State policymakers are beginning to understand — or at least face the realities of — a fundamental reason for California’s job loss and now a 3-year $81 billion budget deficit.  Basically we pass laws and move on to new ones and call it success.  Texas on the other hand — a state that congregates its legislature in only odd years and requires a 2/3rds majority on every bill — created 70% of the new jobs in the United States in 2008 and has a $2 billion budget surplus this year. 

I offer the following 3-week timeline of completely independent events and tidbits — a syllogism if you will — as a picture of evolving realizations of California’s problem, as well as some minimal-cost concepts that are gaining traction. 

October 22

» Treasurer Bill Lockyer testifies that two thirds of California bills shouldn’t see the light of day and begs the Legislature to recognize the severe degree of dysfunction as it pertains to California’s dire situation.

There is a nationwide footrace underway for more than $4 billion in federal education funding. Just a few weeks ago, California appeared to be out of the running. But fortunately, lawmakers have the opportunity to approve legislation that would not only make our state eligible, but also implement some far-reaching education reforms.

Earlier this year, President Barack Obama’s administration laid out a bold vision to reform education in the United States by introducing a $4.35-billion competitive grant known as Race to the Top (RTTT), of which California could be eligible for up to $700 million. This aggressive agenda challenges California leaders to develop a plan that addresses critical issues including the achievement gap, low achieving schools and dropout rates.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state lawmakers, including State Sen. Gloria Romero, made the right decision to accept President Obama’s challenge and implement the reforms required for RTTT funding. Romero authored SB X5 1, which outlines a plan for turning around the bottom 5 percent of lowest achieving schools; removes the cap on the number of charter schools; authorizes greater use of data to improve instruction and student learning; and ensures that innovative strategies are in place in every school.

I’m no legal scholar, but Attorney General Jerry Brown’s decision yesterday to allow for an 18 percent salary cut for the state’s lawmakers and constitutional officers was a political no-brainer. The budget is in woeful deficit, unemployment is at record levels, public employees are on furlough – of course, the state lawmakers must share the pain.

The fact that legislators tried to avoid the pay cut during these difficult times separates them even further from average citizens. Legislators claim their fingerprints are not on the request seeking the opinion on the legality of the cuts. The administrators of the Senate and Assembly made the request to Brown. Right. And, I’m prepared to buy that bridge in Brooklyn.

The state’s independent pay commission authorized the cut in May. Commission chairman Charles Murray, in agreeing with the attorney general’s opinion, said on this issue, “We represent the average Californian.”

He’s right. The proof is the result of the only ballot measure that passed at the May special election.

Don Perata apparently has decided that cancer research is sexier than the state budget when it comes to his election plans.

Perata, who wants to be Oakland’s next mayor, was at that city’s Children’s Hospital Monday, touting the launch of an initiative drive to boost the tobacco tax to raise money for cancer research.

Two days later, the Legislative Analyst’s Office put out a report showing that California is looking at a $20.7 billion budget hole next year and deficits bigger than that in each of the two years following.

Perata, a Democrat who was the state Senate leader until last year, knows exactly the type of devastating cuts that will be needed to close that budget gap and the type of damage those reductions will do to both the state and the people who depend on its services.

Throughout the 2008 campaign, California Democrats ran its printers seven days a week, issuing an endless stream of press releases touting their voter registration gains. With a certain smugness, Democrats pointed to the impact of a lengthy, involved primary battle between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and each campaign’s reach to a large network of youth, minorities and first-time voters. This fueled an intriguing narrative for political commentators and the media that a new political realignment was taking shape – even prior to the election results in November

In the election aftermath, stories were written, proclamations were made, and rumors of the death of the Republican Party, here in California and across the nation, were greatly exaggerated. The wake of so-called “Age of Obama” – voters registration gains, an unseen fundraising behemoth, and the accompanying electoral tsunami – foretold a serious decline for the GOP that began with the loss of congress in 2006.

On the same day that a new police chief assumed the helm in Los Angeles, a battle waged at City Hall over marijuana dispensaries.

Here in L.A., we have experienced an explosion of such dispensaries over the past four years. While other cities in California acted to limit the numbers of dispensaries, our city council opted to keep punting the issue to avoid having to favor important constituencies over others.

Today, it is estimated that there are approximately 1,000 pot dispensaries in the City of Los Angeles, many of which are concentrated in the San Fernando Valley where I live. One is located just one block from my house, and another is located two blocks from my kids’ elementary school.

For those with chronic pains or facing deadly diseases, I don’t think very many people object to them being able to get relief. The objections usually arise from residential and commercial neighbors who complain about the dispensaries’ clientele, who, in some cases smoke pot inside the store or in the parking lot or loiter in front of the store. Others worry that some stores are a magnet for crime.

Recently, the Commission on the 21st Century Economy held hearings around the state to determine the best way to reform California’s tax system, which many believe is outdated. There were hours of testimony from economic experts, tax groups and businesses of every size, including small business owners and representatives of the National Federation of Independent Business. We all agree – the system needs to be reformed in order to get us out of a feast-or-famine revenue stream.

The efforts of the Commission have brought to the forefront a major challenge to business growth in California and deserve a critical analysis by all parties including legislators and other state officials, the small business community, organized labor groups and taxpayer organizations. The fact that most of these groups have already expressed concern over some of the recommendations put forth by the Commission should be enough reason to pause before implementation of any of the recommendations. But certainly it does not shut down all discussion of ways in which the Governor and Legislature can reform our state tax structure to improve our economic and fiscal situation.

Please note: the original version of my article, Public Service or Public Disdain, referred to actions of sisters-in-law and fathers that could disqualify a person from service on the Citizens Redistricting Commission. However, administrative regulations adopted by the State Auditor have defined the term “immediate family” as used in Proposition 11, to include only those family members who have lived with an applicant for at least thirty days in the previous year or with whom the applicant has a shared ownership or financial relationship worth $1,000 or more. Consequently, two paragraphs have been rewritten to remove references that could cause confusion.

Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor officially let all Californians know what a lot of insiders were whispering about for months. The budget is already in the hole for this fiscal year and combined with the projected deficit for the next budget the state treasury is short a cool $21 billion.

Elsewhere on this site, Greg Lucas runs the state’s tab on a woeful future. And, John Wildermuth explores the difficulty in finding a solution.

The question at hand is who’s picking up the tab and how do we get to a solution?

Maybe Governor Schwarzenegger and his buddy, movie director James Cameron, can team up to make the equivalent of 21 blockbusters like Titanic, all in one year, each grossing $1 billion—and donate it all to the state.

We are talking 21 disaster movies here.