| To see how bad it's gotten, all one has to do is read the front page at Calitics this past week.
On Tuesday, Robert in Monterey hit most of the scene-setting notes when he wrote:
Substantially Worse
by: Robert in Monterey
Tue Dec 09, 2008 at 10:18:46 AM PST
Dan Walters caught one of the more important pieces of information that was revealed at yesterday's budget convention: Thousands of words were spoken Monday during an unusual joint session of the Legislature on the state's budget crisis, but the two most important were uttered by the state budget director, Mike Genest, when he quietly told lawmakers that the deficit will be "substantially worse" than the current figure, as staggering as it may be.
The current estimate is that the 2008-09 budget is $11.2 billion out of whack and the 2009-10 income-outgo gap is another $17 billion, but with new forecasts of a declining economy and up-to-date revenue numbers, state officials believe that both numbers could be as much as 50 percent higher, around $40 billion.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will reveal the higher deficit figures a month from now when he unveils a proposed 2009-10 budget.
These numbers are staggering, but within the realm of possibility - the economy is in free fall right now, and with hardly any safety net in place it makes sense that consumers are going to stop spending, employers will lay off workers, all of which reinforces the cycle. Things seem to be snowballing.
Obviously a deficit anywhere near $40 billion would be catastrophic. It would be a perfect moment to shock doctrine California - massive destruction of public services, many of which will wind up privatized; a state thrown into depression when government employment - which ought to increase in a recession - is contracted.
It will also be an opportunity to finally "blow up the boxes" as Arnold once promised - a deficit of that size ought to give progressives an opening to advocate for a modernized, fair, and realistic tax structure. Wealth taxes must be at the core, just as they were for FDR during the Depression - that's money we can easily get and that won't worsen the economic crisis.
It could go either way. But for the last five years it's only gone in a progressive direction once--when the California Nurses Association stood up to the Gropenator's bullying and initiated a grassroots, union-fuelded upwelling of opposition that humiliated him at the polls in the November 2005 Special Election.
Among the measures on the ballot were:
Proposition 73: Parental Notification
Defeated: 47.4% Yes, 52.6% No.
Proposition 74: Public School Teachers Tenure
(Would have Increases length of time before a teacher could become a permanent employee from two to five years--AND allowed permanant employees to be fired, ie, not actually permanent.)
Defeated: 44.9% Yes, 55.1 No.
Proposition 75: Union Dues - Political Contributions
Union members can already opt out of having their dues pay for political actions. This would have made it much harder for public employee unions (but not industry trade groups, or any other special interest) to keep collecting political funds.
Degeated: 46.5% Yes, 53.5% No.
Proposition 76: State Spending Limits
Would have forced state spending downward over time, focus first on starving education.
Defeated: 37.9% Yes, 62.1% No.
Proposition 77: Redistricting
First attempt to give GOP a better shot at further mucking up the state government.
Defeated: 40.5% Yes, 59.5% No.
In short, the CNA and its allied destroyed the Gropenator.
But, rather than finish off the job, California Democrats said, "Let's make up and play nice," and helped the Gropenator rebuild his image, so he cruised to re-election one year later with little more media scrutiny than he got the first time around.
The Gropenator is supposed to be a "moderate" Republican. But two previous conservative Republicans who faced budget crises--including no less than Ronald Reagan--raised taxes as part of a balanced response that included tax increases on the wealthiest Californians as well as program cuts.
Heck, Pete Wilson even personally attaced a GOP lawmaker who was obstructing the deal when he was governor. The Gropenator? Total girly-man. Nada. Zip.
On Wednesday, D-Day wrote:
Villines: This is a stick-up
by: David Dayen
Wed Dec 10, 2008 at 07:59:37 AM PST
Yacht Party Assembly leader Mike Villines visited the Sacramento Bee editorial board yesterday, and like any good mob boss, he offered an ultimatum. Solving the budget stalemate is simple enough, Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines said in a visit to The Bee's Capitol Bureau Tuesday. Democrats have to capitulate to GOP demands for the 8-hour work day, meal breaks, looser environmental regulations, permanent budget cuts and a stiff spending cap, among other things.
