Crazy Arnie: Everything must go! Update: Reason says, “Hasta la vista, baby”
posted at 10:55 am on May 14, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
California voters have an opportunity to tell lawmakers to stop hiking their taxes and start getting serious about budget reductions in the face of a $23 billion deficit in an upcoming special election — and the power elite is getting mighty nervous. Andrew Malcolm highlights the latest scare tactic to come out of Sacramento: the fire sale of state properties like San Quentin’s prison and the Los Angeles Colisseum as a means to gin up enough money to keep Sacramento spending. They’re certainly picking one hell of a time to get into real estate speculation:
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to sell the Los Angeles Coliseum, San Quentin State Prison, the Orange County Fairgrounds and other state property to raise cash amid the state’s growing fiscal crisis, according to a copy of a proposal reviewed by The Times.
Sale of the properties, to be included in the governor’s revised budget plan on Thursday, would raise between $600 million and $1 billion, although it would not provide relief to state coffers for two to five years, according to the proposal.
Er, what? A billion dollars, tops? In five years? Come on, Governor — throw in some state parks! How about the Golden Gate Bridge? I understand some people made a lot of money reselling that over the years, too.
Andrew scoffs at the notion:
Everything must go. Sky also falling. …
But leaked word of the suggestion is priceless political publicity in terms of dramatizing the state’s pathetic financial situation and — gee, do you suspect? — attempting to sway popular opinion to vote in favor of the governor’s upcoming budget proposition.
The governor’s budget proposition is — how shall we put it? — currently also operating in a deficit position in terms of recent polling support among voters who would be imposing the new taxes on themselves. Always an easy sell.
Or perhaps not. Brian Faughnan pointed out this Rasmussen poll of Californians, who don’t appear to be buying the Golden Gate Bridge or Arnie’s schtick:
Californians will vote next Tuesday on a series of budget-related propositions, and one thing is clear from new Rasmussen Reports telephone polling in the state: Voters aren’t in the mood for tax increases to ease California’s budget woes.
Seventy-three percent (73%) of California voters oppose raising state income taxes to eliminate the budget deficit. Raising the state sales tax is opposed by 69%.
At the same time, 69% favor major cuts in government spending to eliminate the budget deficit. Just 16% oppose the spending cuts.
That’s bold-print, 36-point headline fodder. The last time 73% of Californians agreed on anything, it was that gold looked pretty good to them. The last time 73% supported tax cuts, they meant from the Mexican government. One of the bastions of liberalism just became a supply-sider state, thanks to the absurd spending spree in which Sacramento has indulged itself for the last few decades.
Maybe the only things that have to go are Crazy Arnie and the state legislature.
Update: Reason TV says, “Hasta la vista … baby!”
My friend Nick Gillespie does a great job in narrating this deconstruction of the Governator. Be sure to watch it all the way through, and then visit Reason for intelligent libertarianism.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
“Truth Commission” is an oxymoron for a moron. Its also congressional speak for a group of yuk-a-muks asking her questions that would provoke a response to bash bush. The “commission” also would not put her under oath. What is needed is a federal grand jury, but Holder is more of a wimpass then BO…
jbh45 on May 14, 2009 at 12:13 PM
Whenever there’s a ditch to be dug off the I-5, we need three CalTrans trucks and a crew of ten, each working in fifteen-minute intervals. All paid at comfy SEIU wages and looking forward to near 100% pay when they retire at age 60.
Whenever there’s a two-car fender-bender, we need a fire truck, an ambulance, and three police cruisers. Assume $70,000 per fireman/police officer, all with healthy state-paid pensions waiting for them when they retire at age 60. Some also like to skimp on their generous vacation time and take a huge payout on the unused hours at retirement.
In order to teach 500 grade school students we need a staff of twenty teachers (all paid in NEA wages and pension when they retire at age 60), P.E. paraprofessionals, half a dozen administrative staff, a principal earning six figures, state-of-the-art facilities, a computer lab, dining room and staff, and expensive playground equipment. All so they can make it to high school with a fifth-grade reading level and inadequate math skills.
Yep, totally necessary.
TheMightyMonarch on May 14, 2009 at 12:17 PM
The picture is from ‘Total Recall’, when they were trying to give Arnie a new set of memories. We need that machine again to put in some memories of Ahnuld being a Republican and that that’s supposed to mean fiscal responsibility (the line of GOP officials needing that treatment is getting long).
michaelo on May 14, 2009 at 12:17 PM
A sad tale, this is what happens when Republicans go “moderate” and adopt the big spending ways of libs.
echosyst on May 14, 2009 at 12:18 PM
MUST SEE VIDEO!
