Tuesday, September 23, 2008

Why is this man smiling? Who are these people – and why are they clapping?

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger holds a copy of the 2008-2009 state budget after signing it during a small ceremony in his Sacramento office. Representatives from California counties stand behind the governor. (Steve Yeater / Associated Press / September 23, 2008)

LONG AGO, earlier this year in a meeting room in Sacramento the legislation team from the State PTA met and discussed the state budget as it impacts Education and the Welfare of Children - back when the budget was first proposed. Before the May Revise. Before the Crisis of 85 days. We were strong and we had powerful friends on our side: the legislative majority, almost a million members who are united and vocal - every one a likely voter. We had The Truth on our side; we were in the majority and we were set out to do the right thing for kids and the future of the state.

We also knew that politics is the Art of Compromise - and that ultimately we and the children would be compromised by our legislative friends. The Republican minority had signed a pledge to Not Raise Taxes …and we knew that that was not the workable option. That determination was shared by our friends and ultimately by the governor himself - we shared his dedication to reach a long term solution rather than a quick fix to postpone the crisis to next year. We were committed in his proclaimed  Year of Education Reform to NOT do things the way things had always been done.

Now as the dust clears, we and the children have been compromised. The governor claims that Education has been kept whole - but Education hasn't been whole since 1978. It has been cut and reduced and slashed and nibbled at since the passage of Proposition 13. Proposition 98, which is supposed to be the floor for Education funding is looked at as being the ceiling by most - and as being an outrageous burden on the taxpayers by a few. It was that few who won in the end. Taxes were not raised. The problems were put off to next year. California moves a little lower into the Cellar of Education Funding, perhaps from 46th to 47th in the nation - it remains to be seen.

     2007 was the year of Healthcare Reform.

     2008 is the Year of Education Reform.

     2009 will be the Year of Budget Reform.

Don’t let me ruin it for you but I have a feeling I know how that turns out.

Onward nonetheless! - smf

Day 85 and Done! CALIFORNIA BUDGET IS SIGNED, 85 DAYS LATE AND DESPISED

“The governor, however, proclaimed the budget a victory.”

FOR REAL MASOCHISTS: The California State Budget…includes veto messages!


By JENNIFER STEINHAUER – New York Times

September 24, 2008 -- LOS ANGELES — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Tuesday signed California’s budget, a document that was 85 days late and among state lawmakers, perhaps the most universally despised budget in the nation.

State Controller John Chiang used the occasion to move quickly to dispense with some 80,000 in claims that have gone unpaid since the state began its fiscal year on July 1.

“This record-setting budget stalemate has been an enormous burden on so many small businesses and health care providers who care for our most vulnerable Californians: the sick, elderly, disabled and children,” Mr. Chiang said in a statement. “I will quickly pay all backlogged claims, and I am asking state agencies for their assistance to ensure that we get payments into the hands of those who most desperately need them as quickly as possible.”

The $143 billion spending plan, which the governor signed without the usual public ceremony, was the subject of heated debate and intense last-minute haggling among Democrats, who control the Legislature, Republicans and the governor, a Republican who was at odds with lawmakers from both parties over how to close a $15 billion gap.

The budget, $68 million larger than last year’s, sets $1.7 billion in reserves should state revenues come in below estimates, highly likely in California’s, and the country’s, volatile economy.

Mr. Schwarzenegger also vetoed $510 million in line items, including $944,000 from the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, a cut that means the loss of nine enforcement jobs; $8 million from the state’s Alcohol and Drug Program’s program for preventing crystal meth trafficking; and $2 million from a California Conservation Corps work training program.

The budget relies heavily on accounting maneuvers — moving tax receipts from one year to a next — as well as a plan to borrow $5 billion against future lottery earnings, which requires the approval of voters in a ballot measure in a special election next year. If the lottery plan is defeated, midyear cuts and other measures to rein in spending are likely.

The government will also increase the penalty on corporations that understate their tax liability by at least $1 million, to add a 20 percent penalty in addition to a 10 percent interest rate on underreported taxes. But the spending plan contains no substantive changes to the state’s expenses or its revenue-raising structure, which might have staved off another hole next year.

“We have always said this really does just kick the can down the road,” said Alicia Trost, a spokeswoman for Don Perata, the Senate president pro tem, a Democrat. “The only thing good is that we fully fund education, we prevent borrowing, and we avoid the most onerous cuts to the neediest communities.”

The governor, however, proclaimed the budget a victory — one he squeezed from the Legislature after rejecting an earlier plan and after Democrats and Republicans could not agree on a sales tax increase.

He said he was particularly pleased by the budget’s proposed increase in the size of California’s rainy day fund, to 12.5 percent of the state’s general fund expenditures from 5 percent. That provision, too, requires a nod from voters in the special election.

Mr. Chiang’s office may begin writing checks as early as Friday, a spokeswoman said, beginning with $3.6 billion in Medicaid payments to hospitals, nursing homes and other health care providers that had been held up under the standoff. Further payments to vendors and other state creditors will follow.

Monday, September 22, 2008

Day 84: CALIFORNIA’s BUDGET – Everyone is a Winner AND a Loser

by Jon Fleischman -Publisher  FlashReport | Fleischman is Vice Chairman (South) of the California Republican Party.

 

9-22-2008 8:36 am -- As Governor Schwarzenegger prepares to sign the California State Budget, we hear at the FlashReport are prepared to say that everyone involved in the process were winners AND losers.

The winners:

Legislative Republicans, led by Senate Republican Leader Dave Cogdill and Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines, draw a bright line in the sand and said that the problems caused by massive over-spending in state government WILL NOT be resolved by increasing taxes on Californians. In the face of Democrats who made as a top priority a hike in the state's income taxes, and a Governor of their own party pushing a multi-billion dollar sales tax increase, GOP legislative solidarity won the day.

Legislative Democrats, due to their gerrymandered majority, managed to get through this budget season without a serious overhaul of California's government. Decades of dominance by liberals in Sacramento has grown state government into a grotesque and massive one - in need of serious reforms. Despite all of the hoopla, this new budget spends MORE than last year's - a testament to power of a party committed to growing government.

Governor Schwarzenegger's budget reform measures, after some political muscle-showing, were ultimately placed into this final package - which is to say that it will be placed before the voters (where presumably public-employee unions will pony up millions to try and kill it). While these reforms are short of the kind of absolute spending cap that is needed to reign in the insatiable appetite of Democrats to increase spending, they are certainly a step in the right direction.

Only in California are the winners also the losers...

The big loser was Arnold Schwarzenegger. First and foremost, the Governor demonstrated that his form of flip-flop governance only made him less relevant to the process. While he ultimately got a last-minute demand for some budget reform in the final budget, the only reason there is a budget is because eventually legislative leaders correctly saw the Governor as a nuisance and ineffective in putting together a budget deal. We'll write more on this in the weeks to come, but if the Governor wants to be relevant, he needs to be a part of a team, as opposed to trying to be all things to all people (or nothing to anyone, depending on your perspective). His gross violation of his no-new-taxes pledge has taken his credibility with the California political community, especially Republicans, to an all-time low.

The failure to increase taxes makes California Democrat legislators losers. Clearly Democrats were backed off of a strongly desired tax hike (or as they call it, "revenue increases") as part of a budget solution. They also caved to the Governor's demands for budget reform. Perhaps they are the biggest losers because this year's successful play by the GOP to fend off tax increases pretty much means no new taxes in the foreseeable future. Assembly Speaker Karen Bass was widely looked at as ineffectual and a "B" player in budget negotiations, with the more seasoned and spirited (despite being term-limited) Senate President Don Perata being looked at as the "King Fish" of the left.

Finally, legislative Republicans, despite the win on the tax issue, were forced to put up votes for a budget that increases total state government spending, fails to really include real reforms of the process, and largely continues the status-quo of California's modern-day welfare state. It is unclear if, given the partisan make-up of the legislature, any budget deal could have been better. But it doesn't change the fact that when you get passed the hoopla of holding the line in taxes, no Republican can be proud of the vote they were forced to cast on this budget.

Day 84 - standin’ around an’ waitin’ for the next shoe to drop: WHAT’S NEXT?

AM Alert: SacBee CapitolAlert | Mon Sept 22

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger could sign the state budget as early as today, a record 84 days into the fiscal year.

But state lawmakers are already looking at a multibillion-dollar deficit next year. And the year after that. And the year after that.

"I don't see much of a signing ceremony," Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared Friday, "because there's nothing to celebrate."

The next year's state budget will start out $1.5 billion in the hole.

And that includes $5 billion in funds borrowed from future state lottery earnings. If those don't materialize (the money depends on passage of a ballot measure that the education community is leery about), the state starts off in a $6.5 billion hole.

And that's if the economy holds up, which, well, who knows.

"We have simply rolled the problem into the next year," Senate President Pro Don Perata said last week.

Minority legislative Republicans, meanwhile, have been emboldened by the 2008 impasse, as they fended off calls for tax hikes from a GOP governor and from majority Democrats.

"So it's a W for the reps," wrote ex-Assemblyman Ray Haynes, a conservative Republican, on the FlashReport. "They should go home proud of their accomplishment, apologize to no one for what they have done, and gird their loins for next year's fight. It is going to be even nastier."

For their part, Democrats are ramping up the rhetoric to turn the Big Five into the Big Three, pushing a potential ballot measure to eliminate the two-thirds vote for passage of new taxes and budgets.

Such a measure could go on the 2009 special election ballot.

There's also the matter of the 800-plus bills lawmakers are dumping on Schwarzenegger's desk. He has until the end of the month to sign or veto them.

Saturday, September 20, 2008

Day 81+: SENATE PASSES BUDGET …AND THE ASSEMBLY TOO (meaning also and again) But the clock is still ticking until the Governor signs and The Lege decides to do nothing about the inevitable line item vetoes.

Senate passes budget updates

SacBee CapitolAlert | Published 4:46 PM Friday, September 19, 2008 by Shane Goldmacher

The state Senate has just passed the final updates to the 2008-09 state budget, shipping the bills over to the state Assembly.
"We are finished," pronounced Senate leader Don Perata, amid clapping among the lawmakers.
It is the 81st day of the fiscal year. ... (more)

 

And the Assembly, too

SacBee CapitolAlert | Published 5:38 PM Friday, September 19, 2008 by Shane Goldmacher

It's official. The final budget bills of 2008 have passed through both houses of the Legislature and are on their way to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, where he will likely line-item veto certain spending and then sign the spending plan.
The Assembly adjourned after passing the final pieces of the budget around 5:30 p.m. on Friday, 81 days into the fiscal year.
"I move that the Assembly adjourn -- again," said Assembly Major leader Alberto Torrico, D-Fremont. ... (more)

Friday, September 19, 2008

Education leaders blast proposed state budget plan

By Kimberly S. Wetzel | Contra Costa Times

09/19/2008 05:51:22 PM PDT - State and local education leaders this week, getting their first glimpse of the new state budget proposal, blasted the tentative spending plan as an "accounting gimmick" that leaves students out in the cold.

The plan — approved by the Legislature more than 80 days late and which was still awaiting Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's signature Friday — allots $58.1 billion for education, an increase of almost $300 million over last year. That amounts to a cost-of-living increase of 0.7 percent, much less than the 5.66 percent increase school districts hoped to get, or about $3 billion less than educators would like to see, according to Jennifer Kuhn, analyst at the state Legislative Analyst's Office.

Education leaders this week echoed each other in criticizing the plan, saying it doesn't do enough to help local school districts pay for the rising costs of just about everything. State Superintendent of Instruction Jack O'Connell called the plan a "gimmick," while California Teachers Association President David Sanchez and California PTA President Pam Brady each urged Schwarzenegger to use his veto power to leverage a more education-friendly budget.

"The proposed budget includes a reduction of the cost-of-living adjustment that will further tighten the vise on local school budgets as districts across the state face increased costs for supplies, food, transportation and employee health care costs," O'Connell said in a statement. "These reductions are a disservice to California's 6 million school children and the thousands of educators across the state."

The plan does keep in place state Proposition 98, a 1988 constitutional amendment approved by voters that guarantees minimum funding for education, and there's language that restores cost-of-living funds in the event the money becomes available. There was some discussion of suspending Proposition 98 earlier this year amid the $17 billion state deficit.

The Legislature approved the $104 billion spending plan Tuesday, but the relief was short-lived as the governor threatened to veto the bill later that day. A compromise announced Thursday does not change the education components of the plan, and Schwarzenegger is expected to sign off on the deal soon.

Because of the record-long impasse, local school districts have been operating without state money for months. Mt. Diablo school district Superintendent Gary McHenry said the district has been able to pay its bills using a carry-forward balance but is awaiting state money for such things as classes to help high-schoolers pass the state-mandated exit exam.

He said he's disappointed that the Legislature took so much time to deliver such a lackluster budget.

"My first reaction is it's not sufficient," McHenry said. "My second reaction is it took too long. The proposal they came up with, to me, could have been done two months ago."

Troy Flint, spokesman for the state-run Oakland schools, said the drawn-out legislative process, with its fluctuating budget projections, has posed an extra challenge for his district.

Oakland Unified, which received a multimillion-dollar emergency loan from the state in 2003, has had to revise its long-range financial recovery plan in light of the new projections, Flint said. The district is now expecting to spend $9 million less in 2009-2010 than it had planned because of a dramatic reduction in the cost-of-living money from the state.

"We were hoping for a better solution," Flint said. "While the impact for this year will be minimal, next year's outlook is discouraging."

Day 81: SCHWARZENEGGER: “A budget deal, but not structural change” + “Special election in '09”

sacbee.com - The online division of The Sacramento Bee


By Amy Chance – Sacramento Bee | Published 3:28 pm PDT Friday, September 19, 2008

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger told a Capitol press conference this afternoon that the budget the Legislature will consider tonight is "an improvement" over earlier versions, but still fails to solve California's structural financial problems.

"Unfortunately the Legislature was unable to make the hard decisions to end our structural deficit, but this budget is an improvement of the earlier versions," he said. The Republican governor nevertheless plans to sign it next week, perhaps as early as Monday.

"Hospitals, nursing homes, day care services will be able to get paid...and California will be able to fulfill its obligations," said Schwarzenegger, who said he hopes to move on to make redistricting changes, reform the health care system and develop a statewide water plan.

"I don't see much of a signing ceremony, because there's nothing to celebrate," he said.

Schwarzenegger said he would support an initiative to penalize lawmakers when the budget is late.

"The one thing that I would look at right away is to create consequences so that when the Legislature is late one day there are consequences," he said. "Even after two months, you know, they are just very relaxed about it and in the meantime you cannot pay your bills. I think there's something wrong with that."

The governor said such a ballot measure would have to be put on via initiative, because the Legislature would not do it themselves. "I don't think it will get done in this building," he said.


Schwarzenegger: Special election in '09

SAC BEE CAPITOLALERT by Shane Goldmacher on September 19, 2008 3:25 PM

After three elections in 2008, California voters better start gearing up for another election in 2009. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he and the Legislature would call a special election next year for voters to approve changes to the lottery and, likely, budget reform in a press conference announcing he would sign the budget.

"Because of the lottery and various different other things, yes, we will be calling a special election," Schwarzenegger said.

The timing of a special election next year remains up in the air. In March, voters in Los Angeles, the state's largest city, are set to go to the polls for a mayoral election. Consolidating a special election with that one could save the state money.

But Schwarzenegger said Friday that "March is probably too early. It could be June."

A special election appeared likely after the initial passage of the budget on Tuesday morning, with the overhaul of the state's rainy-day fund and the changing of the state lottery both requiring voter approval.

Since 2002, Californians have had to go to the polls at least once every year except 2007.

Besides the regularly scheduled elections, there was the 2003 recall and the 2005 special election. By 2010, voters will have been to the polls in eight of nine years.

Posted by Shane Goldmacher on September 19, 2008 3:25 PM

State's Top Education Leaders Urge Everyone to JOIN THE PTA!

image CONTACT: Carol Kocivar
Vice President- Communications
(916) 440-1985

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:                                                                        Friday, September 19, 2008

State's Top Education Leaders Urge Everyone to Join the PTA

SACRAMENTO, CA- California’s top education leaders, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell and Secretary of Education David Long, today called on parents, teachers, and administrators to join the PTA.

Proclaiming September and October “PTA Membership Months,” Secretary Long said, “PTA support for children is critical for the future of California.  I urge anyone in California who cares about children and our public schools to join the PTA. Superintendent O’Connell and I are both proud PTA members. Students truly benefit from the active involvement of caring adults and we want every school in California to have a strong PTA.  Join us—join PTA!”

“Parent involvement through the PTA is critical for the success of our children,” Superintendent O’Connell said. “PTA volunteers work in schools and communities to improve the education, health and welfare of all children and youth.”

The California State PTA, with nearly one million volunteer members, has been instrumental in efforts to support small class size, bring arts and physical education back into our schools, and ban junk food at school.

PTA provides members with free resources and training to build leadership and parenting skills. It also provides programs on a wide range of topics, including student achievement, childhood nutrition, and prevention of violence and bullying, to increase parent awareness of issues affecting their children.

For more than a century, the PTA has been supporting and advocating for public schools, children and families under the motto “Every child, one voice.”  The PTA is non-profit, non-partisan, non-sectarian and non-commercial. For more information about how you can join PTA, go to www.capta.org and click on “Join PTA.”

