LA Times Columnist George Skelton put it into perspective for me, perfectly. The budget as a "crisis" is not about just revenues and cuts but a structural deficit that can't be fixed by just one of these tactics. It's a culmination of budgets pushed through with huge tax cuts when it appeared we could afford them. Of course, hindsight is 20/20; we can't afford any of them.
The aptly titlted column is California's GOP lawmakers should do the budget math...
Follow me...
According to the state budget document, there is the equivalent of 205,000 full-time jobs controlled by the governor. There actually are more workers than that because some are part-time. Do the math based on 16 months, since that's now the time frame of the projected deficit, assuming a balanced-budget package could be implemented by March 1.
You could lay off all those state workers -- rid yourself of their pay and benefits -- and save only $24.4 billion.
Meanwhile, you would have dumped 160,000 convicted felons onto the streets because all the prisons were closed after the guards and wardens were fired. There'd be no Highway Patrol because all the officers were canned. State parks would be closed because there were no fee-collectors or rangers.
So in essence, we could fire every worker in the State and save, at the MOST, 24 billion and still have a deficit of 16 billion dollars.
And we could cut all higher education funding, that would add up to 16 billion but who cuts higher education in a recession when many people who are laid off or underemployed go back to school in order to go back to work? It's just insanity!
But the numbers don't add up. The Legislature's two Republican leaders -- Assemblyman Mike Villines of Clovis and Sen. Dave Cogdill of Modesto -- came to that realization in December as they dug through the budget books. They also knew that even if it were possible to avoid tax hikes, their GOP colleagues didn't have the stomach for the kinds of slashing that would be needed in school, healthcare and prison programs.
So what is it? How does ardently standing against raising taxes help anyone? Of course no one wants to pay more taxes, especially now. We all get that. But does that mean sacrificing the entire state? For ideology? So legislators get to keep their jobs? (These were campaign pledges).
As a Californian who pays property tax, sales tax and every other tax, I would rather pay more so that future generations are able to have what so many take for granted right now. All those screaming radio listeners who don't give a damn about Government? You would care when it started to affect your everyday life. That's when people seem to care most.
And today? Massive layoffs...
After a frustrating holiday weekend that failed to yield the one vote needed to end California's budget stalemate, the state is poised to begin layoff proceedings Tuesday for 20,000 government workers.
AP
And for what? One vote. That's right, ONE VOTE.
Steinberg warned lawmakers to bring their toothbrushes, saying they would not leave until that vote was secured.
"One member," Steinberg said. "One more member to put the interest of the state ahead of ideology and ahead of any parochial concern."
You see, California is a great example of how Republicans will put ideology before what's best for everyone else. Talking points, catch phrases, (Generational theft? What about the gutting of our education system, that's generational theft) and a lot of postering that adds up to very little action.
I'm reposting what Senate leader Darrell Steinberg had this to say at the end of another stalemate, another session that went on without a solution.
The process is failing because of a very few people who hold the power because of our State's 2/3 rule. Just a small number of people are literally (Thanks Calitics) holding our state HOSTAGE.
The theft has happened and now we're just dealing with the aftermath. No matter what, education, health care and everything else will face a cut and it will put future generations at risk. Is it worth it? Is the quick fix of tax cuts worth ruining the State and our Country for years to come? Tax breaks that were irresponsible and too far reaching, that is Generational theft and now we have to pay more because of it.
This is what we have here at California, a smaller version of what happened in the last few decades in our Federal Government. The California Tax Revolt of 1978 has finally come home to roost.
Proposition 13, officially titled the "People's Initiative to Limit Property Taxation," was a ballot initiative to amend the constitution of the state of California. The initiative was enacted by the voters of California on June 6, 1978. It was upheld as constitutional by the United States Supreme Court in the case of Nordlinger v. Hahn, 505 U.S. 1 (1992). Proposition 13 is embodied in Article 13A of the California Constitution.
...
Owners of commercial real estate have also benefited: if a corporation owning commercial property (such as a shopping mall) is sold or merged, but the property stays technically deeded to the corporation, ownership of the property can effectively change hands without triggering Proposition 13's provision that fixes the amount of tax based on the property's resale value.[3] Since many properties owned by large companies are nominally owned by shell companies whose sole assets are the properties in question, this has led to situations that have struck many commentators, such as Steve Lopez and Michael Hiltzik of the Los Angeles Times, as absurd and unfair, with companies taking a lesser percentage of the overall tax burden than private homeowners.[3] Smaller property owners do not have the "shell company" advantage that large property owners do.[3] As an example, the Times has reported that the property tax bill of the historic Capitol Records building in Hollywood is approximately five cents per square foot, while a small house assessed at $300,000 may pay up to 60 times that on a per-square-foot basis. Critics of Proposition 13 have argued that this situation unfairly benefits commercial property owners and should be changed,[3] but recent attempted ballot initiatives have not succeeded in altering assessment formulas.
Wiki
Emphasis mine
Decades of lower revenues with the inevitable spending increases is what brings us to today. And those who argue that the Government has been growing too quickly here in California, I give you this...From the Legislative Analyst's Office
Total state spending over the decade 1998-99 through 2008-09 ... Total spending grows over this period from $72.6 billion to $128.8 billion-an average annual growth rate of roughly 6 percent...
* After adjusting for inflation, real spending has grown by roughly 18 percent over the entire period, or an annual average growth rate of roughly 1.7 percent.
* Real per-capita spending-which adjusts for both inflation and population growth-would increase by about 2.2 percent over the period, for an average annual rate of 0.2 percent.
It's not a spending problem, it's a Republican problem, not facing up to the facts, years of Prop 13 and unwise tax breaks has led us to this cliff. So, the question is, are Republicans going to push?
Cross posted at OC Progressive