Ed, thank you so much for posting this update video. It’s the best video I’ve seen explaining California’s reckless overspending and government growth. Although almost entirely focused on California, the video also points out how Obama is doing the same thing nationally.
MAKE IT GO VIRAL.
Loxodonta on May 14, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Believe me, if I could get out of California, I would. I’ve been trapped here for years, and have voted consistently against all these wild “feel-good” propositions the nitwit public thinks sound so good. If people would just look at the costs of all this junk we might not be in this spot. We probably would still be in a financial hole, though, because every time some kind of reform measure gets voted in, the legislature just finds some way around it, to keep on spending, or the court tells us we don’t know what we’re doing and invalidates it.
The only way that Californians will ever get a responsible budget is for the financial roof to fall in on the state. Then maybe some might get the message.
hachiban on May 14, 2009 at 12:23 PM
I’m a USC trojan and our school has been wanting to buy or at least control the Coliseum for eighty years. So, if the state’s selling, I have a feeling there’s a buyer.
I love it that when Democrats have no other option, they turn to privatization. It shows that THEY KNOW our way is better.
joe_doufu on May 14, 2009 at 12:25 PM
I’ve been saying for years that there is no reason why rep’s and sen’s need to go to Washington. This is 21’st century for crying out loud.
Haven’t these guys heard of NetMeeting?
More representatives, a minimum of 10 times as many, and make them live and work in their districts. (House and Senate salaries would be a bare minimum to cover additional expenses).
I would also increase the age of elegibility. It’s a crime that someone can go from grad school straight to the House.
45years for the house.
55 for the senate.
65 for President.
Then throw in strict term limits.
MarkTheGreat on May 14, 2009 at 12:28 PM
yep. what’s so wrong with selling government-owned assets?
funky chicken on May 14, 2009 at 12:32 PM
Does this bode well for the San Fran Democrap party next year? As Cali goes so goes the Congress? One hopes so.
eaglewingz08 on May 14, 2009 at 12:33 PM
Heard on the radio today 38,000 prisoners would get early parole. Illegal aliens would be handed over to Feds.
Border control and deportation is a function of the Feds. It’s been a failure of Republicans and Democrats in Washington, but Californians gets to pay.
Marc01 on May 14, 2009 at 12:33 PM
We never had budget problems when we had a part time legislature. As for Arnie and the incumbents, they’ve sealed their fate come 2010. People are tired of the bullshit scare tactics, when those same bastard politicians turn right around and get cushy make-work jobs at over $125/yr between elections.
GarandFan on May 14, 2009 at 12:34 PM
My sentiments exactly! The idea that selling a few properties is a solution is ridiculous. One billion dollars is a drop in the bucket compared to the fiscal insanity that has been engineered in this state over the years.
What I’d really like to see is, instead of these scare-tactic ads with firefighters and teachers (ugh!), some ads with illegals bitching about the benefits they might lose if we taxpayers don’t continue to pony up and pass the propositions.
(sorry if this posts twice, I posted it once and it disappeared!)
califcon on May 14, 2009 at 12:34 PM
Isn’t USC a state government run school like most of CA schools? The state government buy property from the state government, I knew I should have become an accountant.
kirkill on May 14, 2009 at 12:35 PM
Yep. Of course Di Fi and Boxer will scream that building anything in the Mojave Desert will DESTROY THE ENTIRE ECOSYSTEM OF THE ENTIRE DESERT even though there is a huge national park and another huge national preserve out there already.
BUT until the voters of CA get tired of supporting that kind of stupidity by reelecting it, really, what can one governor do?
Schwartzenegger isn’t perfect, but he doesn’t deserve nearly the amount of ridicule that conservatives direct his way. The majority of CA voters? Um, richly deserved.
funky chicken on May 14, 2009 at 12:36 PM
What?! Arnie is a Republican?! Must be that new socially liberal socialist-lite brand.
kirkill on May 14, 2009 at 12:37 PM
kirkill on May 14, 2009 at 12:35 PM
No kirkill, USC is a private university.
You could have used google.
funky chicken on May 14, 2009 at 12:38 PM
While we’re at it, abolish the 435-seat limit on the House and return to actual representative government, meaning one representative per 40,000 people as James Madison felt was necessary for true representation.
That translates into nearly 8,000 House Representatives. It would also have the added effect of weakening the lobbyist industry as it would prove much more difficult to bribe 4,000 representatives than 218.
As you said, make ‘em use NetMeeting, or just throw them into RFK stadium. At least that way the Nationals will get an audience for once.
