The Budget is Done, The Budget Problem is Not
The budget deal agreed to by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders is better than the budget the legislature sent to the governor earlier in the week, but it does not come close to fixing California’s dysfunctional fiscal system.
The idea of borrowing from the taxpayers with a no-interest loan by increasing withholding was eliminated. That’s a good thing. And, the rainy day fund provision was strengthened while the size of that fund was reduced. That works, too.
But, whether other aspects of the deal—collecting larger penalties from corporations that underpay their taxes, and voters approving a plan on loans from an expanded lottery – will secure the needed revenue to balance the budget are iffy at best.
On top of that, the main budget problem remains: once again the state is projected to spend more in the next budget year than it brings in. While some think they can take a breather from state budget thoughts now that this budget is put to bed, others are plotting otherwise.
If it sounds too good to be true…
Here is the conclusion from the just-released economic analysis by the California Air Resources Board’s of AB32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006:
The analysis we have conducted indicates that if California implements the comprehensive greenhouse gas strategy, as recommended in the draft Scoping Plan, not only will the economy grow by a similar amount as we move toward 2020, but it will grow at a slightly higher rate. Increased economic growth is anticipated primarily because the investments motivated by several measures, such as the expansion and strengthening of existing energy efficiency programs and implementation of new and existing policies to reduce emissions from the transportation sector, result in substantial energy savings that more than pay back the cost of the investments at expected future energy prices.
Will there be powdered wigs? Thoughts on the Constitutional Convention.
California’s elites are talking, and here’s what they’re saying: this governor can’t get things done, the legislature is hopeless, the entire state government is dysfunctional. (OK, just because they’re elites, they’re not wrong. These are Western Elites, not the dreaded Eastern Elites who are being so, so, so unfair to Sarah Palin). The you know what has hit the fan. The only way to fix this is top-to-bottom reform.
So let’s have a constitutional convention.
What does your blogger think? Put the convention in some place nice (Monterey, maybe, or how about Coronado?) and I’m there, live blogging every second. But while I hate to burst bubbles (OK, I enjoy the occasional bubble burst), I wonder if a constitutional convention is a realistic goal, and whether such a gathering might be more trouble than it’s worth.
Correction: “Who is Really Behind Proposition 2” Post.
In his September 8, 2008 post, “Who is Really Behind Proposition 2,” Patrick Dorinson asserted that the campaign manager for Yes on Proposition 2 was an admitted former member of the Animal Liberation Front who vandalized fur stores in Memphis.
The Humane Society of the United States has pointed out that the campaign manager of the Yes on Proposition 2 campaign is Jennifer Fearing, who is not connected to the ALF nor is she the person referred to by Mr. Dorinson in the post.
Fox and Hounds Daily retracts this statement by Mr. Dorinson and stands corrected.