The mission of the California State PTA is to positively impact the lives of all children and families by representing our members and empowering and supporting them with skills in advocacy, leadership and communications.

###

There are 4 ways to get involved with PTA in California:

1. Join a local PTA Unit.

If you know the PTA district you are in, send an email to the district president at districtpresident- @capta.org (Insert your district number in the blank).

 

If your school is in the San Fernando Valley, Sunland or Tujunga – LAUSD Local Districts 1 & 2 - you live in 31st District PTA

email districtpresident-31@capta.org

Your District President is Dell Goodman

 

If your school is South of Mulholland Drive,  – LAUSD Local Districts 3 - 8 - you live in 10th District PTA

email districtpresident-10@capta.org

Your District President is Silvia Flores

If you don’t know your PTA unit, send an email to membershipchair@capta.org providing your contact information and location so that we can assist you, or call the California State PTA office at 916-440-1985 ext. 328.

If your neighborhood school has a PTA, you can join that PTA and automatically become a voting member of the California State PTA and the National PTA. Each PTA sets its own dues, typically between $4.00 and $10.00 per member. The amount of the dues is found in the PTA's bylaws. Dues are not tax-deductible.

2. Join the Golden State PTA

Interested individuals and businesses that do not have an affiliation with a particular PTA unit or area also have the opportunity to support PTA by joining the Golden State PTA. Click here to join the Golden State PTA.

Download the GSPTA membership application [pdf]

The Golden State PTA is a statewide organization that allows individuals with an interest in PTA in California to show support and to maintain contact with the California State PTA.

By joining the Golden State PTA, each member

  • pays $10.00 dues per year
  • supports the Scholarship and Grant program
  • can receive a subscription to PTA in California newsletter for an additional $5.00
  • receives member privileges to the state convention (upon payment of registration fee)

3. Organize a New PTA unit

Please send an email to leadership@capta.org and provide your contact information and location so that we can assist you or call the California State PTA office at 916-440-1985 ext. 301.

4. Contribute to the Founder's Circle and support California State PTA without joining.

Thursday, September 18, 2008

80 Days 16 Hours 51 Minutes: BUDGET STANDOFF OVER - Governor and lawmakers agree on spending plan

Matthew Yi, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer

Thursday, September 18, 2008  4:51 PM

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, backed in Fresno by Mayor Ala...

(09-18) 16:51 PDT SACRAMENTO -- California's longest-ever budget standoff ended this afternoon when Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders struck a deal, avoiding the governor's promised veto of a budget the Legislature approved earlier this week.

The compromise, expected to be approved Friday, eliminates extra withholdings from workers' paychecks and revenue from a tax amnesty program. It bridges the $17 billion budget gap by adding penalties on corporations that underpay quarterly income taxes and reduces reserve funds, according to lawmakers and legislative sources.

Lawmakers also agreed to Schwarzenegger's demand to make it more difficult for the state to dip into a rainy-day fund to be created as part of budget reforms to avoid future fiscal crises like the one this year, when a slowing economy resulted in a huge budget deficit.

The governor met for more than an hour this afternoon with legislative leaders to finish the deal, after he told them at a meeting this morning to strengthen fiscal reforms and eliminate accounting maneuvers in the budget - or send it to him for a veto.

Legislators had faced a quandary, legislative sources said: The budget approved early Tuesday had the support of more than two-thirds of the Legislature, but the provision to raise billions of dollars in early collection of some taxes needed only a simple majority to pass.

No Republicans voted for that portion of the budget, saying it was the equivalent of raising taxes, and without support from GOP lawmakers, Democrats would not have been able to muster a two-thirds vote to override a veto by the governor.

The budget-related legislation had been criticized by several politicians because it called for the state to collect more taxes earlier to pump revenue into the state budget. The money would be refunded to taxpayers later if they had overpaid taxes.

Facing billions of dollars in deficit, the governor last month proposed a temporary increase of 1 cent in the state sales tax, which would be followed by a 1 1/4-cent cut after three years. Schwarzenegger pitched the idea as a long-term tax cut, although the proposal got little support from his Republican colleagues in the Legislature.

The governor said this week that he also has problems with state lawmakers' fiscal reform proposals in their approved budget.

On Monday, as lawmakers prepared to vote on a package of budget bills, Schwarzenegger sent a letter to legislative leaders threatening to veto the budget unless three changes were made to strengthen fiscal reforms.

Lawmakers adopted two of the suggestions: increasing the amount of the rainy-day fund and creating more-stringent rules to force the state to continue depositing money into that fund. But lawmakers rejected Schwarzenegger's third proposal, which would allow the state to dip into that fund only when the state's revenues fall below the estimates in the enacted budget.

Day 80 4:06PM: BUDGET DEAL APPEARS IMMINENT

By Anthony York | Capitol WeeklY | published Thursday, September 18, 2008 @ 4:06PM PDT

image 

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders are nearing agreement on a budget compromise that would allow the governor to sign a new state spending plan that is more than 80 days overdue. The first signs of an accord emerged after the political leaders met today in the Capitol behind closed doors.

Sources say the draft agreement includes a smaller emergency reserve and increased penalties on corporations that under-report their income.

The tentative accord does not include an earlier proposal that would have accelerated the collection of withholding from California taxpayers, which would bring in $1.5 billion in one-time revenue to the state.

To make up for that lost revenue, the proposal increases penalties on corporations that fail to disclose their earnings by $1 million or  more. The new penalty on corporate taxpayers could raise an estimated  $1.5 billion.

The easing of the historic impasse began after a stormy day in which angry lawmakers in both major parties threatened to unite against the governor.

Relations between legislative leaders and Gov. Schwarzenegger reached the boiling point this week, after the governor threatened to return the budget bill to the Legislature without his signature. Schwarzenegger cited bookkeeping gimmickry and "fake budget reform" as the reasons for rejecting the budget.  Democratic and Republican legislators angrily responded that the "gimmickry" cited by the governor originated with his own finance department.

According to Capitol sources, the Legislature has agreed to the governor's proposal to develop  a so-called Budget Stabilization Fund, and tighter restrictions on when that "rainy-day fun" could be tapped.

The Big 5 -- the governor and the four legislative leaders -- planned to meet later today.

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE WORKING TO HEAD OFF BUDGET VETO

Need a Real Sponsor here

By JIM CARLTON – The Wall Street Journal

SEPTEMBER 18, 2008, 6:50 P.M. ET -- The California Legislature was racing to amend its $104.3 billion state budget to head off a threatened veto by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, with a new deal possible later today.

According to two people familiar with the plan, the legislature's reworked budget would make it harder for lawmakers to dip into a "rainy day" fund that can be used to help close future shortfalls. The governor had threatened to veto a budget the legislature passed on Tuesday, in part, because he felt the fund was not tamper proof. Failure to pass the budget that is now nearly three months overdue has led to a fiscal crisis in the nation's most populous state, with mass layoffs, hiring freezes and reduced pay hammering the state government.

The legislature was also working to address another concern of the governor's: that about $1.6 billion in new revenues aimed at helping to close an estimated $15.2 billion shortfall this fiscal year would come from accelerating withholdings on tax filers in the Golden State. The Republican governor told lawmakers he considered that funding tactic -- opposed by every Republican in the Democrat-controlled legislature -- a tax increase and would move to block it.

Legislators, who said the governor's office actually gave them the withholding idea, were instead looking at increasing corporate tax penalties to raise the money, said a person familiar with the matter. But representatives of the governor said he never supported that idea.

According to another person close to the negotiations, Gov. Schwarzenegger gave legislative leaders until today to fix the budget, or he would veto the one they already approved. A spokesman for the governor, Aaron McLear, disputed suggestions by some in the Sacramento statehouse that Gov. Schwarzenegger had delayed his veto to give lawmakers time to amend the plan to his satisfaction. Mr. McLear said the governor was simply awaiting all pieces of the budget, which he still had not yet received as of today.

Whether the governor gets his way in the end, political observers say this likely won't go down as a significant accomplishment on his part. "It's really hard for anyone to claim victory for something that has taken this long to produce," says Mark Baldassare, president and chief executive officer of the Public Policy Institute of California, a think-tank based in San Francisco.

Day 80: ANGER BOILING INSIDE CAPITOL

Sources close to all four legislative leaders – two Democrats and two Republicans – said their bosses believe the governor has been deliberately deceptive, and they are prepared to go on a joint public offensive against the governor.

   image

by Anthony York  | CAPITOL WEEKLY | published Thursday, September 18, 2008 @ 1:14PM

Legislative leaders say critical pieces of the state budget denounced by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger -- and  used by him to justify an unprecedented veto -- actually originated in the governor’s own Department of Finance.

Tempers flared inside the Capitol today, as sources close to all four legislative leaders – two Democrats and two Republicans – said their bosses believe the governor has been deliberately deceptive, and they are prepared to go on a joint public offensive against the governor.

Many of the so-called “revenue accelerators” -- the bureaucracy’s term for speeded-up tax collections and increases in income tax withholding -- came from the Department of Finance, according to documents reviewed by Capitol Weekly. The department, which writes the governor’s budgets, is among the most powerful agencies in state government.

A copy of  the governor’s “August Revision” sets out nearly $2 billion in one-time, “accelerated revenues” by changing the way personal and corporate income taxes are collected.

Schwarzenegger’s revenue acceleration proposal was part of the budget blueprint adopted by lawmakers. A similar plan to accelerate withholding collections from income tax payers has been the focal point of the governor’s derision of the budget as a “kick the can down the alley” proposal. But legislative sources say that, too, came from the governor’s office.

"The one thing that he's objecting to came from the governor's office," said Eileen Ricker, a spokeswoman for Senate Republican Leader Dave Cogdill, R-Fresno. Sources in the offices of all three other legislative leaders also say the withholding proposal originated in the governor’s office.

A Schwarzenegger spokesman said he could not confirm or deny that the withholding proposal came from the governor’s office. But he tried to distance the governor from the proposal.

“It was not in our January budget, not in our May budget, and not in our August budget,” said Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear. “This administration never included that in one of our three budget proposals.”

McLear did not dispute that the concept for increasing withholding collections may have come from the governor’s office. McLear, however,  sought to link the accelerators to the Legislature.

“They (lawmakers) are the ones who voted for this,” he said of the Legislature. “It’s their budget,” he said.

The standoff has led to an unprecedented showdown, with all four legislative leaders barely containing their outrage Thursday at the governor. A meeting of the Big 5 began late this morning, and is expected to continue into the afternoon.

Schwarzenegger, in public appearances across the state, contends that his threatened veto of the Legislature-approved state budget is justified, because the document just “kicks the can farther down the road” and does not contain an adequate cushion in future years. He suggested that the “revenue accelerators” delay meaningful action, and promised to veto the document. He says the cushion, or “rainy day fund,” is his principal reason for his veto.

But while the governor, loudly, has attacked the Legislature over these provisions, among others, he hasn’t told the public that he himself embraced a number of similar measures. He supported a two-year sales-tax increase that would have expired after he left office. In his August revision, he introduced the concept of suspending corporate Net Operating Losses for two years and accelerating the cetion of income taxes by conforming state policies to the General Accepted Accounting Principles. Those concepts were contained in the budget adopted by lawmakers earlier this week.

The dispute between the governor and the Legislature is the latest wrinkle in a bitter dispute over the 2008-09 state budget, that by law is supposed to be approved by the Legislature by June 15 and signed into law July 1, the beginning of the new fiscal year. On Thursday, California moved into its 80th day without a spending plan, a record. Also historic is Schwarzenegger’s threatened veto—a governor never before has vetoed an entire state budget.

Earlier in the week, Schwarzenegger met with legislative leaders in a last-minute attempt to avoid the governor's rejection of the spending plan. The meeting, which caught the Capitol by surprise, abruptly ended when the Republican governor went to Fresno to publicly criticize the budget.

"The goal was to try to avoid a veto," Ricker said. "The Legislature feels the state needs to move forward now. The governor's budget didn't have the votes, and this is what the compromise was."

Both the governor and his critics have mounted public relations offenses to woo the public to their sides.

The governor has accused the Legislature of approving a budget that does little to curb future spending. Lawmakers, while acknowledging that the budget has flaws, say the spending plan should be approved immediately to avoid inflicting further pain on the public.

For Republicans, there is a real incentive to avoid a veto and an override vote.

When the budget was passed, the so-called "revenue accelerators" - the speeded-up tax and withholding collections that comprise the $5 billion in new revenues that string the budget together -- were approved on a majority-vote bill. In the Senate, that bill, AB 36xxx (the triple Xs officially denote the Legislature's third special session), passed without any Republican votes at all. The bill received just 21 votes in the Senate, and 43 in the Assembly.

But if the Senate is to override a veto of that measure, it would take a two-thirds vote, and that means Republicans would have to put up votes supporting what amounts to a $5 billion tax increase. That vote could prove difficult: Many Republicans earlier signed pledges that they would not approve new taxes.

But Cogdill and Villines both said they want the governor to sign the budget.

"Not getting your way is no reason to the veto the state budget," said Villines. "While not perfect, the budget compromise funds our state's priorities without raising taxes on California's hard-working families."

Cogdill went further, saying he "will vote to override the governor's veto, as should every other legislator who approved this budget."

In a Sept. 15 letter to legislative leaders, Schwarzenegger said he "would be unable to sign a budget without meaningful budget reform."  He said he would not " not sign a 'get-out-of-town budget' that punishes taxpayers, pushes the problem into the next year and includes fake budget reform," Schwarzenegger said.

By by Wednesday evening, it appeared that budget reform alone will not be enough to avoid a veto. Senate Leader Don Perata said the governor is "pretty dug in" on the idea of a veto, and budget reform alone would not be enough to avoid the governor's rejection.

Day 80: MORNING BUDGET MEETING ENDS ABRUPTLY

Sep 18, 2008 12:48 pm US/Pacific

CBS 13 News/Sacramento and Associated Press

It used to be "The Big Five" ...now it's "The Big Four +1"?

SACRAMENTO (AP) ― This morning's budget meeting between Governor Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders ended abruptly after 20 minutes with the Governor threatening an immediate veto of the current budget.

Governor Schwarzenegger's spokesperson told CBS13 that the governor told lawmakers to go back to the table and fix the 'rainy day plan' and get rid of accounting gimmicks.

The Legislature's budget relied on accounting gimmicks -- such as accelerating the withdrawal of state income tax from workers' paychecks -- that could lead to an even larger deficit next year.

But another sticking point is the strengthening of the state's rainy-day fund; lawmakers made changes but rejected Schwarzenegger's demand that they restrict when and how the Legislature can tap into the cash.

The 'Big Four' lawmakers are scheduled to meet again with the governor at 3:00pm this afternoon.

It's unclear whether there are enough votes in the Legislature to override a governor's veto.

 

.)

AROUND THE BUDGET IN 80 DAYS + OVERRIDING SCHWARZENEGGER'S VETO WON'T BE SIMPLE

SacBee CapitolAlert | Sept 18

Lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger met on Wednesday afternoon to discuss ways to sidestep a budget veto and an override showdown.

"We'd like to avoid a veto," said Assembly Speaker Karen Bass when she emerged from the gathering. "We'd like to avoid a veto override. Conversations are ongoing. No decisions were made. We'll be back tomorrow morning."

Linda Corbin waves an adult diaper, left, as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger explains his planned budget veto Wednesday during an appearance outside Fresno City Hall. Corbin said the diaper was her last and that budget cuts and service closures would cut off her supply. Meanwhile, lawmakers - who expected to easily override a gubernatorial veto - learned that their plan to accelerate tax payments might be much more difficult to push through the Legislature again. ERIC PAUL ZAMORA / Fresno Bee

In part, that may be because lawmakers who thought an override of a governor's budget veto would be easy learned Wednesday that things are more complicated than that.

Jim Sanders reports in today's Bee (Overriding Schwarzenegger's promised budget veto won't be simple, following) that not all of the so-called budget "trailer bills" passed with the two-thirds vote necessary to override a gubernatorial veto.

One of those majority-vote bills contained the key "revenue acceleration" proposal, which would hike the percentage the state takes from taxpayers' paychecks only to cut a bigger refund check every April.

To override, some Republicans would have to vote for a bill they stayed off the first time around.

 

Overriding Schwarzenegger's promised budget veto won't be simple

By Jim Sanders - Sacramento Bee

September 18, 2008 -- Lawmakers who assumed an override of a governor's budget veto would be easy learned differently Wednesday.

As they sent Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger a budget he opposed this week, legislative leaders of both parties said they were confident they could override a gubernatorial veto. That takes a two-thirds vote, the same threshold required to pass the budget bill in the first place.

But complications surfaced Wednesday because the linchpin of the spending plan – an attempt to raise nearly $4 billion by accelerating tax payments – was passed in separate legislation using a procedural maneuver that required only a majority vote.

That allowed Republicans to sidestep an action that political opponents could call a tax increase.

To override, Republicans will have to cast votes on that measure.

Assemblyman Alberto Torrico, a Newark Democrat who serves as majority floor leader, said the controversy adds to an "absolute mess" surrounding the state's record 80-day budget standoff.

"I think it's going to be a significant problem," he said of garnering enough GOP votes – at least six in the Assembly, two in the Senate – to override a veto of the tax bill.

The development gives Schwarzenegger substantially more leverage as he seeks to alter the deal lawmakers struck without him over the weekend.