TheMightyMonarch on May 14, 2009 at 12:39 PM
I remember back when Arnie was in movies like “Total Recall” that I thought he’d be a great person to run for political office. Boy was I wrong, the man’s been a disaster.
gsherin on May 14, 2009 at 12:46 PM
Maryland learns that actions have consequences.
corona on May 14, 2009 at 12:47 PM
There is a stretch of the 5 in my area they have been working on for 10 years, and they still are not finished.
No sympathy for our whiny Governor here. Californians, vote NO on props 1A – 1F
infidel4life on May 14, 2009 at 12:53 PM
I could probably find this info somewhere, but maybe someone already knows. If they want to sell the Coliseum and San Quentin, will they have to call another special election and have the people vote on it? Or would it be up to the legislature? Because, one way this state could save some money is to stop having these freakin’ special elections every couple of months!
califcon on May 14, 2009 at 12:57 PM
Ed, that $23 Billion is on top of $30+ Billion that was just “solved” a few months ago. As I mentioned on Twitter, $20+ billion and $30+ billion short in a $140 billion budget does not a “Gap” make. It’s called Subprime Government.
juanito on May 14, 2009 at 1:01 PM
Yep; I’m stuck here too… and I want this state to burn.
hindmost on May 14, 2009 at 1:06 PM
It’s not just you guys. We here in AZ pay plenty for them too. Especially the medical costs. If CA (and other border states) really want to save money they should make sure their hospitals are providing only the emergency services required by law for illegal aliens — no more ER pre-natal care for illegals expecting anchor babies, no more ER care for minor physical ailments, etc.
AZCoyote on May 14, 2009 at 1:06 PM
Marc01 on May 14, 2009 at 12:33 PM
In California, we could raise about $15 billion just buy submitting an invoice to the Feds for remittance.
juanito on May 14, 2009 at 1:13 PM
There was a hiring freeze on state employees when Gray Davis was governor. This also meant employees they lost by attrition were not to be replaced. Still, Davis managed to hire over 25,000 new employees. Or should I say democrat voters and doners. The state, or should I say all political offices in Calif, have all this patronage money. This means then are given money to hire outside consultants, i.e, hire their friends kids for about 100k a years. In LA they used to be able to do this with 8 people. Then the gov. has all these appointments to boards. Gary Condit’s wife and kids got these appointments which means you sit on a committee one day or a half day a month, and received 100k for it. They have no expertise for these positions. All they are is a body.
Blake on May 14, 2009 at 1:15 PM
Mark – Simply return to the original representation rates. This makes each Rep closer and more answerable to their constituents, and has the added bonus of diluting House power over more Reps.
The key take-home point from the video is that unionization of government employees should be outright banned. Soldiers have no unions, and they put their very lives on the line for the country (which is a large part of why they are so highly respected, and it is well deserved). There are no worse work-rules than the obligation to obey any reasonable order given, regardless of risk to life or limb. So the only thing that a union does for gov’t workers, is to demand more money for less work. I say, ENOUGH! – you are NOT entitled to a “middle-class lifestyle” if you’re sucking off the public teat. You are a public servant. YOU work for US – and you’ve clearly forgotten that! If you want the wealth and comfort of a true “middle-class lifestyle,” go out and make your fortune in the private sector. Work for a living like the rest of us (who pay your salaries) do. It’s not that hard when gov’t is restricted to its proper, limited role. In the private sector, you can even (properly) unionize, if you so desire.
I look forward to an officeholder, Governor or POTUS, who comes right out and tells the unions off, who closes whole Departments, fires everyone from Cabinet appointee to the janitors, puts the office equipment up for auction, and dares the union to do something about it – what’ll they do, go on strike? Hah! A government worker on strike gets a pink-slip immediately, because their job is clearly expendable.
Blacksmith on May 14, 2009 at 1:18 PM
Several years ago, it was 14 billion a year for services to illegal aliens. This meant education, health, housing, and incarceration.
You can’t skip education because the states are under federal orders to offer it. However, is we attracted less illegal immigrants, the cost of educating them would go down — same with health and housing. We may have to pay for most of health care, but there is no way we should fund subsidized housing for illegal immigrants. Incarceration we should definitely fund.
Blake on May 14, 2009 at 1:19 PM
As always it comes back to fiscal restraint and small government bias in all things. Arnie, loved by moderates and assorted folks who have not a clue about fiscal restraint, has led California over the cliff.
Now the esteemed Repub leadership is championing Crist in Florida–Arnie without the muscles.
Prediction. Obama will bail out California and nothing will change. Also as someone who has lived here 30 years and easily predicted this sad state of affairs I can tell you the polling numbers about California residents are bogus. Once Obama bails out the state they will happily go back to wanting everything for free.
