You can’t have a 2/3rds requirement to pass a budget when Republicans are childlike half-wits who think government is bad and taxes are evil.
As long as “Republican” means “I’m a moron,”it simply can’t work.
h/t eschaton
Posted inNational
California Budgeting With Morons
Posted by
By
24 Comments
By
24 Comments
If they continue down this path they just may find out that there are worse things than taxes.
Yeah, like massive traffic jams, wildfires, earthquakes, mudslides, smog, a million illegal aliens, shitty football teams…wait, why exactly do people live there?
This thing really is a mess. They aren’t kidding when they say that they had suspended construction. The interstate close to my brother’s house was in process of getting a couple more lanes (badly needed). Traffic now backs up worse because the jersey barriers are still up for the work zones. What I don’t think that folks think about is that those construction companies are likely to go back to the state and ask for (and get) funds to pay them for shut down costs, but also for the delay (cost escalation). So those projects will come in over budget (paid for by Cali taxpayers) because there is a cost to delay.
What someone needs to figure out is how to get some cutbacks that will hit areas represented by the obstructionists over the long term. Let the constituents of the repubs standing in the way get feel the brunt of the cuts and then see how long this lasts. Especially in California who may be the most government entitled people in the US.
Oooh, Cassandra. I like that idea.
Truth is… people love their entitlements, and think other’s are a waste of money.
wait, why exactly do people live there?
Because it ain’t 20 degrees outside.
Isnt the California legislature democratic controlled?
The Republicans in the CA legislature (like most Republicans) are moronic children:
The Democrats passed a budget that was designed to make an end run around the two-thirds legislative vote requirement for tax increases. By calling gas taxes “fees” and shuffling sales taxes, Democrats believed they had found a way to pass a budget that included revenue increases without any Republican votes.
Democrats were able to get majority votes in each houses of the Legislature, with no GOP votes and a few Democratic abstentions.
However, the governor was opposed to the Democratic budget, not because of the revenue increases, which he did not criticize, but because he wanted more spending cuts and relaxation of environmental and labor laws to stimulate public works projects.
Children.
I think these crazy budget rules came when conservatives were trying to TABORs passed throughout the land.
so the republic governor didnt think it did enough and wanted to cut spending, but the democrates didnt want to do that? they would prefer to continue spending?
I believe the package included cuts.
Ummm…. (#9)
It sounds like Schwartzenegger vetoed because he didn’t think the Democrats when far enough, he wants to raise taxes more. The rest of the Republicans don’t want any tax increases.
What a mess. The governator came into office because of the budget woes of Gray Davis. His brilliant plan was to borrow money. It doesn’t look so smart in retrospect.
My goodness. arthur is a stone cold moron isn’t he?
Anyway, he proves my original point: You can’t have a 2/3rds requirement to pass a budget when Republicans are childlike half-wits who think government is bad and taxes are evil.
For conversation sake… what is the Republican plan for CA? Do they have one? Or do they just like to say NO?
ah, jason. when i am having a bad day nothing lifts my spirits more than just getting under your skin.
So after years of democratic control what is the democratic plan to unfuck california? Also, I’d like to just remind everyone of the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Constitution_Article_XXXV Thank God Delaware didn’t do this.
If you were reading the article, Tom, you’d see the plan to unfuck California. And use of the google would get you a few others that have been rejected.
Maybe Calif. should fine the church $100 each time a child is fondled by one of it’s priests.
At that rate it wouldn’t take long to make up the $3bil spent on research.
How about taxing churchs w/’incomes’ over a certain amount?
I suspect those ‘big box’ congregations would produce handsomely for the state.
Been in the mid 70 all week blue skys and just great weather for this time of the year in San Fran. I like Cassandra’s idea of cutting off services in thoses repuk areas i suggest we start with orange county
what happened to the Governor before this one? wierd how this has worked out for Cali-for-nya
Here is some info to clear up your uniformed and silly rhetoric. This mess has nothing to do with Republicans.
So, what went wrong?
Tax revenues that last summer had been expected to total more than $102 billion now figure to come in under $98 billion for the year.
Spending is up, too, though. The forecast for the current year was about $102 billion. The latest figures now put the cost of the state’s commitments at more than $104 billion.
But the economic issues only worsened a basic, structural problem in the state budget: Spending is programmed by law to grow each year at a rate that is generally faster than tax revenues can match. Current state law would push general fund spending to $113 billion next year if nothing is done to slow it, according to the Schwarzenegger administration. Revenues, meanwhile, are projected to decline further, to about $95 billion. The budget Schwarzenegger celebrated last summer would have bridged the gap for one year at best.
Since Schwarzenegger has been governor, the state’s revenues have grown by 25 percent. But spending has grown even faster – far faster than population growth and inflation combined. The spending increase totals about $26 billion, starting from a base of $77 billion.
de-re-gu-la-shun
has everything to do with Republicans, Procrack
Jeez, Protack doesn’t even have the narrative right.
Spending other people’s money = mature
Cutting spending to match revenue = childish