If Republicans were to stand firm on their Tuesday votes, the lawmakers' budget wouldn't balance and they would be forced back to the drawing board. California's constitution requires a balanced budget.

Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear said the governor's goal is passage of a state budget that does not push fiscal problems into next year and cracks down on future spending.

"We'll work with them to do the right thing," he said of lawmakers.

Legislative leaders, who met with Schwarzenegger on Wednesday, were hesitant to speculate on how events will play out.

"We cross that bridge when we get there," said Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles.

"Everything is wait and see," said Alicia Trost, spokeswoman for Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata.

The tax-acceleration bill opposed by Republicans calls for raising billions this fiscal year by advancing collection of income taxes, then refunding overpayments later. The state essentially would receive a short-term, interest-free loan from taxpayers.

Schwarzenegger called the measure a smoke screen that cuts paychecks.

"It's really increasing the taxes, and they're putting a burden on taxpayers," he said at a Capitol press conference Tuesday.

Supporters of the measure disagree.

They argue taxpayers would not pay more in taxes but would just remit payments sooner – and they could avoid any impact by altering the withholding forms they file with employers.

GOP legislative leaders have publicly supported overriding a gubernatorial veto on the primary budget bill. Prospects for the tax-acceleration bill are less certain.

"It does create some heartburn for Republicans," Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster, said of a second vote on the trailer bill. "Will it create enough that they wouldn't go up on an override? I don't know."

Senate Republican leader Dave Cogdill of Modesto, who voted against the tax-acceleration bill Tuesday, is willing to help line up GOP votes for it if necessary for an override, spokeswoman Eileen Ricker said.

Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines of Clovis could not be reached for comment.

Because the bill did not actually raise taxes, only accelerated collection, state law allowed it to be passed Tuesday by a simple majority of each legislative house as part of a special session on budget matters.

Assemblyman Anthony Adams, R-Hesperia, voted against the tax acceleration Tuesday but said he would be willing to reconsider, if pressed.

"It's not desirable, but at the same time, the governor is playing games with California families – and if we have to step in and provide the only real leadership in the Capitol, then so be it," Adams said.

Republican Assemblyman Chuck DeVore of Irvine characterized the tax-acceleration bill as "taking money out of people's pockets." He has not decided, however, whether he would support an override as a last resort to save the budget package.

Adding to complications at the Capitol, the Assembly has sent to Schwarzenegger the primary budget bill but not its tax acceleration, one of about two dozen trailer bills.

The strategy prevents the governor from vetoing both at the same time.

After Wednesday's session with Schwarzenegger, legislative leaders expressed hope that a showdown will not be necessary.

"We'd like to avoid a veto," Bass said. "We'd like to avoid a veto override. Conversations are ongoing."


Wednesday, September 17, 2008

CALIFORNIA STATE PTA URGES GOVERNOR TO VETO THE BUDGET

clip_image002

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

CONTACT: Carol Kocivar

Vice President- Communications

(916) 440-1985

Pam Brady, President, California State PTA has issued the following statement:

On behalf of nearly one-million volunteer members, California State PTA opposes the budget that was passed late last night by the legislature.

We urge Governor Schwarzenegger to veto this budget because it is not good enough for California’s children or for California’s future. It is impossible to know just how bad this budget is yet because the public did not have a chance to review details before the legislature took action – but from the details we do know, this budget relies on borrowing and gimmicks that are not in our state’s long-term interest. After months of delay by the legislature, the public deserves a fair chance to see any proposal before it is passed and signed into law.

By vetoing the budget, the Governor will be standing up for transparency, and standing up for a budget that will not simply pass the buck for another year.

The PTA is the nation’s oldest, largest and highest profile volunteer organization working on behalf of public schools, children and families, with the motto “Every child, one voice.” PTA volunteers work in their schools and communities to improve the education, health and welfare of all children and youth. The PTA also advocates at national, state and local levels for education and family issues. The PTA is non-profit, non-sectarian and noncommercial.

###

Day 79: League of California Cities Statement: FINAL BUDGET UNDERSCORES DRASTIC NEED FOR REFORM

Last update: 5:46 p.m. EDT Sept. 17, 2008

SACRAMENTO, CA, Sep 17, 2008 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) -- The League of California Cities has urged state leaders for months to find common ground on a state budget and produce one that is responsible and does not raid voter-protected local government, redevelopment or transportation funds. We urged them to level with the taxpayers about what it would take to get the job done, including budget cuts and tax increases. The Legislature's adoption of a budget early Tuesday morning, that some legislative leaders described at worst as a "Ponzi scheme" and at best as a "short-term solution," gives Californians little comfort that this goal has been met.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's announcement yesterday that he intends to veto the budget because of its many shortcomings underscores just how broken the state budget process really is. Californians have every right to expect better than a budget that passes the buck to next year's state leaders. Unfortunately, that is what this budget gives them, and its shortcomings will become even more evident in the days and weeks to come.

Early this spring, the League committed to supporting a budget that did a few simple things:

-- Achieves savings by eliminating overlapping, obsolete and redundant programs;

-- Balances state spending and state revenues without "borrowing" voter protected funds;

-- Cuts spending responsibly and raises new revenues only to address the structural deficit and avoid devastating budget cuts (not for new programs), but only if there is substantial budget reform;

-- Enacts meaningful budget reforms to help the state weather the next economic crisis; and

-- Continues to invest in infrastructure to aid the economic recovery.

The League's leadership applauds the Governor and Legislature for agreeing that the budget should not rely on "borrowing" local government and transportation funds. We are also pleased that the adopted budget provides additional Proposition 1B funding for local streets.

However, we strongly oppose the fact that part of the Legislature's final budget effectively steals $350 million of local redevelopment funds that are so essential to the vital community infrastructure investments that generate both high paying construction jobs and substantial state and local revenue. There also seems to be little in this budget in terms of streamlining or real solutions that address the state's structural budget deficit. In fact, some of the solutions are expected to make next year's problems worse.

In short, after 78 long days of gridlock, it is clear that most legislators, the Governor and other opinion leaders agree that the adopted budget will not serve California well in either the short- or long-term. More importantly, this consensus emphasizes the critical need for comprehensive budget reform.

The League stands ready to work with state leaders and other stakeholders in moving this agenda forward. California can ill-afford another budget impasse that threatens funding for critical services and undermines public confidence in government. The time has come to fix this dysfunctional system and do the job Californians rightfully expect from their state and local officials. Now is the time and this is the place.

Contact:
Eva Spiegel
(916) 658-8228
Cell (530) 400-9068

1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, California 95814
Phone: (916) 658-8200
Fax: (916) 658-8240
www.cacities.org

Day 79: TORLAKSON ON THE BUDGET "COMPROMISE"

Senator Tom Torlakson

BREAKING NEWS: The following update about the state budget situation was drafted before Governor Schwarzenegger announced his intention to veto the budget package. In the interest of keeping you informed about the state budget process, Senator Torlakson still wanted to send this statement to you for your review.
Senator Torlakson watched the Governor's press conference today. He is continuing his efforts to find a solution to the state budget debate, and looks forward to working with his colleagues to seek a resolution in the coming days.

September 16, 2008
1:30 p.m. (emailed @ 8:25:59 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time)

Dear Friend:

The California State Senate and State Assembly early this morning passed the 2008-09 state budget by the necessary two-thirds vote margins in the Assembly and Senate. The Legislature then sent the package of the bills to Governor Schwarzenegger for his signature.

This budget includes nearly $10 billion in budget cuts and various one-time revenue accelerations to close the remaining budget gap. This budget does not include any borrowing from Proposition 1A (2006) local government or Proposition 42 (2002)/Proposition 1A (2006) transportation funds. It also restores many of the most severe cuts proposed by the Governor and Senate Republicans. (Click here to see more of these budget details.)

But make no mistake: this compromise fails to address our long-term budget problems. Because of my concerns about our state's ability to fund our schools in the future, I voted against the part of the budget plan (AB 1452) that replaced the on-going revenues I believe are so necessary with one-time revenues and the creation of vast new loopholes in corporation taxes. These loopholes will reduce by $1 billion or more annually the amount of money our state will have in the future to fund our education system, health care needs, and public safety.

We have once again failed to find a fiscally responsible solution to our state's ongoing structural deficit. The Legislature also failed to find the ongoing revenue needed to fully fund our schools or give our children the healthcare and other supports they need to succeed.

One reason it was important to pass a budget was to end the horrible impacts created by the delay in payments to our schools, small business owners supplying health care and food to state institutions, providers of homes for people with developmental disabilities, child care providers, students who rely on CalGrants, and senior day care center operators.

Because of the two-thirds vote requirement to pass a budget, the Republicans were able to command key elements of this budget deal. This fact severely limited the opportunity to find balanced and long-term solutions to our ongoing budget problems. Preserving a minimum foundation for our education system and vital social services was the best we could do under these circumstances.

But I must ask: is the "bare minimum" now the best for which we can hope? Must we settle for funding our schools with less money per pupil than 46 other states? Will we accept ranking 46th in the nation in eighth grade math achievement, 44th in eighth grade science achievement, and 49th in eighth grade reading achievement? Do we serve our students by ranking 49th in student-teacher ratio, 51st in librarians and guidance counselors per pupil? Is allowing nearly 800,000 children to go without health insurance really acceptable?

I deeply regret that it does not include the restorations of even a dime from the $12 billion in annual tax cuts enacted over the past 15 years. Democrats fought this year for an ongoing revenue source -- but the Governor could not get the necessary Republican votes even for his own modest revenue plan.

This year's debate over the state budget once again highlights the need for significant reforms to our state budget process. I will be working diligently to return democracy to the budget process by promoting my legislation (SCA 22) to eliminate the two-thirds vote requirement. This reform is as important today as it was when I first proposed it ten years ago (ACA 26, 1998).

The only way to fully fund our schools -- to provide the additional $15-24 billion a year recent analyses say our public education system requires -- is to reverse some of the tax cuts imprudently passed over the past 15 years.

California will not remain a vibrant economy, and a great place to live, unless we begin to invest once again in our public education system. We must figure out how to give our students the tools and skills they need to live up to our positive aspirations and their dreams. We must restore the promise of our state's education master plan.

That is our challenge in the wake of this year's state budget debate. I hope you will join me in this effort in the coming weeks and months.

Sincerely,

Tom Torlakson

79 Days + the clock is ticking: SCHWARZENEGGER VOWS TO VETO BUDGET - the view from two Times zones

 

[Transcript of Gov. Schwarzenegger's press conference vowing to veto state budget]

Schwarzenegger vows to veto state budget

Legislators say they will quickly override Schwarzenegger's action. He'd respond by killing many bills.

By Evan Halper and Jordan Rau • Los Angeles Times Staff Writers

September 17, 2008 -- SACRAMENTO — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced Tuesday that he planned to veto the state budget passed early that morning by the Legislature, setting the stage for an unprecedented confrontation in California's Capitol.

"When they send me the budget, I will veto it," Schwarzenegger said at a news conference here.

A budget veto would be a first for modern California.

The governor also said that if lawmakers decided to override him -- which they were openly planning -- he would kill most of the legislation they passed this year.

"Hundreds of bills will be vetoed," he said.

Schwarzenegger had warned lawmakers before they passed the spending plan, which was 78 days late, that he would reject it if it did not include three provisions to ensure the state a reliable rainy-day fund for times of fiscal trouble. This year, California has developed a $15.2-billion budget gap.

The Legislature agreed to two of his three requests, but balked at putting more restrictions on lawmakers' ability to raid the state's reserves.

The budget and accompanying bills are expected to be printed and reach the governor's desk in coming days. Legislative leaders in both parties said they would override a veto quickly.

"I'm pretty confident we are not going to have any difficulty," Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) told reporters. "We would do it in rapid fire."

Senate Republican leader Dave Cogdill of Modesto said in a statement that he would vote for an override, "as should every other legislator who approved this budget."

The last override of any bill veto was in 1979, when Jerry Brown was governor, on measures concerning state employees and insurance. Schwarzenegger has rejected hundreds of bills since being elected in 2003, but none of his vetoes has been overruled.

An override requires a two-thirds majority in the Assembly and the state Senate, the same margin required for the budget that passed in the wee hours Tuesday.

Schwarzenegger's veto announcement is certain to cause anxiety among thousands of healthcare clinics, day care centers, schools and others reliant on state money but unable to receive it in the absence of a budget. The state has never gone as long without a spending plan, and many providers have stopped paying their staff or have shut down.

"Californians who are suffering need a budget," Cogdill said.

However, the governor, like many others at the Capitol, had harsh words for the deal cobbled together by lawmakers. By borrowing billions of dollars from taxpayers, their plan would avert deep program cuts as well as a multibillion-dollar tax increase that Democrats and Schwarzenegger had advocated.

The borrowing would consist of accelerated tax collections from individuals and businesses, taking cash now that otherwise would not come in until next year. That leaves a big hole for next year.

Schwarzenegger said the plan "takes our problems and makes them even worse. . . . The way this budget is right now, we will need a huge tax increase next year or to cut education severely."

Education expenditures make up roughly half the $106.4-billion general fund budget that lawmakers passed.

He said the spending restraints lawmakers approved amount to "fake budget reform."

"You . . . say we can do anything we want with the rainy-day fund and you can do it any time," he said.

Democrats said the governor was in no position to be making such charges. They said Schwarzenegger's inability to secure votes from fellow Republicans for his own budget proposal, which would have closed the deficit with the help of a one-cent sales tax hike, left the Legislature without recourse.

"He is a leader with no followers," said Senate leader Don Perata (D-Oakland).

Assembly Republicans said the changes the governor wants would do little or nothing to curb spending and thus are not worth a further delay in the budget.

Jack Pitney, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College, said that if lawmakers do bow to Schwarzenegger's demands and begin renegotiating the budget, the governor may come to regret it.

"There's no guarantee the budget would go in a direction he likes," Pitney said. "Special interests would try to reopen certain issues and undo certain deals."

Regardless of what happens this week, Pitney said, the governor's historic standoff with lawmakers may not impress Californians.

"This isn't what people expected" when they recalled a sitting governor to put Schwarzenegger in office, Pitney said. "There was enormous hope for the governor that he'd be able to get Republicans and Democrats inside the smoking tent and smelling like a rose. . . . Things have worked out differently."

The governor's threat to use his veto pen aggressively on other legislation if lawmakers do not meet his demands leaves 873 bills hanging in the balance. Among them are measures to require chain restaurants to post calorie information, to impose fees on port cargo to pay for air-pollution reduction, and to deter metal theft by requiring scrap sellers to supply their thumbprints.

Lawmakers advised the governor against trying to punish them with his veto pen.

"To threaten bills without taking each one on the merits is more immature politically than anything else," said Assemblyman Chuck Calderon (D-Montebello).

He said lawmakers could just as easily turn the tables, declining to pass bills important to the governor's policy agenda or purposely putting bills on his desk that he doesn't want -- "veto bait," in the parlance of the Capitol.

"If he arbitrarily takes this action," Calderon said, "I think he has to worry about what bills the Legislature sends him."


The New York Times

Schwarzenegger to Veto Budget and Other Bills

By JESSE McKINLEY - New York Times

September 17, 2008SAN FRANCISCO — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday that he would veto a long-overdue state budget, and he threatened also to veto hundreds of other pieces of legislation, as the state’s 78-day budget crisis dragged on.

The California Legislature finally passed a $104 billion general fund budget by potentially veto-proof two-thirds majorities early Tuesday morning, after setting a record for tardiness.

But Mr. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, said he would not sign it, or very little else, until a “good budget” was passed.

“I say enough is enough,” he said at a news conference in Sacramento. “Californians have been put through this rollercoaster ride too many times.”

In particular, the governor asked for guarantees regarding contributions to a so-called rainy day fund, something he regards as critical to budget reform, which has become central to his second term in office.

Mr. Schwarzenegger said he expected the Legislature to override his veto, but promised to return the favor by sending back most of the laws it passed in the last legislative session. “Every bill will be carefully evaluated, and hundreds of bills will be vetoed,” he said.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle said they were prepared to override any budget veto.

“Not getting your way is no reason to veto the state budget,” said Mike Villines, a Republican. “It is disappointing that he would take this unnecessary step that will only prolong our budget stalemate and cause more pain for many Californians.”

Karen Bass, a Democrat and speaker of the state’s Assembly, said a vote to override the governor’s veto could come as early as Wednesday.

Leaders on both sides admitted that the budget that was passed was a disappointment and that lawmakers were likely to face similar problems next year.

“We tried,” Ms. Bass said. “But we weren’t able to do anything better.”

Under the bill, the state would close a $15 billion budget gap with about $9 billion in cuts and additional revenue essentially borrowed from future tax payments. Some tax exemptions, including business losses, would be temporarily suspended, and some loopholes would be closed.

Republicans in the Legislature had refused to consider new taxes desired by Democrats. And because California law requires two-thirds majorities for tax increases, several proposals, including a one-cent increase in the sales tax, were nonstarters.

All of which led to more than a little frustration.

“This is not a budget the Democrats or the governor wanted,” said Don Perata, a Democrat and Senate president pro tem. “It’s a failure. But Republicans had the final say — and they said no.”

Tens of thousands of businesses, from child care to nursing homes, have been missing payments from the state as the crisis dragged on. Mike Danneker, executive director of the Westside Regional Center, a state-financed medical services organization in Culver City, said that his center ran out of money last Friday.