Most people think there is a North/South divide in the state. There is not. The true divide is coastal vs mountain. The fiscally responsible folks live in the foothills and mountains. The problem–there are not enough people there to have an impact.
patrick neid on May 14, 2009 at 1:31 PM
Juanito, the Feds are certainly complicit, but California opened their arms to illegals to mow yards, pick fruit and make beds. You made your bed, you sleep in it.
We in Florida are equally responsible. Strange that I don’t hear any blowhards in either state talking about comprehensive immigration reform anymore. It must be because it’s not an election year.
orlandocajun on May 14, 2009 at 1:36 PM
USC is a “private” school, although they pretty much all take government money anyway.
Leave it to the Democrats to wait until there’s a crash in the real estate market before selling off property.
Socratease on May 14, 2009 at 1:49 PM
Interesting, but the age limits would require a constitutional amendment because they are already spelled out in the said document. There is a strong argument for increasing the number of representatives, especially considering that the average congress critter is carrying water for almost 500,000 citizens. When this nation was formed it was more like 5,000. And I like the telemeeting idea, but I also stand on the tradition of them all coming together for a face to face in DC. Ever tried doing real business through a crappy webcam?
As for the senators, not only would I not increase their number, but if you’re going to an amendment to change the ages, also repeal the 17th amendment. The constitution as it stands worked quite well;
It was that way for a damn good reason, and was the beginning of the end of the ’several states’ when it fell as a direct result of the war or northern agression (thanks again Lincoln). Now states are immasculated, helpless, serfs to the federal government. We’re seeing signs of life from Montana, finally fighting the Interstate Commerce clause BS for gun rights. Repeal the 17th amendment, and get some real work done.
Sic Semper Tyrannis
Falconsword on May 14, 2009 at 1:54 PM
The problem is that many of the people leaving CA are going to other states and imposing their liberal policies there. Like NY and New England Dems destroying Florida. The libs are like a virus: they bring financial death wherever they go.
Christian Conservative on May 14, 2009 at 2:14 PM
So basically, when Prop 1A et al fail the state is going to keep begging the Feds for a bailout. Frankly, it’s the only way to shore this state up until things get better. Time can (and has, and will) be wasted in fixing blame but the fact remains that CA is the most important state in the Union and cannot go bankrupt.
One major source of the shortfall is unfunded mandates coming down from Washington like Medicaire and roads. Police cost a lot, too. With more than 15% of Californians out of work the payroll taxes have dried up. Where exactly is the money going to come from to pay for the essential services which must be funded at all times?
The simplistic rhetoric that says “Cut spending!” is missing the obvious- that most spending is uncontrollable both at the Federal and the State level.
Viscount_Bolingbroke on May 14, 2009 at 2:48 PM
We have no money here in CA. Why? Because people are out of work so no tax revenue. Why? Because the prime manufacturing jobs once here are now in other states and countries. Why? Because CA taxed and fee’d them out. Our kooky green-enviro-nitwits cost them too much to do business here. Liberals think taxing companies is the way to go. They are correct: the companies go away from here. I know. Mine is going to relocate to Michigan.
BoSox_or_Bust on May 14, 2009 at 3:32 PM
Cut services and projects. Now.
AnninCA on May 14, 2009 at 3:35 PM
Governments are not a force of nature. Governments are instruments of mankind, and their nature is explained quite clearly in the Declaration of Independence. If we cut the scope of their powers back to an appropriate level – by witholding our consent that they have a right to that level of power, separate from and above the citizens they claim to represent – then cuts in spending naturally follow. Do I expect them to give that up easily? Hardly. Do I expect them to give it up if they’re voted out? Definitely. Do I expect them to give it up swiftly and with great finality should they try to suspend or otherwise monkeywrench the election process? What do you think?
Blacksmith on May 14, 2009 at 4:35 PM
Straight from the frying pan to the fire, huh? Good luck, BoSox – you’re going to need it. I fled MI about two and a half years ago now, and haven’t regretted it – I get my Wings on the satellite either way.
Blacksmith on May 14, 2009 at 4:38 PM
It can and it will go bankrupt. There is only one way to ensure fiscal responsibility, and it’s by force. The state government is overrun with tenured, protected, overpaid union workers who receive pay and benefits that a free-market society could never sustain.
State employees receive above-market wages, top-of-the-line benefits, guaranteed pension starting at below-retirement ages that pay near 100% of working wages, and are also allowed to suckle from the government teat of Medicare and Social Security. They are protected by unions that will fight tooth and nail to get more people in their ranks, so that the union dues keep flowing.
