As the budget deadline bears down on Jerry Brown, he obviously has no intention of being truthful with Californians. In his latest masking of reality, Brown says: “We have a plan, and it’s a very good plan,” Brown said. “It will put California’s finances on a firm footing for many, many years to come.” In truth, Brown plan includes a 27% increase in spending purportedly financed by $58 billion in new taxes over 5 years. That’s not economic firm footing – it’s more like financial quicksand.

Let’s be clear about the state of the California budget. There is no need for a tax increase and any such tax rate increase will only hurt future budgets. Several weeks ago, Republicans gave Brown a no tax increase budget that preserved education funding. Brown said no.

Why? Two simple reasons. First, he wants more money to pay for his 27% increase in spending. That’s right, all of Brown’s scare tactics and demands for taxes this year have nothing to do with this year’s budget – they have to do with his completely irresponsible desire to increase spending by $24 billion dollars over the next three years alone. Neither a single independent nor Democrat voter I have spoken to about that spending increase believes that is the right thing to do. Instead of making videos, perhaps Jerry Brown should level with California voters about his spending increase.

A good lawyer will tell you that how you frame the question
often determines the response.  Knowing that, trial lawyers often ask a
series of leading questions before they push a witness to the conclusion they
want…and after reading the L.A. Times poll on taxes today, I think they must
have a degree in law.  Fortunately, Californians don’t fall for those
types of questions on election days and that’s why they have turned every
statewide tax increase over the last decade.

To start, the headline screams, "Californians
support tax hikes to help close budget gap."  Really?  Reading
the article, it’s very hard to find the actual number that does — and then it
turns out only to be 52%.  Objective election watchers will tell you that
number is far too low to hold up in a true election.  It would need to be
much higher at this point, and that’s before you take into consideration the essential
nature of this push poll.

Why do I say it’s a push poll? Two reasons: the
sampling and the nature of the questions.

In 62 B.C., Julius Caesar divorced his wife, Pompeia, after rumors circulated that she was romantically linked with Publius Clodius, a notorious philanderer. Caesar himself reportedly did not believe the rumors, but made it clear when demanding the divorce that “Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion.”

Caesar took dramatic steps to ensure the integrity of his office. California’s Redistricting Commission does not appear to hold the same high standards.

The controversy stems from their hiring of Q2 Data and Research, a Berkeley firm chosen to draw “fair and impartial” district lines through a series of thinly veiled steps.

Keep in mind that the Commission nearly hired Q2 on a “no-bid’ contract until they were embarrassed by public criticism for that patently unfair practice. Forced to issue a public bid notice, the notice contained three key components: bidders should (1) disclose prior redistricting experience at the Metropolitan Statistical Area level – with minimum populations of about 1.5 million and up; (2) disclose potential “conflicts” relating to the partisan backgrounds of persons involved with the bidders’ proposals; and (3) disclose financial supporters with partisan backgrounds that might cause disqualification.

It is not often enough in politics that the two major political parties provide voters with a clear contrast. This year, the California Republican Party and Democrats will do just that. Democrat Jerry Brown is set to make his case that Californians should pay more taxes while refusing to cut back on the bureaucracy. California Republicans know that the tax-and-spend policies that caused our current problems will not solve them – and it is time for us to speak out about it.

California Democrats have dominated the California legislature for the better part of two decades. Even with a Republican governor, that one-party dominance has led to a more than doubling of our state government. Most fair-minded observers agree that California would benefit from a more balanced legislature.

The first step in achieving that balance within the Capitol will be for Republicans to provide more balance to the statewide discussions outside the Capitol. For far too long, Democrats have dominated the California airways. The new California Republican Party, in partnership with our Republican leaders and legislators, is set to reverse that dominance and go toe-to-toe with Democrats all over the state.

California is facing nearly The Toughest of Times.
We face historically high unemployment, perennial budget crises and
more.  Don’t think it could get any worse?  Think again.  If Jerry
Brown is elected, in one short stroke, he could deal a potentially
crippling blow to the California economy before it gets a chance to get
back on its feet.

Even for a
committed political observer, volunteer and commentator such as myself,
it seems implausible – but true – that the stakes for elections grow
with each successive election.  For
California, the 2010 gubernatorial election unquestionably could be the
most important election ever – and not necessarily for a good reason.
If Jerry Brown is elected, he and his fellow Democrats could deliver a
devastating blow to California.

We well know that California’s unemployment rate is above 12%.  We
also know that well over 100,000 people are leaving California on a
yearly basis.  Beyond that, California faces an exodus of businesses –
large and small alike.  So it can be no surprise that state revenues
have declined nearly $40 billion over the last three years as a result
of the declining taxpayer base.

