist plots and schemes but more and more I’m up to my neck in them. This Arnold person, he doesn’t inspire trust.
happyfeet (c75712) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:23 pmwhat does “accelerate income tax withholding at workplaces” mean?
right now tax is withheld at a constant rate throughout the year. that is, i get 26 paychecks per year, of equal amounts (barring unpaid vacation or bonuses, but lets keep it simple), and i pay the same amount in taxes out of each paycheck.
lets assume that it’s 9%.
accelerated withholding would have me pay 11% in the first half of the calendar year 2010 (eg, the second half of the 2009-2010 fiscal year) and 7% in the second half.
thus the amount I *pay* in 2010 stays the same, but 1/5 of it is shifted into this fiscal year and out of the next fiscal year.
it’s a stupid idea.
aphrael (4163e2) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:28 pmdoesn’t that mess up the Barack Obama’s generous tax cut what he gave us and what has brought such spendy joy?
happyfeet (c75712) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:30 pmThe budget deal with reportedly lead to the release of 27,000 inmates.
Yet once again, California’s ‘new’ budget will not address the cost of incarcerating illegal aliens. It’s very frustrating that this bleed of money is virtually ignored because of the issue no will tackle.
According to Senator John Benoit’s office, illegal immigrants comprise 15 percent — roughly 26,000 inmates — of the state’s prison population.
The cost of housing those prisoners is expected to total $970 million in the current fiscal year — up 46 percent compared to three years ago, according to Benoit’s office.
Under SCAAP, the state received about a 12 percent reimbursement from the federal government for the 2007-08 fiscal year, leaving California taxpayers to foot the balance of the bill, according to Benoit.
Dana (a3e680) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:36 pmI went to a Japanese restaurant in San Francisco and ordered a California roll. The waiter brought me an IOU.
Official Internet Data Office (b7fd11) — 7/21/2009 @ 6:43 pmSomehow I don’t illegal aliens will stop getting welfare or medical care. Tough decisions in lala land? Please.
This is what we face after four years of Presidente Zero.
Thomas Jackson (8ffd46) — 7/21/2009 @ 7:19 pmIt’s the Sequoias I’m really worried about. Much, much more irreplaceable than Californians.
nk (5357a4) — 7/21/2009 @ 7:58 pmThe term limits in California have not worked well because the government in Sacramento, and in DC, is run by staffs who are permanent residents.
Actually, the main reason or most crucial reason why term limits haven’t worked well in California is because too much of its electorate is of “lefty” persuasion. IOW, if one assumes term limits will somehow bring on better, wiser policymaking — because there are better, wiser politicians — than that possibility is tossed out the window when so many voters keep slotting in a variety of knuckle-headed liberals. Therefore, how are you going to get reform out of a bureaucracy when it’s ruled over by a high percentage of people who lack much common sense and who tolerate the type of permisiveness that can easily lead to excessive indulgence and outright corruption?
Mark (411533) — 7/21/2009 @ 8:33 pmComment 26 was me. Somehow the name got changed before I posted. Weird.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 7/21/2009 @ 11:09 pmI have this theory that HAL 9000 occasionally takes over your website programming.
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/21/2009 @ 11:56 pmJct: There’s nothing wrong with small denomination municipal or California State IOUs if anyone can pay their taxes with them. When Argentina’s government workers were faced with cuts, their unions talked 6 state governments into paying them with small-denomination state bonds which could be used to pay for state services and taxes by everyone.
KingofthePaupers (39db5f) — 7/22/2009 @ 2:47 amWhen the local currency is pegged to the Time Standard of Money (how many dollars per unskilled hour child labor) Hours earned locally can be intertraded with other timebanks globally! In 1999, I paid for 39/40 nights in Europe with an IOU for a night back in Canada worth 5 Hours. U.N. Millennium Declaration UNILETS Resolution C6 to governments is for a time-based currency to restructure the global financial architecture.
See http://youtube.com/kingofthepaupers
Too bad California IOUs won’t be accepted in payment for state taxes and services like state bonds were in Argentina. Too bad California IOUs will be denominated too big to use as local currency. Too bad Argentina people were smart enough to avoid the tent-cities catastrophe and California people are too stupid to follow their example.