“These guys have been playing with this stuff for 77 days,” Mr. Danneker said. “They should have done this in May.”

While Mr. Schwarzenegger’s veto announcement set the stage for a showdown with the Legislature, some experts said it was likely to be a lonely fight.

“Everybody has the votes to override him, so he doesn’t really matter anymore,” said John Ellwood, professor at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, “If I was a Democrat or Republican leader, I would say, “What has this guy given me?’ ”

On Tuesday, at least, the governor seemed to be asking the same thing. “They are three months late with the budget” he said. “And this is what we get on the desk.”

Rebecca Cathcart contributed reporting from Los Angeles.

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

On the cusp of Day #79: SHARON RUNNER: "I won't override the veto"

Sac Bee CapitolAlert • Posted by Shane Goldmacher on September 16, 2008 5:37 PM

Republican Assemblywoman Sharon Runner, R-Lancaster, became the first lawmaker who voted for the budget to announce she will not vote to override the governor's veto.

Runner issued a statement late Tuesday saying she is "committed to finding a compromise which benefits Californians now and protects their future."

Here's Runner's statement in full:

"I voted in favor of the budget compromise proposal early this morning because Californians needed us to put an end to the stalemate and provide them with the services that have been long overdue. Even though this spending plan is not the best solution to California's budget shortfall, it is a step in the right direction as it has no tax increases and it begins to implement common-sense budget reforms.

"Although I voted for this budget, I stand with the Governor in his decision to utilize his veto power and I will not vote to support an override of his veto. I am committed to finding a compromise which benefits Californians now and protects their future. I welcome any suggestions by the Governor to make this not perfect budget even better and look forward to working with my fellow legislators to find a solution that all Californians deserve."

 

LT. GOV. GARAMENDI SUPPORTS BUDGET VETO

" All levels of education remain on a starvation diet that is sapping the strength of tomorrow's workforce and leaving California employers with insufficient skilled workers, ill-prepared to compete in the world's economy. Furthermore the most vulnerable in our society, the poor, the aged, the blind and the disabled are denied the basic needs that they deserve. We are the sixth wealthiest economy in the world - we can and we must do better - for our future and our children's future."

SAC BEE CapitolAlert | Posted by Shane Goldmacher

September 16, 2008 4:28 PM - Lt. Gov. John Garamendi is bucking the Democratic and Republican leadership of the Legislature and standing with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's planned veto of the state budget.

Schwarzenegger is "correct to veto the proposed budget...because it does nothing to solve the structural deficit, nothing to fund or to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our poorly performing education system, the prison system or address the need for affordable health care," said Garamendi.

Garamendi, who is serving in his first term as lieutenant governor, is running for governor in 2010.

Here is his full statement:

"The Governor is correct to veto the proposed budget as it does not meet the minimum investment that California must make to maintain its economic competitiveness. All levels of education remain on a starvation diet that is sapping the strength of tomorrow's workforce and leaving California employers with insufficient skilled workers, ill-prepared to compete in the world's economy. Furthermore the most vulnerable in our society, the poor, the aged, the blind and the disabled are denied the basic needs that they deserve. We are the sixth wealthiest economy in the world - we can and we must do better - for our future and our children's future.

This budget "kicks the can down the road" because it does nothing to solve the structural deficit, nothing to fund or to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our poorly performing education system, the prison system or address the need for affordable health care. It uses accounting gimmicks and borrowing to plug the hole, a hole that is guaranteed to be only bigger and deeper next fiscal year.

It's time for Californians to take a stand together. We must modernize our economy, stabilize our budget, reform and fully fund our education programs, establish a universal health care system, address the threat of climate change and adapt our water and transportation systems to the reality of the new and changing environment.

We must reestablish the successful California tradition of investing in both the public and the private sectors. We cannot allow a continuation of the gridlock caused by the Republicans' refusal to adequately fund those investments that create economic growth and social advancement. The two-thirds vote requirement must end along with the ideology that we can continue to cut essential services and education and end up with a vibrant economy and a peaceful society.

The Legislature should return to serious daily negotiations and adopt a budget that invests in California's future. The Republican's have already agreed to a tax hike for every Californian who receives a pay check and for every California Corporation. A 10% increase in tax withholding is nothing more than a tax increase. This flawed budget affects those least able to put food on the table. California's working families deserve real solutions and vital investments which ensure a better tomorrow."

Day 78: UNIONS ALREADY LOOKING TO REPEAL PORTIONS OF BUDGET DEAL

Capitol Weekly - The Newspaper of California Government and Politics

“The fact that this deal was three months overdue and had more smoke and mirrors than a David Copperfield show is a direct result of our broken budget process. Unless we change the threshold to pass budgets and raise revenues, we’ll never move beyond real budget cuts and fake budget solutions.”

Art Pulaski, executive secretary-treasurer of the California Labor Federation

By Anthony York | Capitol Weekly |  published Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Before the ink was even dry on a new state budget, some labor leaders were already talking about going to the ballot to repeal a key provision of the deal.

As details of the proposed budget deal between Legislative leaders emerged Monday, the Service Employees International Union and other labor groups were already contemplating enlisting voters to get rid of the pieces of the deal they didn’t like. In particular, unions do not like provisions of the budget that they say could lead to billions in corporate tax breaks, and reduced revenues to the state.

“SEIU has serious questions about new tax cuts for wealthy corporations which, in our view, will likely result in deep cuts to health care, education and other vital community services,” said one senior union official who declined  to be identified. “We are already hearing from others who want to explore a ballot initiative to repeal these corporate tax cuts and protect California communities. It's a possibility.” The unions began developing their initiative even as the Legislature worked into the night on the budget.

Monday morning, an email was being circulated from Lenny Goldberg of the California Tax Reform Association warning allies of the details in the budget deal.

“In exchange for a small amount of temporary short-term revenues, the Legislature is poised to open two vast new loopholes in the corporation tax, loopholes which will continue indefinitely,” the email stated. “The impact will be to greatly diminish the corporation tax at future costs to education, health care, and public safety. This is a huge giveaway to multinational corporations.”

Specifically, Goldberg focused on a provision that would allow corporations to exchange tax credits among different companies under the same corporate umbrella. Under current law,  the state requires tax credits be taken by the specific corporation that is applying for the credit. 

The change was one of the provisions requested by Republicans during budget negotiations, said Democratic sources.

“There are many billions in unused credits from companies that have not earned sufficient profit to use them,” writes Goldberg. “This proposal will open the ability of companies to effectively sell these credits—e.g. by allowing ownership by another company—so that the billions in unused credits can now be used by profitable corporations.” 

Goldberg estimates this change could cost the state “billions per year and will total many billions over the years.

“These new loopholes will effectively mean the death of the corporation tax as an effective revenue-raiser.  This deal compromises future generations, and does not even receive any real revenues in return.  Borrowing from the future is bad enough.  Giving away the future to multinational corporations is unconscionable.”

Art Pulaski, executive secretary-treasurer of the California Labor Federation, blasted Democrats and Republicans for the budget. "

“The fact that this deal was three months overdue and had more smoke and mirrors than a David Copperfield show is a direct result of our broken budget process. Unless we change the threshold to pass budgets and raise revenues, we’ll never move beyond real budget cuts and fake budget solutions," Pulaski said in a statement.  “The budget passed today does not represent the values of California’s working families. It may let the governor and legislature get out of town, but it shouldn’t let them escape responsibility for its sorry contents.” 

Day 78 ...and still counting – SURPRISE#1: GOVERNOR WILL VETO BUDGET PROPOSAL!

Surprise #2: Governor's website crashes and cannot handle live webcast of veto press event!  •  play video

Surprise#3: If lege overides his veto he threatens to veto every bill on his desk!

By Steve Wiegand - Sacramento Bee

Published 3:26 pm PDT Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today said he would veto the long overdue budget lawmakers sent him just hours before because it does not include long-term spending changes he wants.

The move extends the state's record-setting budget impasse and sets up what could be an unprecedented override attempt.

"People aren't getting paid, hospitals are in danger of closing, but I will not sign a get out of town budget...that punishes taxpayers," Schwarzenegger said.

If lawmakers vote to override the veto, Schwarzenegger said, he will veto all the bills awaiting action on his desk.

A marathon session of the Legislature ended at 2:30 a.m. Tuesday with the proposed compromise receiving the necessary two-thirds majority to pass the Assembly, 61-1, and the Senate, 28-12.

But lawmakers rejected one of Schwarzenegger's demands, which would have placed tighter limits on when and how much money could be transferred from the state's rainy-day fund.

It would take two-thirds of the Legislature to override the veto, and veto overrides are rare in California. The last time it was even attempted, according to the Speaker's office, was in 2003, and it failed.

But legislative leaders of both parties said they were prepared to override Schwarzenegger this time.

Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, the Senate's Republican leader, told a Los Angeles radio talk show that the Senate "most definitely" would override the GOP governor if he vetoes the budget.

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass said she was confident the two-thirds vote could be achieved. "If we bring 120 legislators up here to override a veto, I'm pretty confident that we're not going to have difficulty doing that, and we would do it in rapid fire," she said.

Schwarzenegger's veto sent Capitol historians scrambling today to look for precedents.

It's not clear when - or even if - a governor has ever actually vetoed an entire budget. H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the Department of Finance, said research as far back as 1921 found no instances of it occurring.

Not that governors haven't threatened it. In July 1991, Gov. Pete Wilson promised to veto the budget legislators had sent him because it lacked a tax increase and workers' compensation reforms he wanted. Instead, Wilson held onto the bill until almost the last minute of the 12 days he could legally hold it without acting, and then sent it back to the Legislature, which immediately sent it back to him. That started a new 12-day clock in which the warring parties reached a compromise.

The last successful overrides were in July 1979. Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed a bill that sought to ban banks from getting into the insurance business. But the bill's author, Assemblyman Lou Papan, D-Daly City, succeeded in getting the veto overridden on his second try.

Another Brown veto was also overridden earlier that month. The bill, by Sen. Al Alquist, D-San Jose, proposed $220 million in pay raises for state workers. Legislators also overrode eight items in that year's budget bill.

Brown, in fact, had vetoes overridden several times, the first of which was in 1977 when he vetoed a bill that reinstituted the death penalty in California.

As it happened, Brown - now the state's Attorney General - appeared with Schwarzenegger Tuesday at a ceremony at the Stanford Mansion to honor heroic law enforcement officers.

Asked what it's like to be overridden by the Legislature, Brown said, "It's not a big deal. It happens. In fact, if you're not getting vetoed now and then you probably aren't doing too well."

Asked if Schwarzenegger should veto the budget, Brown said "I don't think I should enter the polarized fray ... I'm the governor's lawyer, so I think I'll keep my counsel as I provide him with my own."

The overrides during Brown's administration came even though members of his own party, the Democrats, controlled the Legislature. But like Schwarzenegger, Brown was almost as unpopular with many members of his own party as he was with the opposing party.

Prior to Brown, California governor's vetoes had been overridden only twice in the previous 31 years, once during Ronald Reagan's administration and once during Earl Warren's.


78 Days: VETO WEBCAST @ 3?

SAC BEE CAPITOLAlert| September 16, 2008 - 1:25 PM

Schwarzenegger 'discusses' budget at 3 p.m.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has scheduled a 3 p.m. news conference at the Capitol to "discuss the budget" among increasing indications that he will veto the budget passed by the Legislature early this morning, setting up an override battle with lawmakers.

Schwarzenegger's office also distributed a compilation of news media criticism of the budget as an expedient plan that doesn't solve long-term budget problems - another indication that a veto is likely.

Meanwhile, Sen. Dave Cogdill, R-Modesto, the Senate's Republican leader, told a Los Angeles radio talk show that the Senate "most definitely" would override the GOP governor if he vetoes the budget.

"I believe that as a Legislature we'll override the veto,"  Cogdill said.

From the Governor's Press Office:Governor to Hold Capitol Press Conference Regarding the State Budget

 

9/16/2008 - Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will hold a press conference to discuss the state budget.
Watch the live webcast at 3:00 p.m.

78 days: A bit of the old S&M

"This budget has enough smoke and mirrors to play the main room in the Magic Castle."

Patt Morrison | KPCC-FM 89.3  | 1:16PM

78 days ...and now what? THE LATEST BUDGET NEWS as of 12:30PM Tuesday 16 Sept

The Sacramento Bee CapitolAlert

Lawmakers worked into the wee hours of Tuesday morning to pass a state budget. But they didn't include one of the three demands Gov. Arnold Schwazenegger made to earn his support.

Capitol Alert has a rundown on what lawmakers passed and what's next:

What's happened:
Who voted for the budget
'Yacht tax' loophole closed
High-tech overtime exemption passed
The Schwarzenegger demand lawmakers didn't meet
Lawmakers react to budget
What's next:
Will Republicans vote for override?
Special election in 2009 likely

78 days and holding: VETO BAIT

Sac Bee Capitol Alert | AM Alert

16 September -- Today we will see what Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger does with a budget that doesn't meet his demands for systemic change.

A marathon session of the Legislature ended at 2:30 a.m. The proposed compromise got the necessary two-thirds majority to pass the Assembly, 61-1, and the Senate, 28-12.

But lawmakers rushing to pass a budget plan were willing to approve just two of the three "budget reform" requirements the governor wanted.

Democrats, already moving a budget plan that rejects their tax increases in favor of borrowing billions from taxpayers, weren't willing to impose the restrictions on use of the "rainy day" fund that Schwarzenegger sought.

Schwarzenegger could make history by vetoing the spending plan. Then he could face an override.

Meanwhile, a new Field Poll shows Schwarzenegger's approval rating slipping -- to 38 percent, near his lows of 2005.

His approval/disapproval rating among Republicans is a dead split 45 percent to 45 percent.

As usual, find the exclusive statistical tabulations only on Capitol Alert.

Despite the low numbers, voters don't have much of an appetite to recall the governor.

Only 29 percent of those surveyed said they would support a recall. And 77 percent said a recall would be a "bad thing" for California.

If you're into math, that is at least six percent of people who said they would both support a recall and that it would be bad for California.

Funny, that's the kind of math balancing the state budget.

78 days later: SQUANDERED CHANCE ON BUDGET – Three months late, this poor excuse for a spending plan is a waste of our time, money and goodwill.

LA Times Editorial

Tuesday morning, September 16 , 2008 -- It's tempting to tell state lawmakers, "Thanks for nothing," but that requires a generous definition of the word "nothing."

The state budget offered up Monday would have been a big goose egg for Californians had it been delivered on time, 90 days ago. Submitted now, with a quarter of the fiscal year already gone, the accord is less than zero.

Pick your Sacramento dysfunction, and this budget has it. Does California borrow too much? This budget borrows in spades, even though lawmakers would rather use words like "revenue acceleration." That's a fancy phrase for making taxpayers pay sooner -- which in turn is another way of saying we'll take next year's taxes and spend them now, without developing any ongoing revenue source or discovering any lasting cost savings. Next year, a huge chunk of tax revenue will already be gone, so we'll have to steal from the following year. All so-called revenue solutions in this budget are, in fact, one-time or temporary.

And some are even worse. Changes in the way corporate taxes are calculated may bring some revenue in now but cost the state more in the future by allowing companies suffering from a bad year to get refunds of taxes paid in good years. Perhaps the Legislature is betting there will be no big corporate losses next year because the economy is about to pick up. Lawmakers may have failed to notice that on the day they planned to vote on their budget, Wall Street was placing a very different bet.

Does California rely too much on ballot measures? This budget works only if voters approve a measure to capitalize the state lottery, borrowing (there's that word again) against future receipts. Legislative leaders say they won't get extra money from the lottery this year, and that may be true -- but this year's budget is contingent on that money appearing next year.

Do lawmakers raise the cost of government by blowing deadlines? Repeatedly. Let's take it as a given that the Legislature wasn't going to pass a budget on time, but if it had been late by just two months, instead of three, that lottery ballot measure would be before voters on Nov. 4, a regular election day. As it is, it will require a special election next year that may cost $50 million to $100 million, if the other special elections of the Schwarzenegger era are any guide.

What Californians would get in exchange for this irresponsible worry-about-it-next-year budget is, lawmakers say, no borrowing, although that's demonstrably untrue. And no tax increases -- except for the fact that many taxpayers will have to pay earlier, which will ultimately cost them because money is more valuable today than tomorrow.

Democrats avoided deeper cuts to education and Medi-Cal. But the majority party got nothing from its minority counterparts by dragging this exercise out. Republicans get to say they held the line on taxes although,in fact, they just disguised them. But the two parties did close the yacht tax loophole.

Thanks for nothing.

78 Days and almost done: BUDGET COMPROMISE REACHES GOVERNOR'S DESK AFTER 78-DAY DELAY

ASSOCIATED PRESS WIRE - Tue, 16 Sep 2008 03:15 AM

●●smf 2¢: While the assembly and senate votes are technically 'veto-proof', it remains to seen whether the governator will veto - either outright or by line-item - and whether the legislature has the will and/or chutzpah to override.

After a 78-day delay, a state budget compromise has finally reached the desk of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger after it was passed by the California State Assembly early this morning.

The budget passed the assembly by a vote of 62-5 at about 2:15 a.m., according to the office of Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles. The state Senate had also passed the compromise by a 29-11 vote about two hours earlier.