Then, and only then, will Republicans come to the table to discuss -- but not necessarily agree to -- new taxes.
"We think you have to do these reforms first, cuts first and make sure that you're doing an economic package that puts people back to work," Villines said. "Then you have a discussion about revenue - and only then."
Many of these things, you'll notice, have nothing to do with the budget. In fact, CapAlert published the ransom note that Villines brought with him, and while he puts his demands in somewhat vague terms (and the Bee should really spell it out if they want to inform the public), it's pretty clear what he and the GOP want. They want to eliminate overtime regulations and meal breaks for state employees. They want to re-legislate already-passed environmental regulations on retrofitting buildings, cutting greenhouse gas emissions and air quality standards. And they want a bushel of tax cuts for businesses. I'll put the ransom note on the flip.
Aside from being ridiculous, this is extremely close to being illegal. Yes, illegal. I know horse-trading is customary in politics, but it violates California law....
D-Day then goes on to cite Section 86 of the California Penal Code, just so you know he's not bullshitting.
Not only illegal, but, of course, classic Shock Doctrine as well.
Also on Wednesday, for a slight change of pace, Robert in Monterey took a doleful look at the dismal Democratic side of the aisle:
Don Perata Gives a $1.5 Million Middle Finger to California
by: Robert in Monterey
Wed Dec 10, 2008 at 18:14:47 PM PST
In a stunning but not too surprising revelation, Josh Richman of the Oakland Tribune is reporting that Don Perata transferred $1.5 million from his PAC to his legal defense fund - one day after the election. Instead of using that money to help defeat Prop 11, which narrowly won, or to help elect more Democrats to the state senate - such as Hannah-Beth Jackson, who lost by 1,200 votes - he took it for himself, leaving California Democrats and the state itself worse off.
Contributors to Don Perata's political action committee this year might have thought their money would bankroll the attempted recall of state Sen. Jeff Denham or opposition to a legislative redistricting reform measure.
But one day after Election Day and with only a few weeks left as state Senate President Pro Tem, the Oakland Democrat moved $1.5 million from Leadership California into his own legal defense fund, formed to counter a years-long FBI corruption probe.
This sum dwarfs the California Democratic Party's $450,000 contribution to Perata's legal fund over the past year, which had caused an outcry from some party activists. It also dwarfs the $555,000 Perata had moved from his Taxpayers for Perata committee - ostensibly created for a 2010 Board of Equalization run - into his legal defense fund in several chunks since 2005.
The transferred amount is more than the entire $1.4 million the committee had raised in this year's first nine months, and more than half of the $2.7 million it had on hand as of Sept. 30.
Jason Kinney, Perata's spokesman, is quoted as saying there was nothing illegal here. Even if that is true, it's beside the point - $1.5 million is a huge sum of money that should have been spent on winning the 2008 election, not pocketed by a termed-out legislator.
If there is any question in your minds about how the Gropenator and the neanderthal Republicans in the state legislature manage to get away with gleefully destroying the state, here, in a nutshell, is half your answer: a Democratic Party establishment bordering on the criminal. (Not saying which side of the border, mind you.) The other half of your answer, is the media, of course.
And on Thursday, D-Day chimes in, raising another aspect of the Democrat's complicity in destroying our state:
CA-AG: Ted Lieu files for Attorney General
by: David Dayen
Thu Dec 11, 2008 at 14:09:56 PM PST
Friend of Calitics Ted Lieu has shown a lot of leadership during the housing crisis, attempting time and again to hold the mortgage brokers responsible and get sensible legislation passed that protects homeowners. It's been his signature issue the past two years. Now he's going to run for Attorney General.