If they make IOUs legal tender, I’ll take back every joke I ever made about Girlieman Governor Musclehead if he engineers the California state currency lifeboat.
Our esteemed host wrote:
Well, you’re the site administrator, so you do have the ability to fix it! 🙂
The blogger Dana (3e4784) — 7/22/2009 @ 3:27 amDRJ wrote:
Thing is, it’s difficult to picture our host replying to some people with a bland, “I’m afraid I can’t do that, Dave.”
The snarky Dana (3e4784) — 7/22/2009 @ 3:29 amYesterday came the news that the CalPers Retirement Investment Fund has taken a $50B+ hit due to the economic downturn;
AD - RtR/OS! (94ba46) — 7/22/2009 @ 9:53 amToday, we find out that the CA Teacher’s Retirement Fund has taken a $100B hit.
Both of these will require additional contributions by government agencies out of their General Funds that will have to be made up by either increased taxes, or the cutting of other programs.
Want to bet what we’re told we’ll have to do?
I have this theory that HAL 9000 occasionally takes over your website programming.
I’ve had a number of comments recently disappear forever. I was too lazy to repost, especially as I kept expecting them to appear.
[note: the only comment found in spam was here. No idea where any others may have disappeared to.]
Mike K (db3eb5) — 7/22/2009 @ 10:00 amThe bottom line remains that California has not made any “tough” decisions. Few decisions at all really.
SPQR (5811e9) — 7/22/2009 @ 10:13 amComment by KingofthePaupers — 7/22/2009 @ 2:47 am
They can’t make the IOU’s legal tender, as that would be a violation of the U.S.Constitution’s prohibition upon the States of creating currency.
AD - RtR/OS! (94ba46) — 7/22/2009 @ 10:25 amI have this theory that HAL 9000 occasionally takes over your website programming.
Also seems like there are any number of occasions when postings are being over-filtered or over-screened, so where text will end up after hitting the “Submit Comment” button not only is a waiting game, but can easily be a case of stuff falling into some black hole in cyberspace.
Mark (411533) — 7/22/2009 @ 10:41 amMark,
The delay in posting comments occurs when the SuperCache is turned on. It keeps the website from crashing when there is a big link but unfortunately it also makes comments post in slow motion.
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/22/2009 @ 11:21 am… or it could be HAL.
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/22/2009 @ 11:21 amwhen the SuperCache is turned on
Good to know that. I thought it instead was a case of SuperModeration, that Patterico.com was trying to manage postings to prevent too much flaming or TOSing or trolling.
Mark (411533) — 7/22/2009 @ 11:29 amThere’s very little moderation here, except for previously identified spam-related comments advertising drugs, gambling, etc. There’s a lot of that and I think it sometimes slows things down, too.
DRJ (6f3f43) — 7/22/2009 @ 11:32 amThe SuperCache slows things down so much it makes it very difficult to carry-on a timely, meaningful conversation on topics that generate a lot of interest.
AD - RtR/OS! (94ba46) — 7/22/2009 @ 11:59 amYou get so frustrated that you just drift away.
I wonder how many of the state’s commissioners of one thing or another have been eliminated. I’m guessing zero.
CA Boards and Commissions Review.
My “favorite” has always been the Unemployment Insurance Board. It has doubled in size over the years to give a fat paycheck ($150K) to every defeated pol around. Shame!
Patricia (48ec63) — 7/22/2009 @ 8:02 pmHey folks remember when your hero RR.. said medicare was socialist? Why dont you have the courage (balls) to campaign for its repeal??
VietnamEraVet (8918ab) — 7/24/2009 @ 2:04 pmHey, VEV, have you seen how much Medicare is costing? And how little good it does? And how expensive medical care has gotten as a direct result of Medicare?
So why don’t you have the courage to campaign for its repeal?
Steverino (69d941) — 7/24/2009 @ 2:06 pmNo severino I want you to campaign for its repeal since you think the war in Iraq is worth the cost but medicare is not
VietnamEraVet (8918ab) — 7/24/2009 @ 2:09 pmhappyfeet: oh hey I am campaigning to stop the Medicare.
VietnamEraVet: You are so brave. You have really big balls I think.
happyfeet: Thank you.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 7/24/2009 @ 2:10 pm