"This isn't a budget we should be thrilled about, it's not the kind of budget we should have and it's not the kind of budget we will have," Bass said in a prepared statement. "But it ends the delay. It stops the pain. It allows the wheels of real reform to start moving."

(© 2007 The Associated Press.  In the interest of timeliness, this story is fed directly from the Associated Press newswire and may contain occasional typographical errors. )

Monday, September 15, 2008

77 Days, 21¾ hours later: LATEST STATE BUDGET IS THE WORST IN MEMORY

By Dan Walters / The Sacramento Bee | 09/15/08 21:42:55

They had to be kidding.

Nobody could have dreamed up a less responsible, more gimmicky, sure-to-backfire state budget than the one California's political leaders cobbled together and were jamming through the Legislature to end a months-long stalemate.

But it wasn't a joke, or at least not a funny one. They violated every principle of fiscal responsibility by conjuring up billions of dollars in sham revenues, basically money borrowed from corporate and personal taxpayers that would have to be paid back later to cover a huge deficit.

Remember those Democrats who promised to end years of deficit borrowing and bookkeeping trickery with a straightforward budget that raised taxes to cover obligations? They embraced a get-out-of-town scheme that's the antithesis of common sense budgeting, and hid most of the details until the last minute.

Remember those Republicans who made noise about not raising taxes, even temporarily, because they would damage an already declining economy? Nevermind. They opted for siphoning billions of extra dollars out of Californians' paychecks through "accelerated withholding" money that consumers won't get back until they receive tax refunds in 2010.

Remember Gov. Schwarzenegger, who vowed never to sign a budget unless it had "reforms" to end the cycle of deficits and debts? He may be willing to accept a budget that not only does virtually nothing to preclude future deficits, but probably would make them worse.

If Californians needed even more evidence that their state government is completely and irrevocably dysfunctional, those they elected to high state office provided it with easily the worst budget in memory.

Yes, the small businesses and individuals who have borne the brunt of the long budget impasse will get their overdue state checks, but everyone will be paying the price for this debacle for many years.

As details of the "compromise" emerged, the Bay Area Council renewed its call for a constitutional convention to overhaul state government.

"This year's budget deadlock shows better than perhaps any other recent event that our state needs a constitutional convention to fix a governance system that is hopelessly broken," said the council's president, Jim Wunderman.

"The defining feature of this budget is that it only makes next year's budget worse, and 'next year' is only nine months away. Of course, it's not just the budget. As we have previously stated, California's government suffers from drastic dysfunction, our prisons overflow, our water system teeters on col- lapse, our once proud schools are criminally poor, our financ- ing system is bankrupt, our democracy produces ideologically extreme legislators that can pass neither budget nor re- forms, and we have no recourse in the current system to right these wrongs. Drastic times call for drastic measures."

SCHWARZENEGGER'S THREE DEMANDS

8:35 PM Sept 15

image

CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS TO VOTE ON PATCHWORK BUDGET PLAN

By JUDY LIN – Associated Press | 8PM - 15 Sept

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — State lawmakers on Monday were considering a compromise plan to end California's longest-ever budget stalemate, a proposal that includes increasing the paycheck withholding for state income taxes.

The withholding provision was one of several steps lawmakers used to close a $15.2 billion deficit without borrowing or new taxes. They acknowledged the proposal would get the state through its current fiscal year but not solve California's ongoing fiscal problems.

The Senate and Assembly scheduled floor sessions for Monday evening. Rank-and-file lawmakers scrambled to understand the compromise that was announced Sunday afternoon, while Republican and Democratic leaders sought to revise the language in a way that would assure the bill's passage.

The budget requires a two-thirds vote in both houses so it can be sent to the governor, who indicated he would not sign the plan in its original form.

In a letter to the four legislative leaders, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he will not sign the budget unless it includes a stronger rainy day account that could be tapped in years when revenue declines.

The budget proposal includes $7.1 billion in spending cuts and fills the remaining gap by moving up tax collection deadlines and closing some tax loopholes. Those maneuvers will generate $9.3 billion, leaving a small reserve for unanticipated expenses.

A large portion of the revenue depends on increasing income tax withholdings by 10 percent for working Californians, a move that would raise $1.6 billion. It also would require those who pay quarterly taxes — including limited-liability corporations and wealthier Californians — to pay 30 percent of their taxes in each of the first two quarters of the fiscal year instead of 25 percent. That move would generate $2.3 billion.

Tax experts said the result of higher withholdings will mean less take-home pay for many workers. Taxpayers can adapt by adjusting withholdings once the change takes effect, said Lenny Goldberg of the California Tax Reform Association.

"It's really about timing," he said. "It will come out of people's take-home pay, and they will end up getting a bigger refund in April."

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass said the $104.3 billion general fund spending plan does not address California's long-term difficulty in balancing spending with revenue. But the Los Angeles Democrat said it was important for lawmakers to finish work on the budget for the current fiscal year, which began July 1.

During the impasse, Republicans have refused to raise taxes on corporations and the wealthy, as Democrats had proposed. The impasse continued despite Schwarzenegger's offer to increase the state sales tax 1 cent for three years.

"At the end of the day, we weren't able to raise the revenues we wanted," Bass told reporters Monday. "But we were able to close significant budget loopholes that is giving us revenue in this budget year that prevent us from having to make the draconian cuts."

The agreement was announced Sunday by the Legislature's Democratic and Republican leaders, who were pitching it to their respective caucuses ahead of the floor sessions.

The cuts include many of those the governor proposed in his May budget revision, although Democrats rejected what they considered the worst of those cuts. They did not want to reduce foster care funding or kick children off welfare if their parents don't find work within five years.

Editorial: SCHWARZENEGGER SHOULD VETO THIS BUDGET

The Sacramento Bee:  Published 7:32 pm PDT Monday, September 15, 2008

If this is the best the Legislature could do, California voters should be wondering what their lawmakers have been up to all summer.

The state budget plan cobbled together by legislative leaders over the weekend and scheduled for a vote Monday night is mostly a sham. The balance it claims between revenues and spending is so tenuous it will hardly survive until the bill reaches the governor's desk.

And when it gets there, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger should veto it.

If there is one message Schwarzenegger has repeated consistently since before he took office, it is that the government should live within its means. The state should not spend more than it collects from taxpayers.

But if Schwarzenegger has trumpeted that message, he has not always lived up to it. Five years after he took office, the state still struggles with the same stubborn gap between income and spending that he inherited in 2003. Now is the time for Schwarzenegger to stand firm and say, "No more."

Legislators - and voters - must come to terms with the reality that we all must pay for the government services we want, or else reduce the amount of government we're getting.

The state must either cut spending, raise taxes, or both. No good can come from, in the governor's own words, "kicking the can" down the alley for another year. But that's exactly what this budget would do.

The Legislature's plan would spend more and take in less money than the budget the governor proposed in May, despite the fact that the outlook for the economy is worse today than it was then. Legislative leaders claim their budget is balanced and would leave the state with a shortfall of only $1.2 billion next year. But the real gap is much bigger than that.

The legislators are assuming that voters will approve a proposal to expand the California Lottery and then borrow against its future proceeds. If adopted, that scheme would bring in perhaps $5 billion a year for two years, reducing the shortfall temporarily before allowing it to expand again, just as Schwarzenegger is leaving office in 2011.

The plan also relies on a host of temporary measures to accelerate the collection of tax revenues and tinker with the way the state accounts for them. These tricks make it appear that more money is in the coffers when the truth is that next year's money is being counted, and spent, this year.

We recognize that the lack of a budget is causing real hardship to public agencies and private vendors who do business with the state and have not been paid what they are owed. It's tempting to cave in to expediency for the sake of those victims of the Legislature's partisan stalemate.

But those same agencies and vendors will be at risk again next year, when the same set of problems will exist and the same set of solutions will be on the table. Chances are that, by then, things will be even worse.

The governor has wisely tried to steer the Legislature's warring parties toward a sensible middle ground with a temporary tax increase, some tough spending cuts and long-term reform to try to prevent future deficits. But the latest plan ignores that strategy and takes the easy way out instead.

Schwarzenegger has the public on his side. He shouldn't give up now. He should veto this budget and tell lawmakers to get back to work.

And keep working until they get the job done.

77 Days and counting: LAWMAKERS IN CALIFORNIA (appear to) REACH BUDGET COMPROMISE

 

LA TIMES STORY FOLLOWS

By JENNIFER STEINHAUER | NY Times

September 15, 2008 -- LOS ANGELES — California lawmakers appeared to have resolved the state’s budget impasse Sunday, but it was far from clear whether Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger would sign the proposal into law.

Lawmakers did not release details of the plan, but said they had reached an agreement that avoided new taxes and borrowing, thereby closing a roughly $15 billion hole in the most overdue budget presented by the Legislature in state history. The Democrats and the governor had sought to increase the state sales tax temporarily by a penny, but state Republicans rejected it.

“The four leaders have reached a deal, but they need to take it to their caucuses,” said Alicia Trost, a spokeswoman for Don Perata, the Senate president pro tem, referring to the majority and minority leaders of the State Assembly and Senate. “There will be no taxes and no borrowing.”

Lawmakers are likely to vote on the plan on Monday.

The gap in the budget, now nearly 80 days late, would be filled with $10 billion in cuts and $5 billion in increased revenue from things like eliminating tax amnesties and other such moves bound to confound anyone but a budget expert.

“We are analyzing their proposal,” said Aaron McLear, a spokesman for Mr. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, in an e-mail message. “But we have concerns that budget reform may not be strong enough.”

The negotiations were essentially a fight among three forces: Republicans, who rejected tax increases; Democrats, who wanted to stave off program cuts; and the governor, who wanted to reform the budget process and avoid borrowing.

In the end, there was a stalemate over $5 billion that became the subject of great haggling. The difference would be filled with one-time revenue increases like the suspension of certain business tax credits and tax amnesties and the acceleration of existing taxes and fees. Although Mr. Schwarzenegger is almost certain to frown on the solution, he may well choose it over borrowing schemes. But he may demand an increased rainy-day fund and other reforms. His veto could be overridden, but he does have leverage with bills.

The state has been unable to pay millions of dollars to vendors, colleges and health care providers because the budget was not passed by July 1, the beginning of the fiscal year. Mr. Schwarzenegger had already ordered a temporary pay cut, to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 an hour, for roughly 176,000 state workers, something the state controller refused to implement, and has laid off nearly 10,000 other workers.

 

LA Times: CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS REACH COMPROMISE ON BUDGET: The proposed state spending plan involves no new taxes. Votes on the plan are scheduled for Monday.

By Evan Halper, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

September 15, 2008  -- SACRAMENTO -- Legislative leaders announced Sunday that they had reached a deal on a no-new-taxes state spending plan, bringing the longest budget impasse in modern California history nearly to an end.

Their proposal would increase spending for education and healthcare, though not enough to avoid cutbacks in services. It would borrow against the state lottery. And it relies heavily on maneuvers that would push the state's financial problems into the future at a time when economists have little hope that revenue is on the rebound.

That plan would require hundreds of thousands of businesses and individuals to hand over more of their taxes sooner, so the state could use the cash infusion to pay its bills. The payments made now would not be available for next year's budget.

Votes on the plan are scheduled for today in the Assembly and Senate.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who appears to have been left out of the final deal-making, is not yet on board, and administration officials suggested he could demand changes. Nevertheless, legislative leaders said they expected the governor to approve the package.

"We will very quickly send the budget down to the governor, and we will expect his signature," said Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) at a Sunday news conference with Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland) and Republican leaders.

Once the governor signs a budget, the state can resume paying its bills.

The deal came days after Democrats in the Senate abandoned their months-long crusade to close the $15.2-billion budget gap with the help of increased taxes. They argued that balancing the budget any other way would be fiscally irresponsible and bleed state services.

Schwarzenegger supported that argument, but his fellow Republicans in the Legislature would not go along with a tax hike. The budget needs a two-thirds vote to pass, requiring at least eight Republicans.

"This won't make my highlights reel," Perata said Sunday, after he and other leaders put the finishing touches on the deal behind closed doors. But on the 76th day of the fiscal year, he said, "it was time to end this."

Schwarzenegger spokesman Aaron McLear said the lawmakers' agreement, which includes a provision to boost the state's rainy-day fund, may not meet the governor's demand for restraints on spending when state coffers are flush.

"We are analyzing their proposal but have concerns that budget reform may not be strong enough," he said.

If the governor were to veto the budget, lawmakers could override him with the same two-thirds vote required to pass it.

Meanwhile, legislators said the proposed cuts to schools, healthcare programs and social services were no deeper than those Democrats had already agreed on. And they said their plan would not borrow from local governments or transportation accounts.

The tax-related measures, which Perata called revenue "accelerations," would affect businesses and individuals in several ways, beginning in coming months.

Withholding of state taxes at the workplace would increase by 10% for families with two wage-earners and for all taxpayers with income from investments. The state could use the extra $1.5 billion generated by the scheme to reducethe budget gap; it would send those taxpayers extra refunds later.

Taxpayers who file quarterly would have to pay more of their taxes earlier in the year. And those who earn more than $1 million and experience a big jump in income would no longer have extra time to pay taxes on the increase. These measures, according to legislative staff, would generate $3.8 billion in the current fiscal year.

Limited liability companies would have to prepay fees that normally would not be due until the next fiscal year. The state would give tax cheats amnesty to encourage them to pay what they owe. And tax write-offs for business losses would be suspended temporarily. These measures would generate $2.7 billion this year.

Advocates of a tax hike criticized the budget deal for pushing this year's problems into the future.

"The proposed budget not only fails to fix the ongoing budget crisis but places health and other vital services at even more risk in future years," said Anthony Wright, executive director of the nonprofit Health Access California, which advocates for the poor.

Republican legislative leaders said they were pleased the state would not be raising taxes, though they expressed little enthusiasm for the final agreement.

"It doesn't solve the structural deficit problems we have in our budget," said Senate Republican Leader Dave Cogdill of Modesto.

Voters would ultimately have to approve, perhaps next spring, some elements of the budget deal. The proposal to bolster the state's rainy-day fund would require changes to the state Constitution, as would plans to modernize the California lottery and borrow against future earnings. If voters said yes, the lottery proceeds would not be available to the state until the 2009-10 fiscal year.

The absence of a state budget has wreaked havoc on providers of government services and those who rely on them. Billions of dollars in scheduled payments to healthcare clinics, day-care centers, group homes for the disabled and others have been withheld since July.

Some small providers were forced to shut their doors. Others have borrowed from friends and relatives to fund their payrolls or asked employees to work without pay until a budget is passed.

The passage of a budget would ease the anxiety of most state employees, whose pay the governor has been trying to cut to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 per hour until a budget is passed. The governor, however, has been unsuccessful so far in getting the courts to force State Controller John Chiang, who runs the state payroll, to carry out his pay-cut order.

77 Days without a budget: DON PERATA'S PRIVATE E-MAIL

from the Sac Bee Capitol Alert : Monday 15 SeptemBEr

There are only nine months left until the constitutional deadline to pass next year's budget.

Or, put another way, state lawmakers are now three months past the constitutional deadline to pass this year's budget.

The story of the weekend, though, was the private e-mail Senate leader Don Perata sent to his Democratic colleagues late last week. The Bee obtained a copy.

In it, he talks strategy for crafting a no-tax budget.

"Reps won't go on a tax. And he (Schwarzenegger) has no truck with them to get them," Perata wrote. "I said we urgently need a budget - let's see if I can work on a deal with Reps that is no tax, no borrowing. (Schwarzenegger) agreed."

"We'll do our best to hold the line on borrowing," he writes later.

Once a plan is done, Perata wrote, "We'll then bring in the assembly leaders to show them what we're sending them. And then we go to the floor the moment we have mocked-up language ready."

Perata also names names of GOP lawmakers he and the governor were trying to pick off: "I spoke with Ashburn who wasn't willing to go up without a stable mate. Margett apparently refused the gov."

But the best parts are Perata's raw political assessments, such as:

"SEIU was OK with borrowing"

"The gov's recall gives him extra motivation to join us."

"Gray Davis wasn't dumped because he didn't have budget reform."

The complete e-mail:

Sent: Fri Sep 12 04:23:04 2008
Subject: Budget Saga

Here's what happened to today's floor session:

It became clear throughout Thursday that the gov had no Rep votes. I spoke with Ashburn who wasn't willing to go up without a stable mate. Margett apparently refused the gov.

Late afternoon, I told the gov I saw no point in going to the floor only to prove what we all know: Reps won't go on a tax. And he has no truck with them to get them.

I said we urgently need a budget - let's see if I can work on a deal with Reps that is no tax, no borrowing. He agreed.

So Denise, Mike and I will work today with Cogdill and Dutton. And tomorrow. And Sunday, or until whenever there is a deal.

We'll then bring in the assembly leaders to show them what we're sending them. And then we go to the floor the moment we have mocked-up language ready.

The gov still insists on a budget reform amendment as a condition of his signature. We'll see. As of yesterday morning, he was back to his most draconian version, which is not acceptable.

Darrell and I met with the ed coalition. They were unwilling to support taking up the gov's budget. Too much risk for not enough gain. The tax cut bothered them (a la fate of car tax) and they view the budget amendment as end of days. (They are not certain it could be beaten on the ballot).