Democratic Assemblyman Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, filed paperwork this week to run for attorney general in 2010.
Lieu is the third Democrat to make the move, following San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, who announced she was exploring a run in mid-November, and former Assemblyman Joe Canciamilla, who filed in July.
Harris and Lieu and Canciamilla can answer one question for me that would help me in my decision for 2010. Do they feel they can keep stonewalling the Federal Prison Receiver, as Jerry Brown has, and refusing to comply with providing prisoners an environment that doesn't violate their Constitutional rights, or do they feel that the failure in leadership over 30 years of wrong-way sentencing and "tough on crime" nonsense needs to be stopped. Solving the prison crisis ought to be the foremost issue for the state's top cop.
Yup! That Jerry Brown. Cheerfully violating prisoners' constitutional rights. People have died as a result.
Lovely.
There are other, more recent diaries in which the downward budget drama spiral is further dissected. In particular, in Is Arnold coming around and has the GOP lost its mind?, Brian Leubitz points out that the Gropenator's belated move toward explicitly criticizing fellow Republicans is a bit late, as well as waaaaaaay too soft:
For a while, Speaker Bass and others (including lots of posts here) have pleaded with Governor Schwarzenegger to stand up to the Republican obstructionism. He says he is for revenue increases, but he's not knocking heads like past Republican governors have been willing to do. Pete Wilson and Ronald Reagan did it, surely Arnold could bang out some sort of compromise.
But up to now, he's just been sort of attacking the legislature in general and really failing to recognize the underlying unwillingness to work for a solution from the Republicans. Now, surely we can agree that today's Republicans are a lot more partisan than those of 20 years ago. However, that's just not a sufficient excuse for the Republican governor to fail to bring a single vote over.
At yesterday's press conference, Arnold slighlty altered his tune. He began to acknowledge what this is: Republicans are holding the state hostage. They are simply not negotiating in good faith. Take this for example, from the transcript on the Bee:
But I think that what is important is to come to the meeting and to be prepared and to propose those kind of issues. I have been to many meetings; none of those things were discussed. So I think it's very hard for the Democrats, in a way, to negotiate when no one puts that on the table and says here is the list of things that we ask for and if we have this list then we're willing to increase taxes and to come up with extra revenues. But it's always very vague and nothing specific and I think that makes it sometimes frustrating in those negotiations.
Ok, well it's a start, Governor, and the legislative inaction clock is very cute. But this simply isn't enough. But today it seems that criticizing Republicans is too much. After a Big 5 meeting, Senate Minority Leader Dave Cogdill decided to take his frustration out on the Governor:
I believe that the Big 5 process has been irreparably compromised as a result of comments in the press over the last couple of days, and it's pretty difficult to negotiate in good faith in that situation. My personal belief is that any resolution to this that is going to be negotiated will result from efforts with the Big 4 similar to what we were able to accomplish with the budget last year, because, again, I just don't see this process as being productive or helpful. (SacBee 12/11/08)
The thing is that the Republicans in the Legislature have grown used to one Arnold. The post-partisan Arnold that tries to make nice with everybody. The Arnold that we've basically had since the 2005 Special Election. Then some new Arnold dared to nudge the Republicans for failing to negotiate in good faith, so Cogdill is going to take his marbles and go home.
It's quite simple really: the GOP hates California, just like it hates America. They like themselves and their yachts. They don't like anyone else. And if they can take everyone else down, and stay safe in their gated communities, then that sounds like a plan to them.
The thing to keep in mind is that California has produced a bevy of progressive leaders, including some of the most progressive members of Congress. There is a vibrant progressive political culture here in the state. But it hasn't been properly mobilized for governing. Not even close. And in the end, that is nobody's fault but our own. We have focused attention on very important, but ultimately lesser battles--lesser in the sense that they can easily be reversed, undercut or rendered irrelevant by the sort of power that comes with truly being in charge of the power of governance. It's way part time now, for that to change. |