The unions are paid up with the right people and are well-motivated to kill, maim, and steal to retain their status as protected public “servants”. The only way to break the unions is through a total inability of the state to foot the bill. That means state bankruptcy. And the more they raise taxes on a shrinking, increasingly unemployed tax base the sooner that moment will come.
The state couldn’t come to terms with this on their own, so their next step is to force a bogus special election in an attempt to get the voters to approve massive tax increases on themselves. When that goes down in flames, they’ll try to sneak through the tax increases through fee hikes and even more burdens on the business sector. Of course this will serve to drive revenues down even further as businesses flee the state, pass along costs to the consumers or just start cutting jobs, putting even more pressure on the entitlement programs. This is all going to come to a head very soon.
TheMightyMonarch on May 14, 2009 at 4:54 PM
Our state already ignores the election process. We’ve passed propositions barring illegal immigrants from accessing government benefits. Struck down by the courts. We’ve passed propositions outlawing gay marriage. Struck down by the courts.
When the tax hike propositions fail next week, the state legislature will simply go back to work trying to sneak them in by stealth. Fees will go up and people will start wondering why their company relocated out of state or laid them off, but the state withholding on the average resident will appear to go up by a pittance.
As goes California, so goes the country. While Sacramento sees the election process as an obstacle to feed their union masters, Washington sees the Constitution as an obstacle to impose their soft tyranny on the country.
TheMightyMonarch on May 14, 2009 at 5:07 PM
I am sitting here laughing my butt off as Nancy Pukelosi lies, lies and lies about what she knew – she is one of the many reasons I left California last year – I was luck to sell my house and get out of the crazy place. I voted against every single spending proposition for 35 years and finally gave up and left the state since my husband actually wants to retire and be able to have a reasonable standard of living. The population is so dumbed down that they pass propositions to fund embronic stem cell research and high speed trains between L.A. and San Fran and then wonder why the state is broke. Blame the majority of the idiot population – they pass this stuff and elect morons. They are just as much to blame. As far as I’m concerned, the federal government should not give them a damn dime – I left the place so I wouldn’t have to pay for all that crap and now I will still be on the hook for all the STUPID!!! stuff. I’ve lost all sympathy for anyone still liviing there. I’ve tried to warn my friends and two of my daughters who still live there. Well, when they come crying to me, I will just say “I told you so”.
Cheryl from Texas on May 14, 2009 at 6:23 PM
… and the fancy new sign is still covered four weeks after being installed.
corona on May 14, 2009 at 6:51 PM
There’s more to the whole tax thing than meets the eye in California and the papers aren’t printing much about either. One major problem is with property taxes.
Most counties use property tax as their source of revenue. In California it is a little less direct. Proposition 13 limited counties to a 2% increase per year in property tax assessments. This was designed to prevent taxing fixed and modest income people out of their homes when housing prices skyrocketed. That part is fine. The problem came in with how Prop 13 changed the distribution of the tax.
Under Prop 13 the counties turn all the property tax to the state. The state then divides it up, takes a cut for itself, and divides the rest up among the counties. This was popular initially because it allowed poor rural counties to reap part of the benefit of the rapid housing value increases in the cities.
BUT, and this is the fly in the ointment, while the counties were limited to 2% per year increases, there was NO limit on how much the state could increase their take before distributing it out to the counties. The amount the state takes for the general fund has been increasing at more than 2% per year. Now we are faced with a major crash in housing values and declining assessments which translate to declining revenue while the state is taking more and more for the general fund. The result is that the county revenue streams are declining at an even faster rate than the decline in property values due to irresponsible spending practices in Sacramento.
Many counties now do not have enough revenue to operate even though they take enough in through property taxes if they were allowed to keep the amount they collect.
Proposition 13 is probably going to be a casualty of this economic downturn because of the state’s inability to control its take of the money.
California’s state government is simply going to have to shrink. There is no other alternative. We are going to have to stop this notion that our communities are required to provide health insurance to the children of illegal immigrants who are in our schools, for example.
And why can’t care of elderly and disabled be performed with volunteers from civic organizations and funded through donations rather than funded by government to provide jobs to union employees?
Government destroys community. It wrecks the notion that we take care of each other all the while pretending to be the opposite. Money corrupts.
crosspatch on May 14, 2009 at 10:13 PM
Seriously, it’s time for da Guvahnator to go back to Austria and herd sheep… or something.
Alas, he’s really bolstering Jerry ‘Moonbeam’ Brown’s chances of being elected as Governor.
Damnit. California is so humongously screwed and I have to stay for a minimum of another 10 years. Maybe 7 if I can swing it with some good fortune :/
SilverStar830 on May 14, 2009 at 11:02 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2