On "what's next" they were divided. CTA didn't like borrowing because 98 doesn't benefit. SEIU was OK with borrowing. AFSCME and CMA more to armageddon option on the
theory their members are being "bled out".

(SEIU - as many of you know- has been calling selected members to ask them not to vote. But the entire "revenue coalition" were working the phones. Opposition to our strategy, but none of their own).

That brings us current.

We'll remain on call of the chair day-to-day. 12 hour notice. Realistically, nothing over the week-end.

We'll do our best to hold the line on borrowing. The gov's recall gives him extra motivation to join us. Gray Davis wasn't dumped because he didn't have budget reform.

As an aside, there was hope in the horseshoe to still get the lottery on the November ballot! Well, no, that's not possible.

So there you have it. Lemme know if you have questions.

Diane, Erin, pro tem and budget staff have worked themselves to exhaustion. We gotta get this done if only to prevent them from being institutionalized!

Today's also a busy day on the fund-raising front, with the state Republican Party hosting an high-priced golf event on the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe.

"For all the Republican hot air about jobs fleeing to Nevada you'd wonder why they wouldn't support a local California golf course," sniped Brian Brokaw of the California Democratic Party.

GOP leaders Mike Villines and Dave Cogdill backed out of the event late last week, citing the stalled budget.

Assemblywoman Fiona Ma, D-San Francisco, has a fundraiser in San Francisco with a mix of past legislative firepower (Willie Brown and John Burton) and future legislative hopefuls (Tom Ammiano, Joan Buchanan, Paul Fong, Jerry Hill, Bill Monning and Nancy Skinner) set to attend.

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass will headline, though spokesman Steve Maviglio said she's playing her attendance by ear, depending on the status of budget talks.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, meanwhile, is fund-raising for Proposition 11, the redistricting measure, with events in Los Angeles and the Bay Area. His attendance also depends on the budget.

Friday, September 12, 2008

74 Days w/o a Budget/The View from Elsewhere: CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS SQUEEZED IN FISCAL VISE - Fallback Plans Readied Amid Budget Stalemate

 

clip_image002

California Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata reacts Sept. 8 during debate over a Republican plan for the state’s budget, now more than two months late. Senate Democrats later defeated the GOP proposal. —Photograph by Rich Pedroncelli/AP

By Linda Jacobson - Education Week

Published Online: September 12, 2008 --The failure of California lawmakers to enact a budget more than two months after it was due has schools operating in what one official called a “very bizarre, unknown place” and contemplating drastic steps to cope with the fiscal crisis.

Without a state budget, districts will have to do without more than $3 billion for programs such as special education, remedial and gifted instructional programs, professional development, and school transportation.

In anticipation of a funding cutoff, some districts already are canceling bus routes, increasing class sizes, raising school lunch fees, and dipping into reserve accounts to operate schools.

Payments for certain targeted programs—including child-care centers—have been put on hold because of the stalemate between Democrats and Republicans in the legislature over how to make up a $15.2 billion deficit in the $101 billion state budget.

  • See other stories on education issues in California.
  • See data on California's public school system.

If a budget is not enacted soon, schools, hospitals, and other human-service agencies will have lost a total of more than $12 billion since the new fiscal year began on July 1, state Controller John Chiang has announced. Although the agencies may get some of that back once a new budget is passed, the amount would depend on what shape the final fiscal 2009 package takes.

The situation is likely to create cash-flow problems for some districts and force others to consider borrowing money to cover their expenses.

“People are planning for the worst and hoping for the best,” said Scott Plotkin, the executive director of the California School Boards Association. “On our advice and others’, they are spending very conservatively because we don’t know what the final numbers will be.”

The crisis has consumed the attention of state and local officials for months, and even generated a threat by the California Correctional Peace Officers Association last week to seek the recall of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Education officials, including state Superintendent Jack O’ Connell, initially supported a conference committee bill in July that restored much of the $3.9 billion in cuts to education that the governor proposed in May for fiscal 2009. But that bill stalled in both houses of the legislature, failing to receive the two-thirds vote in each house required by law.

The Republican governor, in August, then recommended a compromise plan that includes a temporary 1-cent increase in the state sales tax, bringing it to 8.25 cents on the dollar. His compromise proposal included an additional $2 billion in statewide spending cuts on top of the $10 billion recommended by the conference committee.

Gov. Schwarzenegger’s August plan also called for a permanent quarter-of-a-cent reduction in the sales tax after three years.

Senate Democrats then tried, but failed, to pass their own version of a budget plan that included the tax increase, but did not include the later rollback. As a result, Republicans in the Senate rejected it.

The Senate plan also included a large “rainy day” fund that could grow to as much as 12.5 percent of the state’s general fund and give greater authority to the governor to make midyear spending cuts if revenue decreases in the future.

Meanwhile, the Senate last week defeated a Republican budget proposal—opposed by the Republican governor—that relied more heavily on cuts and borrowing to close the deficit.

State affiliates of the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association also criticized the plan.

David A. Sanchez, the president of the California Teachers Association, a National Education Association affiliate, said in an Aug. 30 statement that the plan was “filled with smoke, mirrors, and risky borrowing schemes,” and “would be a disaster for students, public schools, and colleges.”

District-Level Impact

Gov. Schwarzenegger says he remains hopeful that his plan will get consideration.

“What I have proposed is truly a compromise budget, because it includes elements that both parties want but also requires that everyone come out of their partisan corners and give something up—myself included,” he said in a Sept. 8 statement.

Districts, meanwhile, have to pass their own budgets without knowing how much they will receive from the state for the fiscal year. The uncertainty has led to a number of pre-emptive budget decisions.

While most of the more than 14,000 California teachers who received pink slips in March were ultimately not laid off, Mr. Plotkin said it’s likely that many are working on “temporary contracts.”

While state law provides districts with another deadline by which they can cut positions before the beginning of the school year, that would have required the state budget to be adopted by Aug. 15.

In addition to public schools, state-financed preschool classrooms and other child-development programs operated by child-care centers are not receiving payments as long as the budget impasse continues.

“There are 792 child-care agencies across California, and these centers provide a range of services to about 500,000 children, but without a budget in place, we do not have the authority to pay these agencies for services rendered,” Mr. O’Connell said in a press conference in July.

He added that while such agencies are encourage to have reserves, “it is difficult for agencies to manage the fiscal burden of operating a program over an extended period of time with no income to cover costs.”

Credit Crunch

Many child-care and preschool providers are used to having to get short-term “bridge” loans when budgets are delayed, but restrictions from banks on borrowing have increased because of the recent credit crunch, said Sandra Giarde, the executive director of the California Association for the Education of Young Children.

Some agencies she knows of were able to secure funding for July and August but expected a state budget to be in place by September. The delay has her and other advocates worried.

“Many of these centers who were already on the financial brink of disaster are going to go over the side,” said Dennis Vicars, the president of the Sacramento-based Child Development Policy Institute, an advocacy organization. “We’re not going to get a lot of those schools back. Those centers are going to be closed.”

Mr. Plotkin, of the state school boards’ group, predicted that most districts won’t run out of money this school year, but that they will have “depleted their reserves.” If the economy doesn’t improve, “it’s next year that people are worrying about,” he said.

While the late budget has overshadowed most other policy matters this year, the state was able to take a step toward continuing to improve its student-data system, a move that researchers and other experts have repeatedly warned is necessary if the state is going to accurately target students’ instructional needs.

74 Days w/o a Budget: EDUCATION LEADERS: "Give us a budget (one we like)"

 

SacBee Capitol Alert - Posted by Shane Goldmacher

September 12, 2008  == Education leaders held a news conference yesterday to lament California's missing budget, saying the uncertainty of funding and the lack of certain checks being cut is hurting the state's students.

"Education is suffering," said Jack O'Connell, the state's superintendent of public instruction. "Our students are suffering."

The state budget is a record 73 days late. As a result, many bills are going unpaid, most notably for schools' categorical programs.

Speakers from various school unions said the uncertainty of funding had led to ballooning class sizes, as districts prepare for potential budget cuts, with more problems to come as more and more checks are withheld during the budget delay.

Worst of all, lawmakers seem nonplussed, said Bob Wells of the Association of California School Administrators.

"If you look at the fact that our doors are open and our students are showing up, teachers are showing up in the classrooms, you can get the impression that things are fine," said Wells. "This sense of relaxed attitude toward the budget that exists here in Sacramento somehow has to get shaken up."

The so-called Education Coalition has endorsed the Democratic budget plan floated by the leaders of the Assembly and Senate that would raise taxes on wealthy Californians. But that plan has found no traction in the Legislature.

The speakers invariably criticized the GOP budget plan that Democrats in both houses voted down this week.

"Republicans in the Legislature want to mortgage the future of our children," accused O'Connell, a Democrat.

 

Thursday, September 11, 2008

A State w/o a Budget: Day 73 (cont.)

Sac Bee Capitol Alert | Sept 11, 2008

Neither the Assembly or Senate has session scheduled for today, after Democratic lawmakers in both houses voted down GOP budget proposals earlier this week.

So how far are Democrats from wooing enough GOP votes for their own tax-raising plans?

Well, pretty far, especially if the offensive conservatives have mounted against the California Taxpayers' Association is any indication. The 82-year old group endorsed Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's compromise proposal, which is built around a three-year 1-cent sales tax hike, followed by a permanent 1.25-cent cut.

Thirty-one of the 32 Assembly Republicans co-signed a letter blasting the taxpayers' group for "a cynical political calculation" in backing the plan.

The only GOP non-signer? Assemblyman Greg Aghazarian of Stockton, who just so happens to be running for state Senate in a Democratic-leaning district.

There may be no budget yet, but the state's bureaucracy continues to lumber along.

73 Days w/o a Budget: THREE PLANS, NO AGREEMENT

By Dan Smith - smith@sacbee.com

September 11, 2008 - Lawmakers are debating three main plans to resolve the state's overdue budget - one proposed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in August, one advanced by Democrats from two-house conference committee deliberations, and one from legislative Republicans. So far, none of them has received enough support to reach the needed two-thirds vote for passage. Here's a look at how they differ in key areas.

 

See a larger version of this graphic

TAXES/REVENUES

SCHWARZENEGGER

• Raise sales tax by one cent on the dollar for three years (except on gasoline and diesel); cut sales tax by 1.25 cents on the dollar on Sept. 1, 2011. $4 billion in first year

• Suspend net operating loss deductions for tax years 2008 and 2009; make other changes for businesses to recoup the money in future years. $1.1 billion in first year

REPUBLICANS

• Suspend net operating loss deductions for tax years 2008 and 2009; make other changes for businesses to recoup the money in future years. $1.1 billion in first year

• Borrow from future lottery funds. $1.9 billion

DEMOCRATS

• Create higher tax brackets for high-income taxpayers. $5.6 billion

• Raise corporate income tax rate from 8.84 percent to 9.3 percent. $470 million

• Eliminate indexing of income tax brackets. $815 million

• Eliminate child dependent credit for high-income taxpayers. $215 million

• Suspend net operating loss deductions indefinitely. $1.1 billion in first year

SHIFTS/TRANSFERS

• All three plans propose to accrue income tax payments from the next fiscal year. $1.9 billion

SCHWARZENEGGER

• Shift transportation money from special fund to pay for transportation programs in general fund. $1.7 billion in savings

• Transfer from special state funds. $648 million

• Shift 5 percent of local redevelopment funds to schools and community colleges. $344 million

• Grant income tax amnesty. $360 million

REPUBLICANS

• Shift transportation money from special fund to pay for transportation programs in general fund. $1.7 billion

• Borrow from special state funds. $648 million

• Shift 5 percent of local redevelopment funds to schools and community colleges and redirect funds set aside for low-income housing. $694 million

• Grant income tax amnesty. $360 million

DEMOCRATS

• Shift transportation money from special fund to pay for transportation programs in general fund. $1.1 billion in savings

• Borrow from special state funds. $498 million

• Shift local redevelopment funds to schools and community colleges. $98 million

• Grant income tax amnesty. $1.5 billion

K-12 EDUCATION

SCHWARZENEGGER

• Provide $57.8 billion for schools. No cost-of-living increase is included.

REPUBLICANS

• Provide $57.9 billion for schools, but $1.9 billion is dependent on lottery borrowing plan and would not be built into base for calculating future education funding under Proposition 98. No cost-of-living increase is included.

DEMOCRATS

• Provide $58.9 billion for schools, which includes a 2.1 percent cost-of-living increase.

HEALTH/WELFARE

• All three plans suspend cost-of-living increases for low-income elderly, blind and disabled on SSI/SSP ($264 million in savings) and for welfare families ($162 million in savings).

SCHWARZENEGGER

• Cut Medi-Cal provider rates. $500 million in savings

• Deny federal cost-of-living increase for low-income elderly, blind and disabled on SSI. $172 million in savings

REPUBLICANS

• Cut Medi-Cal provider rates. $392 million in savings

• Cut Medi-Cal services for illegal immigrants and legal immigrants in the country less than five years. $87 million in savings

• Require undocumented immigrants to file monthly for Medi-Cal eligibility. $42 million in savings

• Cut welfare grants to 1989 levels; make other CalWORKS changes. $548 million in savings

• Cut pay for in-home supportive services workers to minimum wage, other reductions to program. $265 million in savings

• Eliminate program for elderly, blind and disabled legal immigrants no longer eligible for SSI. $111 million in savings

• Cut payments to counties for Child Welfare Services. $84 million in savings

DEMOCRATS

• Cut Medi-Cal provider rates. $302 million

PRISONS

• All three plans deny pay raises for correctional officers. $521 million in savings

SCHWARZENEGGER

• Make sentencing changes that increase monetary thresholds for property crimes and change petty theft with a prior conviction to a misdemeanor; other inmate credit and parole changes. $175 million in savings

• Reduce local assistance to various programs by about 10 percent. $54 million in savings

REPUBLICANS

• Make inmate credit changes. $35 million

• Reduce local assistance, including grants for Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction program. $94 million in savings

DEMOCRATS

• Eliminate parole for inmates who have completed sentences for "non-serious, non-violent offenses and have no prior serious or violent offenses or sex offenses." $110 million in savings

• Revamp prisoner credit program, resulting in shorter time served. $140 million in savings

• Make sentencing changes that increase monetary thresholds for property crimes and change petty theft with a prior conviction to a misdemeanor. $100 million in savings

• Make other parole changes. $95 million

• Reduce local assistance, including grants for Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction program. $157 million in savings

LONG-TERM BUDGET CHANGES

SCHWARZENEGGER

• Create rainy day fund, fed by borrowing against future lottery earnings, that is designed to save money in good economic years for use in bad years. Allow governor authority to make midyear budget cuts in bad years.

REPUBLICANS

• Allow governor authority to make midyear budget cuts in bad years.

• Set hard spending limits for general fund and special funds based on inflation and population growth.

DEMOCRATS

• Support rainy day fund.

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

72 Days w/o a Budget: HELLO, MY NAME IS _______________ -or- ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER FAILED BUDGET VOTE

Sac Bee Capitol Alert | September 10th

Assembly Democrats said no to the GOP budget proposal along party lines. Meanwhile, the state's revenues dipped below expectations in August.

After the vote, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger met separately with members of both the Assembly Democratic caucus and the Assembly Republican caucus.

Last week, Assembly GOP leader Mike Villines said, "Some of my guys want to meet him for the first time,"

He wasn't kidding.

Name tags were distributed for the GOP lawmakers before the governor's arrival.

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass said her caucus' meeting with Schwarzenegger was "honest and frank," but that he needs to wrangle some GOP votes.

"The question remains on how the governor is going to get votes from his fellow Republicans in the Assembly so their budget blockade comes to an end,"

He could start by learning their names

Tuesday, September 9, 2008

71 days w/o a budget: SENATE DEMOCRATS REJECT GOP PROPOSAL FOR ENDING CALIFORNIA BUDGET IMPASSE - Republican plan would have avoided a sales tax increase through $3.4 billion worth of spending cuts.

By Jordan Rau, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

September 9, 2008  -- SACRAMENTO -- Senate Democrats rejected the Republicans' proposal for ending California's budget deadlock Monday, saying the state would not tolerate $3.4-billion worth of spending cuts they proposed.

The GOP plan failed along party lines, 13 to 21, nine days after the GOP had blocked a Democratic alternative because it increased sales taxes to close a $15.2-billion budget gap.

Though Sen. Bob Dutton (R-Rancho Cucamonga) said he hoped the GOP budget would "act as a starting point" for a reconciliation, more than an hour of debate produced no political movement.

"The Democrats have compromised as far as we can," said Sen. Dean Florez (D-Shafter). "This is a budget quite frankly worthy of dismissal."

The Republican plan would have avoided sales tax increases, originally proposed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, through cuts in welfare grants, child-care programs, college financial aid, the salaries of in-home care workers who tend to the elderly and disabled, and dozens of small programs. The plan also would have accelerated borrowing against the lottery beyond what Schwarzenegger and Democrats have proposed to infuse the state treasury with nearly $2 billion in cash for the fiscal year that began July 1.

"As a caucus, we believe tax increases are the absolutely wrong way to go," said Senate GOP leader Dave Cogdill (R-Modesto).

Behind-the-scenes negotiations are not going any better. A private meeting between Schwarzenegger and Senate Republicans on Thursday did not lead to any breakthroughs, and there are similar expectations for his scheduled meeting today with Assembly Republicans.