Sacramento was witness to a rarified event on May 11th.

According
to at least one reporter, she had never seen a press conference where
each of California’s political parties stood together – literally and
figuratively – and so it was at the "No on Prop 14" press conference.
The Republican Party, the Democrat Party, the Green Party, the Peace
& Freedom Party, the American Independent Party and the Libertarian
Party all came to together in opposition to Prop 14.  Here are the Top
3 facts and the fantasies that came out of the press conference.

Fantasy #1:  It is only the major parties that are opposed to Prop 14 according to Prop 14’s proponents.

By all accounts, future job growth is going to be sluggish at best and we can expect double digit unemployment at least through next year. The Democrats’ response is a $300 billion jobs program. Many Republicans would rather rely on the private sector to fuel the recovery and job growth. So what’s better, Government Force or Market Forces?

The use of the phrase Government Force is based on the nature of government programs. The vast majority of the people would prefer to pay little or no taxes. They are literally forced by government to pay those taxes. As it relates to a jobs bill, the Democrats will tax one set of people or businesses (taxpayers) and/or borrow money (a delayed tax) and then transfer a portion of those collected/borrowed funds to other people or businesses. In that manner, the Democrats believe they have created a job – or in today’s vernacular, saved a job. But have they?

In the process of taxing some and transferring to others, the government force has taken money away from a business/taxpayer in California and perhaps given it to someone in Alabama. That means the business in California cannot hire someone (or save a job) with the money transferred to Alabama – a type of zero sum game. Actually, it is worse than a zero sum game because government always manages to waste money in the transfer and so Alabama is never helped so much as California is hurt.

Amidst polls showing flagging public support, the Obama Administration has decided to address the one poll, among all others, that will determine Obama’s political future: the unemployment rate. As Scott Rasmussen points out, the unemployment rate has a lot to say in deciding a President’s popularity rating and election results – which is probably why Obama announced he would hold a jobs summit with small business representatives among others.

Speeches and photo-ops, however, won’t change the fact that Obama’s policies are anti-capitalist and therefore anti-job and anti-recovery.

It’s important to note that the secret to capitalism is not all that secret. It’s right there in the name CAPITALism. Our system relies on:

Step 1. The ability of some to aggregate enough capital, i.e. save money, so that they can . . .

Step 2. Invest in productive enterprises, i.e. start or grow businesses which . . .

Step 3. Employ people – people who . . .

What a difference 200 days can make. When Obama took the oath of office at the end of January, the Democrats had a 7% lead in the Rasmussen generic congressional ballot – a simple poll that asks the question if the election were held today, would you prefer a Republican or a Democrat for Congress (no names – just a question of Party preference). As of September 6, 2009, that lead was symmetrically reversed to a 7% Republican lead – a historic 14% swing.

There are two main reasons for that reversal – style and substance.

On the substance side, there is no doubt that nationalized health care is sending a political shock wave through the electorate. Voters are deeply concerned about this issue because most voters are smart enough to realize (1) that Obama’s numbers don’t add up, (2) that huge government programs don’t work and reduce personal choices, and (3) the fact that it involves their own health care not just some other group of people. The health care debate comes on the heels of similar, deep seated concerns about Cap & Trade and the utter explosion of the Deficit. Those issues and others have given rise to a sense of buyer’s remorse on substance – and not just among those Republicans that strayed to vote for Obama – but among Independents who now favor Republicans 43% – 21% on that same Generic Ballot.

With each passing week, the political headlines make it clear that the luster is falling off the Democrat brand quickly. Whether its Obama’s falling polls, falling numbers for his health care initiative or growing disenchantment with the Pelosi/Reid leadership, the trend is unmistakable. To make matters worse for Democrats, that trend is likely to continue in the year to come.

The so-called stimulus package will not positively affect the economy. The reason is simple: the economy is still suffering from the 2nd largest tax burden in American history and the highest ever regulatory burden. Combined with a huge debt burden, staggering deficits and the threat of new taxes, it is no wonder that talk of a double dip recession has started to make the rounds among economists. All of that spells more than potential mid-term election trouble for the Democrats – something Congressional watcher Charlie Cook notes when he says the dynamic is “out of control” for Democrats and that there is a 50/50 chance they will lose more than 20 Congressional seats in 2010.

That dynamic, however, represents only an opportunity for success – not a guaranty of victory – for Republicans nationally and in California. Whether Republicans capitalize on that success is story yet to be told.