Schwarzenegger said: "Now that the Senate has voted down both the budget proposal put up by Democrats and the proposal put up by Republicans, I'm asking that senators take up my compromise budget, which is a fair, responsible, middle-of-the-road proposal, and pass it."

Democratic Assembly leaders are considering bringing it up for a vote in their chamber as early as today to demonstrate that it has insufficient support in both parties.

Under California's rule that fiscal measures need a two-thirds vote of each chamber, the Legislature needs at least eight Republicans -- two in the Senate and six in the Assembly -- to pass a budget. Near the end of Monday's debate, Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland) loudly berated the Republicans, saying that a few have privately outlined to Schwarzenegger the terms under which they would defect from their caucus, but that those demands keep changing.

"Why don't you stand up and tell me what you need!" Perata yelled. "I'm done guessing."

But Cogdill said, "If there's a Republican willing to raise taxes, they haven't talked to me."

71 days w/o a budget: THE MADNESS CONTINUES

SAC BEE CAPITOL ALERT - Sept 9

"This madness has gone on far too long," Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said in his Saturday radio address of the budget impasse.

But the spending plan-free fiscal year will continue today.

On Monday, Senate Democrats voted down the Senate Republicans' budget plan, along party lines.

Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata made the most disheartening comment of the whole debate, saying lawmakers are "no closer today than we were three months ago."

What was notable were the voting abstentions of GOP Sens. Abel Maldonado and Roy Ashburn, whom the governor and the Democratic leadership are eyeing as potential supporters of some type of compromise plan.

Schwarzenegger seems to think his August proposal could close the deal and pushed the Senate put it up for a vote.

"It is also the only budget proposal remaining that has not been voted on," the GOP governor said in a statement. "For the sake of all Californians, the Senate should take up and pass my compromise budget proposal now."

Schwarzenegger will make his case for his August compromise budget to Assembly Republicans behind closed doors today, after asking Assembly GOP leader Mike Villines to help set up a meeting with the 32-member GOP caucus last week.

The Assembly, meanwhile, amended the governor's plan into a bill on Monday, making it eligible to be taken up as early as today.

71 days w/o a budget: A Message from Senator Tom Torlakson (D-7) Antioch/Concord

Senator Tom Torlakson
9 September 2008

Dear Friend:

With the state budget stalemate now over two months old, I wanted to take a few moments to update you on my thoughts about this dreadful situation.

I am extremely disappointed in the State Legislature's inability to pass a budget that includes a balanced solution to the $15.5 billion projected deficit.

THE CONSEQUENCES OF LATE BUDGETS

I know the failure to pass a state budget has a real and deep impacts on our community. The ramifications are all too real for people and organizations providing necessary services. My staff and I have talked to school leaders, small business owners supplying health care and food to state institutions, providers of homes for people with developmental disabilities, child care providers, students who will soon not receive their CalGrants, senior day care center operators, and others who are facing the consequences of the budget gridlock every day.

State Controller John Chiang reports that he has been unable to make $4.25 billion in payments so far because no new state budget is in place. There are $7.6 billion in payments that will go unpaid if the budget stalemate were to tragically continue through the end of September.

It may cost up to a half billion dollars to borrow money to pay the state's bills in the absence of a budget. That is money that instead should go fund services Californians require. We need to act!

MAKING CONCESSIONS, SEEKING COMPROMISE

My colleagues in the Democratic caucus have offered numerous concessions over the past few months, without success. A half year's work on the budget produced a balanced budget agreeable to the majority of both houses of our legislature. But this carefully crafted budget was unable to gain the required two-thirds support in the legislature.

Since June, Democrats have reluctantly agreed to billions in additional cuts to our schools, child care, children's health, medical providers, and other programs. Our budget to close corporate loopholes and to reinstate higher tax brackets on the wealthiest Californians was rejected by the Republicans, so we have accepted the Governor's temporary sales tax increase. We have, so far, rejected plans to borrow from Proposition 1A (2004) local government or Proposition 1A (2006) transportation funds.

SENATE REPUBLICANS OFFER BUDGET PROPOSAL TODAY

We were finally able to debate a detailed budget plan from my Republican colleagues on the Senate floor today. Unfortunately, it was a budget that would starve our schools at a time when they need more resources to meet rigorous federal and state accountability standards.

The Republican budget literally gambles with our school funding. It uses a risky and legally dubious securitization scheme to "fill the gap" between funding schools at the minimum level and achieving the $1.9 billion higher spending amount Democrats put forward in the spirit of compromise. The Governor's Department of Finance believes this lottery proposal is not legally viable because such securitization requires a vote of the people.

So the Republicans want to rely on gambling and "rolling the dice" to fund our schools. It is highly probable that when their lottery scheme does not work, schools would receive $600 million less this year than they did last year. Schools have already made series of cuts--and then cut more again.

I adamantly urged a NO vote on this irresponsible, destructive budget--which would compound harm by an on-going reduction of $2 billion per year in the Proposition 98 schools guaranteed funding. It is a gamble we must not accept!

This scheme is on top of spending reductions many school districts have put in place already--a situation which has led to increased class sizes, dismantling of career technical education courses, elimination of arts and music, reductions in technology, and other decisions that will harm our students and our state over the long-term.

STARVING OUR SCHOOLS

As I told my Senate colleagues today, given our students' needs, we should be debating increasing public education spending by billions of dollars--not starving our schools even further. Last year's Getting Down to Facts adequacy study estimates that California should spend at least $15 billion to $24 billion a year more to ensure every student can meet "academically rigorous content standards and performance standards in all major subject areas."

Should we really talk about further starving our schools of needed resources when we rank 45th in eighth grade math achievement and 43rd in eighth grade science achievement? When we rank 46th in per pupil spending when adjusted for regional cost-of-living differences?

We must not pass a budget that dishonors and ignores our students' positive aspirations and dreams. That rejects the promises of our state's education master plan. That leaves our students ill-prepared to compete in the 21st century global economy.

There is no doubt that spending cuts are required this year and we must always strive to spend every dollar efficiently. But, as I have previously argued, we must make certain that any resolution to this current budget deadlock does not leave California incapable of providing a public education system offering a rigorous and relevant curriculum, the infrastructure needed to support continued economic vitality, services for the most vulnerable members of our society, or a health care system able to care for and protect our residents.

STATE BUDGET PROCESS REQUIRES REFORM

The budget failures of the past two years highlight the need to reform our broken state budget process. As someone who has authored several budget process reform bills during my time in Sacramento, I believe we must change the way we craft a state budget. I authored SCA 22 earlier this year because I believe we must bring democracy back to the budget process by eliminating the two-thirds vote rule. I also have also been a long-time proponent of creating real consequences for state legislators when a budget is late.

To this end, I am not going to accept any per diem payments for Senate sessions dedicated to debating the state budget after the August 31 scheduled adjournment date. I do not think I should benefit from the legislature's and Governor's failure to pass a budget. For similar reasons, I did not to accept the pay increase offered to members of the state legislature after the current budget deficit crisis became clear.

I appreciate and value your feedback. I appreciate your support for my strong stand against further reductions to our schools and health care programs--cuts that would harm our kids, senior citizens, and most vulnerable residents.

Sincerely,

Tom Torlakson

Paid for by Senator Tom Torlakson Officeholder Account, ID #1297989

P.O. Box 21636, Concord, CA 94521. Phone: 925-682-9998
www.sen.ca.gov/torlakson
Tom on Facebook: www.facebook.com/people/Tom_Torlakson/711624013
 
Senator Torlackson is a former teacher and declared candidate for Superintendent of Public Instruction.

Monday, September 8, 2008

70 days w/o a budget: ALLOW A MAJORITY BUDGET VOTE - The delay in passing a state fiscal plan is not the fault of Republicans or Democrats but of the state's supermajority rule.

At the very least, California should return to a pre-1962 law that allowed budgets to be passed on a majority vote if spending didn't increase above 5%.

George Skelton

George Skelton, LA Tines Columnist | Capitol Journal

September 8, 2008  -- SACRAMENTO -- Don't blame Democrats for the record-long budget stalemate that is forcing the state to stiff private suppliers, community colleges and healthcare centers for the poor.

They've tried to compromise, agreeing to cut programs for schools, welfare families and the impoverished aged, blind and disabled. They're even willing to accept some of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's budget "reforms."

Related Content

Don't blame Republicans either. They're being asked by the governor to break their pledges -- however misguided they were -- not to raise taxes. Moreover, most are philosophically opposed to taxing people more -- particularly during a recession -- and are sticking to their principles. That's supposed to be an admirable trait.

And Schwarzenegger? The Republican governor has little clout with GOP lawmakers and seems incapable of eliciting any of their votes. But give him credit: He did recently offer a revised budget proposal -- including a one-cent sales tax increase and deeper program cuts -- that could provide the framework for probably the best, most honest deal anyone's going to get.

No, don't blame the politicians, at least not entirely. The chief culprit is that archaic demon: the required two-thirds majority vote for passage of a budget.

It's a good bet that 51% of the Legislature would have voted for a budget by now -- maybe even had one in place for the July 1 start of the new fiscal year. But 67% is required.

Only two other states have such a monstrous hurdle. And both are better positioned to deal with it because, unlike California, their legislatures are lopsidedly dominated by one party.

California's Senate is 63% Democrat; its Assembly 60%.

But in Arkansas, the Senate is 77% Democrat and the house 75%. That state actually requires a three-fourths majority vote on appropriations except for education, highways and paying down debt. That leaves a sizable chunk of the budget that can be passed on a simple majority vote.

Rhode Island's Senate is 84% Democrat; its house 81%. A two-thirds majority is needed, but with that kind of party control, the budget should fly through the Legislature.

Illinois has an intriguing law aimed at ensuring on-time budgets. Until June 1, a budget can be passed by a simple majority. After that, it takes three-fifths.

State Sen. Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks), a hero of fiscal conservatives, long has favored allowing a majority budget vote.

"The two-thirds vote for the budget has not contained spending, and it blurs accountability," McClintock says. "If anything, in past years, it has prompted additional spending as votes for the budget are cobbled together."

Cobbled together by trading votes for pet programs and pork projects.

"It dilutes the responsibility of the majority party for the budget," McClintock continues. With a simple majority vote, he believes, the ruling party "would be much more careful about what it put in the budget."

Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines of Fresno County is moving toward McClintock's position, but isn't quite there yet. "There's a discussion to be had," he concedes.

"As a conservative Republican, it's frustrating to work out a budget that's always bad. You're just trying to make it a little bit better, but it's still never one you like."

Villines adds: "I can understand the argument to let the majority party own the budget. If people realized how out of touch the liberal majority party was, they'd be shocked. Voters would say, 'Why are we electing these liberal Democrats to run California?' "

Whatever. At least the budget might get passed on time.

Both incoming Senate leader Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) say they'll consider developing a 2010 ballot initiative to permit majority-vote budgets.

"I'm telling you, I'm very serious about it," Steinberg says. "We can't keep doing this. This is ridiculous. It's unproductive."

Bass figures there would be plenty of financial support for a ballot campaign from labor unions, healthcare providers and others who rely on public funds and are frustrated by incessantly tardy budgets.

"This budget crisis we're in is a perfect example of why we need to be like 47 other states," Bass says. "I'm not sure what we have in common with Arkansas and Rhode Island. . . .

"We would have had a budget by the constitutional deadline, June 15."

Maybe not this year. Without a tax increase, it's virtually impossible to permanently plug the current $15-billion deficit hole. And a tax hike also requires a two-thirds majority vote, a handcuff applied 30 years ago by Proposition 13.

Selling Californians -- let alone Republican politicians -- on a simple majority vote for tax increases would be a tough sell. McClintock and Villines would oppose that.

Steinberg and Bass will order up a lot of polling and focus groups before they decide whether to attempt that move. "When you try to do all or nothing, too often you wind up with nothing," Steinberg notes.

Most states, 34, allow taxes to be raised on a majority vote of the legislature. The other 16 require some supermajority.

At the very least, California should return to a pre-1962 law that allowed budgets to be passed on a majority vote if spending didn't increase above 5%. That provision apparently had never been used because budget growth always exceeded 5%. So the clause was clumsily deleted in a constitutional streamlining.

That idea is endorsed by Joel Fox, former president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., the Prop. 13 sponsor. "The 5% cap would serve as a spending limit," he notes.

But I'd go all the way and require only a majority vote for both budget and taxes. Get things moving in Sacramento. The governor can always use his veto.

Let the legislative majority rule and be held accountable. We'll know whom to blame -- maybe even credit.

Friday, September 5, 2008

67 Days without a Budget: TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION BACKS SCHWARZENEGGER BUDGET

By Dan Smith and Jim Sanders - Sacramento Bee

Published 6:18 pm PDT Friday, September 5, 2008

Breaking its long practice of opposing tax increases, the California Taxpayers' Association on Friday agreed to support Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's state budget proposal, including a sales tax boost.

The 82-year-old association is a non-profit representing all taxpayers, but some of California's largest corporations dominate its sizeable board of directors, which voted 28-19 to back the proposal Friday.

Schwarzenegger's latest spending proposal would close the state's $15.2 billion budget gap, in part, by imposing a three-year, one-cent-on-the-dollar sales tax increase on most taxable products, except gasoline and diesel fuel.

The boost would raise $4 billion this year and $9.9 billion more over the next two years, but be replaced by a 1.25-cent decrease on Sept. 1, 2011.

That decrease, along with long-term budget changes Schwarzenegger is proposing, played into the group's decision.

"As an association representing taxpayers, we have not arrived at our position lightly," said CTA President Teresa Casazza, in a statement. "Given the current circumstances, however, we can support a temporary sales tax increase as long as it is accompanied by meaningful budget reform, an economic stimulus plan and a future reduction in the sales tax rate that will make the change a net tax reduction over time."

The state is 67 days into the fiscal year without a budget, the longest the state has ever gone.


Thursday, September 4, 2008

STAND UP FOR CHILDREN: No More Cuts!

 You don't have to be a PTA member to be mad as hell and unwilling to take it anymore ...this is a little song we can all join in with!image

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

A State without a Budget - Day 65 begins: AM ALERT: CONTINUOUS BLOVIATIONS

Sacramento Bee: Capitol Alert | Shane Goldmacher - Capitol Alert Coordinator

Sept 3/6:02 AM -- Assembly Speaker Karen Bass cancelled plans for an Assembly floor session today. Instead, the Assembly Budget Committee will hold a hearing on the Republican budget proposal.

The wonkish fun begins at 1:30 p.m., with the Legislative Analyst's Office and the Department of Finance invited to testify. Before that, though, Bass and other Democrats will hold a press conference to discuss (and presumably criticize) the GOP spending plan.

State senators will again convene at 4 p.m. to talk about the budget, though there's no voting expected. The Big Five -- the four legislative leaders and the governor -- is tentatively scheduled to meet at 2 p.m. today.

One topic that's likely to come up is whether the state should pass some type of "continuous appropriation" law to make good on its unpaid bills. Republican lawmakers have been pushing for that stopgap approach, as the budget deadlock stretches into its third month. Senate leader Don Perata has blocked such legislation, but punted the decision to the governor on Tuesday, writing in a letter to Schwarzenegger that "only you have the constitutional authority to ask for legislation to appropriate funds" for unpaid bills. Schwarzenegger fired back a letter saying, "Legislators should not be devising band-aid solutions like continuing appropriations. What legislators should be focused on is passing a budget." With the state short of cash, Schwarzenegger said any such appropriations would require a costly loan that could "dig our budget hole" deeper by hundreds of millions of dollars.

Finally, if you thought legislative fundraising ended in August...well, you'd be wrong. Today Assemblyman Joe Coto, D-San Jose, has a golf outing for donors at Teal Bend. Assemblyman Roger Niello, R-Fair Oaks, woos contributors at the Sutter Club. While Assemblyman Bill Emmerson, R-Redlands, and Assemblyman Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, are both collecting checks at the Esquire Grill during the lunch hour.

A State Without a Budget - Day 65 and counting: STARS OF SHAME FOR SEVEN LEADERS

LOOKING FOR SOMEBODY TO BLAME FOR THE STATE'S BUDGET DEBACLE? THESE NAMES SHOULD TOP THE LIST

 

SACRAMENTO BEE EDITORIAL

Wednesday, September 3, 2008 -- Once again, the state of California is a national disgrace.

Its budget is now 65 days late. Its legislative session ended Sunday in embarrassing fashion. Health clinics are running out of money because of the impasse. Schools are starting without spending plans in place.

And it likely will get worse. With divisions running so deep among Democrats, Republicans, the governor's office, the Senate and the Assembly, lawmakers are becoming desperate. Surely they are tempted to slam through a budget that raids funds and uses gimmicks to delay the tough choices until next year. Such an outcome would be a disaster. It would extend the budget crisis until at least 2010, hurt the state's debt rating and make it less likely that California will come to terms with challenges ranging from health care to water.

Who's responsible for this mess? Start with the seven leaders at right who helped create it. The star ratings under their photographs (rendered, appropriately enough, in red ink) indicate the wretchedness of their performance on budget issues. The more stars, the worse.

Assembly Republican leader Mike Villines. He opposes tax proposals by Democrats and the governor, yet hasn't laid out what combination of cuts, including cuts to education, he'd support to eliminate a $15.2 billion budget deficit. Why not? Is he afraid of how teachers in his district would react to such cuts?

• Senate Republican leader Dave Cogdill. His caucus has put together a budget proposal, but as of mid-Tuesday, it still wasn't ready for floor debate in the Senate. Like Villines, he seems comfortable with massive borrowing to duck this budget jam. So much for fiscal responsibility.

Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata. Perata has so far held the line against borrowing, but why did he wait until now to do the drill of daily Senate sessions? And why does he continue to take money from groups – such as the California Correctional Peace Officers Association – that have a direct interest in the budget he is negotiating?

• Darrell Steinberg, Perata's successor. Steinberg has stayed on the sidelines and says he is comfortable with how Perata is handling the budget negotiations. Is that really what he thinks? Does he call that leadership?

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass. She's a nice person. But is she too nice? Why has she abdicated the pace of the budget deliberations to Perata? Will she hold firm on a pledge not to raid local funds?

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Does this guy have a strategy? He pulls gimmicks like threatening to cut the pay of state workers. Then he pledges to veto all bills sent to his desk until a budget is passed. The latter ploy may only prompt Republicans to become more intransigent, since most bills passed this year came from Democrats.

• Pete Wilson. The former governor helped bridge a budget deficit in 1991 by approving a $7 billion tax increase, far more than what Schwarzenegger has proposed this year. Yet Wilson seems more interested in salvaging his ties with the GOP's far right than in helping a successor. On Monday, Wilson criticized Schwarzenegger's tax proposal, undercutting what little leverage the governor has left.

The members of this star-studded lineup deserve to hear from you. If they don't, you can't blame them for appearing indifferent to your concerns.

E-MAIL YOUR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS

Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines

Senate Republican Dave Cogdill

Senate Pres Pro Tem Don Perata

Senate leader in waiting Darrell Steinberg

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger

Former Gov. Pete Wilson: No e-mail address

Tuesday, September 2, 2008

A State Without a Budget: Looking forward to Day 65 - ASSEMBLY SCRATCHES WEDNESDAY SESSION

Sac Bee Capitol Alert by Shane Goldmacher |  Published 1:52 PM Tuesday, September 2, 2008

September 2, 2008 -- With no deal in sight, Assembly Speaker Karen Bass has cancelled plans for an Assembly floor session on Wednesday, instead opting to hold a hearing on the Republican budget proposal.


The budget committee hearing is scheduled for 1:30 p.m., her office reports, with the Legislative Analyst's Office and the Department of Finance invited to attend.

A State With a Budget: Day 64 - [EVERY DAY] A NEW RECORD

The Sacramento Bee CapitolAlert

September 2 -- State lawmakers worked through the weekend, passing legislation ahead of the August 31 bill deadline. Both houses adjourned on Sunday afternoon.

But of the hundreds of bills they've passed, none include the 2008-09 budget, which is now in record-setting territory.

"That's the history that will be written about this year," declared Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, who has called for Senate floor session every day at 4 p.m. until lawmakers strike a budget deal.

Legislative Republicans, who have blocked passage of Democratic-backed budgets in both houses, outlined a spending plan of their own over the weekend. Perata promised them their day in the sun, or at least a floor debate.

"I do not want to rain on their parade," Perata said of the GOP plan, which does not include new taxes but deeper cuts and more borrowing. "I wish they'd have started marching a little earlier in the season."

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said the plan was "not fiscally responsible." The budget, he said, should "not kick the can down the alley for others to deal with in the future."

On Monday, Schwarzenegger missed attending the scaled-down Republican National Convention in St. Paul due to the budget debacle.

In his stead, he sent former Republican Gov. Pete Wilson.

Who proceeded to criticize Schwarzenegger's temporary 1-cent sales tax proposal to balance the state's books.

"If you're going to do any tax, that's the right one, but I just disagree," Wilson said. "Number one, we're already a high-tax state. I mean, that's the problem."

With daily sessions, four GOP senators could miss out on the St. Paul festivities. And in the Assembly, a spokesman for Speaker Karen Bass said she'll be requring lawmakers stay within three hours of the Capitol, which could interfere with convention plans for seven Assembly Reeps.

Capitol Alert has a list of all the GOP lawmaker delegates.

Monday, September 1, 2008

A State Without a Budget: Day 63 - HISTORIC DELIVERANCE + FAILURE + UNCHARTED TERRITORY

Deliverance

smf sermonizes: Never before has California ended a legislative session, gone more than 62 days or seen the month of September without a budget. This is not good - but rushing ahead and getting a budget for the sake of getting a budget no matter what could and/or would be worse.   "The more is on the line, the easier it is to get swept into an irrational decision." Economist Ori Brafman and his psychologist brother Rom explain in their treatise Sway: The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior. Before there were self-help business books there was the itinerant rabbi from Galilee : "Lead us not into temptation".  Let us not be so led.

Historic failure on state budget

LEGISLATIVE SESSION ENDS; NO PLAN IN SIGHT

By Edwin Garcia | Mercury News Sacramento Bureau

Article Launched: 09/01/2008 01:31:38 AM PDT

SACRAMENTO - The California Legislature's ambitious effort to improve the quality of education, transform the way political districts are drawn and upgrade the state's vulnerable water supply system came to an unsuccessful and anti-climactic end Sunday afternoon when lawmakers reached the end of their two-year session unable to even pass a budget.

When the final gavel came down, the 120 members of the Senate and Assembly became the first lawmakers in at least three decades - and possibly longer - to close the traditional Aug. 31 legislative deadline without a budget in place.

"What strikes me as interesting is that this is going to go down as one of the least productive sessions in California history," said Tony Quinn, a longtime political analyst and onetime head of the Assembly Republican Caucus.

"It's pretty negative history, I'll tell you that," said Michael Zarcone, president and chief executive of Subacute Saratoga Children's Hospital, where 36 children breathe on ventilators and which hasn't received Medi-Cal reimbursement for weeks because of the state's finances. Zarcone is now searching for a loan to make his next employee payroll Wednesday.

The various budget proposals - which bounce from the hands of Democrats eager to raise taxes to Republicans who forcefully oppose them, then to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who tries to please both sides - are nowhere near being adopted.

A series of complex issues make state budgets difficult to pass for several reasons, including the two-thirds majority voting requirement.

The standoff has had a minimal effect on politicians, who face no penalties for the 63-day record budget delay, and the public, which largely continues to enjoy uninterrupted programs and services.

"Californians will start to pay attention to all of this when it begins to hurt them," said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, a senior scholar at the School of Policy, Planning and Development at the University of Southern California.

That point may come later this month.

State Controller John Chiang warned Friday that he will be unable to write checks worth billions of dollars by the end of September.

College students who rely on state aid for books, tuition and room and board will be shut out of more than $120 million. Community colleges will be owed $1.4 billion. Hospitals, nursing homes, rural health-care clinics and regional developmental services centers will be out more than $4.7 billion in Medi-Cal payments.

The end of the legislative session, Aug. 31, is the last day to get bills to the governor, including, until now, the budget. Beginning Sept. 1, many lawmakers hang their policy hats in Sacramento and don their political hats in their home districts, where they campaign for re-election or walk precincts for their party's colleagues before the November elections.

But over the weekend, Assembly and Senate leaders announced they were essentially extending the session for the purpose of working on the budget.

The Assembly will meet at noon Wednesday and the Senate will gather daily, which means most if not all Republican senators will miss out on the GOP convention in Minnesota.

Schwarzenegger, who would have been one of the convention's most celebrated speakers, confirmed in a statement Sunday he will skip the event entirely because a budget is not in place.

Normally during September, he's busy deciding which of a few thousand bills to sign or veto. But in an attempt to pressure legislative leaders into agreeing on the budget, the governor has pledged to reject all measures as long as the state is without a spending plan for the fiscal year that began July 1.

Assemblyman Jim Beall, D-San Jose, who landed in Sacramento nearly two years ago and has about 20 bills waiting their fate before the governor, said he never experienced this kind of budget delay as a San Jose city councilman or Santa Clara County supervisor.

"It's very frustrating," he said, "to see this happen."


California enters uncharted territory with no budget

Some say the stalemate could last into next year, leaving the incoming Legislature to solve the problem. That will leave those dependent on state funds without the money to operate.

By Evan Halper | Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

September 1, 2008 — SACRAMENTO — As the Legislature lurched to its close Sunday with no budget in place, California toppled its own record for fiscal dysfunction.

Never in recent memory has August ended without a spending plan, so the state is now thrust into uncharted territory.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's administration has been busily preparing a blueprint for keeping the state afloat through the fall.

The governor told Fresno Bee editors last week that he would wait until winter to sign spending bills into law, if necessary, to get what he considers a decent budget.

That means one with a mechanism to limit future spending, with temporary taxes to help wipe out the state's $15.2 billion in red ink and without the multibillion-dollar borrowing from local government and transportation accounts that some lawmakers appear to favor.

Others in the Capitol say the stalemate may indeed last into next year, leaving the incoming class of legislators, many of whom will be rookies elected in November, to solve the problem.

Meanwhile, hospitals, community colleges, day-care centers and other facilities dependent on state funds go without the money they need to operate.

"There is no victory for anybody when we . . . come into Monday and have no budget," said Mike Villines of Clovis, leader of the Assembly's Republicans. "I don't think Californians are sympathetic."

With the deadline for legislative business passed, lawmakers can no longer work on regular lawmaking. But they will still be tethered to Sacramento as they wait for their leaders to strike a budget deal.

The past record for state budget delay was set in 2002, when Gray Davis was governor and the Legislature did not pass a spending plan until Aug. 31 -- the final day of its session.

At the core of that impasse was a dispute over taxes. The same is true now, 63 days into the current fiscal year.

The governor's office held a meeting last week with two former state finance directors and former Senate Republican Leader Jim Brulte, seeking advice on how to make it to November or beyond without a budget.

The group, according to some participants, discussed the state's options for getting cash once it runs out in a month or so; whether the governor has the authority to release emergency funds to health clinics and other programs; and how California will be able to repay arrears on state services once a spending plan is finally in place.

In the case of some large education and health expenditures, the state cannot make cuts retroactively. So some reductions that lawmakers hope to make to save money would apply only to the portion of the year when a budget is in place.

Administration officials say the costs of delaying such reductions, together with the costs of securing short-term loans to keep the state solvent, could add as much as $1 billion to the budget shortfall if the impasse drags through the fall.

Meanwhile, the arguments continue.

Republicans unveiled a plan Saturday that would rely on borrowing against the lottery and on deep program cuts. A vote on their proposal is expected soon, though it has no support from Democrats.

"There is no doubt in my mind that the silent majority does not want taxes," Villines said.

Democrats and the governor say closing the budget gap without new levies would cripple state services. Republicans blocked the latest proposal that included them -- along with the spending restraints promoted by the governor -- in the state Senate on Friday.

"We compromised more than we thought prudent," said Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland). "We are done."

According to people involved in confidential budget talks, Democrats in the Assembly have been looking for ways to raise taxes without Republican votes. California requires a two-thirds majority to pass a budget or raise levies; in the existing Legislature, that means two GOP votes in the Senate and six in the Assembly.

Assembly staffers have been scurrying to find loopholes that might permit a tax hike on a simple majority vote, said those involved in the negotiations. One proposal would have the effect of increasing sales taxes by eliminating a tax cut put in place several years ago.

Legislative lawyers have suggested the plan could be approved without Republican votes. But it would almost certainly wind up in court. Anti-tax activists hold the two-thirds vote requirement sacred.

As the standoff continued, some Californians had already begun paying the price.

Earlier in the summer, checks stopped going to thousands of healthcare clinics, nursing homes, child care facilities and other providers of government services.

The longer the delay, the more dire their situation.

By the end of September, according to state Controller John Chiang, $12 billion in payments will not have been made.

"We had to suspend our payroll for the last week of August to all our staff and providers," said Amparo Ortiz, administrator of Casa Healthcare, which provides care for developmentally disabled children.

The state already has missed $250,000 in payments to her, and she is borrowing from friends and relatives. Her staffers earn the state minimum wage of $8 an hour and do not have savings to fall back on.

"What are we to do? Where do we turn?" Ortiz asked. "If we take out loans, the interest rates will kill us, not to mention all the late charges we are going to receive for our mortgages we don't pay on time."

Times staff writers Patrick McGreevy and Michael Rothfeld contributed to this report.

FROM SEA TO SHINING SEA: Bellwether states are falling off the fiscal cliff

"Everyone knows that when the nation is going to hell in a hand cart, California usually gets there first. "

COMMENTARY by THOMAS G. DONLAN  | Editorial Page Editor of BARRON'S


MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 2008  -- ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER FLOATED TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE in California on the foam of a fiscal crisis in 2003.  The "governator" replaced old what's-his-name, Gray Davis, because Davis couldn't handle the state economy. The people voted the gray ghost out of office and selected the Teutonic Republican movie actor to fix their problems.

This year, Schwarzenegger is in the middle of a fiscal crisis of his own, proving that he has no super powers. He isn't really much of a Republican, either. His firmest proposal so far is a one-cent increase in the state sales tax, already one of the highest in the country.

Everyone knows that when the nation is going to hell in a hand cart, California usually gets there first. But for those who have failed to notice the looming crisis shaping up -- not just in California but in a number of states -- we provide a summary.

On July 1, California entered fiscal 2009 without having enacted a state budget. Nothing new in that: Budgets have been late in 16 of the past 20 fiscal years. The cause was also not unusual: There was a budget gap, generated partly by the slump in housing, partly by the absence of enormous stock-market profits and partly by the ongoing boom in state spending. Nothing new in that, either.

Meanwhile, the productive, private part of California's economy has been cyclical for decades, while the unproductive government part keeps growing, and spending money it doesn't have. The size of the gap is not a record, but $15.2 billion is nothing for Sacramento to sneeze at.

Holding Firm

The state constitution requires a two-thirds majority in each legislative house to pass a tax increase. Democrats don't quite command this level of power and, so far, Republican lawmakers have hung together and refused to raise any taxes.

Schwarzenegger hasn't even been with the Republicans in spirit. He has been more interested in a package of long-term "reforms," such as giving the governor power to make budget cuts by decree if deficits loom in the middle of a fiscal year. In addition to the sales-tax hike, his other idea for fixing the immediate crisis was to borrow $15 billion against the putative future profits of the state lottery.

To bring his unruly lawmakers to heel, Schwarzenegger refused to sign any legislation until they passed the budget. Down went several of their favorite programs, along with a couple of his, without changing the obdurate Republican bloc of tax opponents. Last week, he permitted a borrow-and-spend transportation package to go to referendum this fall.

Schwarzenegger also tried to bring the state employees' unions over to support his propositions -- by making their lives miserable. He ordered that most state workers' pay be cut to the minimum wage. (The state can continue nearly all spending on salaries and services without benefit of an enacted budget.) This was his substitute for the tactic employed by Presidents Reagan and Clinton in the 1980s and 1990s. They shut the federal government, and quickly prevailed in confrontations with Congress.

Californians, however, are made of sterner stuff. John Chiang, the state controller, who is also elected statewide, has simply refused to follow orders. First, he said the computer systems that manage state payrolls are too old and too hard to reprogram. He reported:

"In 2003, my office tried to see if we could reconfigure our system to do such a task, and after 12 months, we stopped without a feasible solution and with the knowledge that recovery for such a sweeping adjustment to minimum wage would take at least six months before all employees would see the right amounts in their hard-earned paychecks."

At first, he had said that the state's computers were programmed in Cobol, and no one was left who knew how to reprogram them. He was quickly advised that there are thousands of Cobol programmers employed in California's private sector. After that confession of bureaucratic incompetence, the controller returned to pure defiance, adding a dash of spurious econometrics:

"Aside from the expense of costly and lengthy litigation over my authority to pay state workers their full wages, [the governor's] move would harm thousands of families who already are struggling with mortgages and higher gas, food and energy costs. The loss of their spending dollars will increase the loss in consumer confidence, and further deteriorate California's fragile economy."

The Republican legislators, meanwhile, haven't proposed any spending cuts to take the place of the tax increases they so abhor. Their plan is to have no plan, which means following the examples set in previous state fiscal crises, and borrow, borrow, borrow.

Rotten Apple

That's the news from the left coast. Across the country in New York, things are not much better. The golden goose of Wall Street has stopped laying eggs that the city and state can tax. In particular, Wall Street bonuses and investment profits are so heavily taxed that the revenues make up 20% of the whole state-tax take. Wall Street bonuses, however, are somewhat dependent on Wall Street profits, and Wall Street has been busy making losses on mortgages.

Faced with a $6 billion shortfall in the current $121 billion budget, state legislators have been casting about for other things to tax, such as incomes over $1 million and cigarettes sold on Indian reservations. Spending cuts aren't an issue because every legislative seat is at stake in this fall's election. Few want to face voters without bearing grifts from Albany.

Gov. David Paterson, who is not currently up for election, also waffled. He called for painful spending cuts, and agreed to a large pay increase for the state troopers' union to match other big pay hikes negotiated under former Gov. Eliot Spitzer. He is in favor of limiting taxes, but only the property taxes levied by local governments.

Paterson called the legislature back to Albany recently to deal with the $6 billion problem, and presided over victory celebrations when the legislators agreed to somewhat more than $425 million of reductions in planned spending increases.

New York and California are leading the way off the fiscal cliff; other states are sure to follow.