California tax revolt: Voters crush Schwarzenegger’s budget proposals at the polls
posted at 8:20 am on May 20, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Of the six propositions offered, only one passed — the one to freeze pay raises for legislators when the state’s running a deficit — despite Arnold and his allies having outspent critics 10 to 1 in pushing the initiatives. To paraphrase a hip-hop classic, California knows how to tea-party:
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was dealt a crushing defeat as voters rejected a series of ballot initiatives designed to help plug the state’s spiraling budget deficit…
Schwarzenegger had warned that failure of the proposals would leave California grappling with a budget shortfall of around 21.3 billion dollars.
But weary voters were unwilling to heed Schwarzenegger’s deficit warnings and came out broadly against the ballot proposals, by margins of around 60-70 percent to 40-30 percent, local media reported.
The LA Times is naturally upset — with voters:
By rejecting five budget measures, Californians also brought into stark relief the fact that they, too, share blame for the political dysfunction that has brought California to the brink of insolvency…
The results Tuesday fit Californians’ long-standing pattern of demanding what is ultimately irreconcilable, all the more so in an economic downturn: lower taxes and higher spending.
“We all want a free lunch, but unfortunately that doesn’t exist,” said former Gov. Gray Davis, whose 2003 recall stemmed largely from a budget crisis brought on by the dot-com bust. For decades, Davis said, Californians have been “papering over this fundamental reality that the state has been living beyond its means.”…
The public’s contradictory impulses were laid bare by a recent Field Poll. It found that voters oppose cutbacks in 10 of 12 major categories of state spending, including the biggest, education and healthcare. Yet most voters were unwilling to have their own taxes increased, and they overwhelmingly favored keeping the two-thirds requirement for tax hikes.
As noted by Karl, the same Field Poll showed fully 72 percent of Californians treating this as a chance to send a message to Sacramento that they’re tired of higher spending and higher taxes. In fairness to the Times, though, Mark Steyn has long lamented this same tendency among European and, increasingly, American voters: They love their government goodies even though they manifestly can’t afford them, with the total paralysis here over social security reform the grimmest example. Californians don’t really have to make a hard choice between cutting spending and raising taxes since The One will surely force you and I to bail them out, but per that gruesome Heritage graph illustrating his own deficits over the next decade, the national reckoning’s coming. And given the likelihood that universal health care will pass sometime soon, creating a dependency among the public even more profound than social security, it’s not hard to guess how that choice will go when the time comes to make it. How’s that for a pessimistic thought from your favorite eeyore blogger? In the meantime, your exit question: Republican revival in California next year? Meg Whitman’s got to like the headlines this morning.
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: 1 2 3 4 Next »
Cali Dems voters:
“We want MORE services
but LESS taxes!”
…..where are the adults?
battleoflepanto1571 on May 20, 2009 at 8:24 AM
Freezing the pay,on Mr.Freeze!!
Wait a tic,thats a reference to Batman!
canopfor on May 20, 2009 at 8:24 AM
Good for the voters of California. Stand up and let your voices be heard.
Brat4life on May 20, 2009 at 8:24 AM
Any questions?
Cut government spending.
Eliminate freebies to non-citizens.
Cut program costs by denying access UNLESS A CITIZEN.
maverick muse on May 20, 2009 at 8:24 AM
Girly man.
Wethal on May 20, 2009 at 8:26 AM
OT, Palin slams Obama for a shift away from free market capitalism!
promachus on May 20, 2009 at 8:27 AM
Let the budget cuts begin… First step… Raise the tax rate on all California politicians to 99.7 percent……..
doriangrey on May 20, 2009 at 8:27 AM
I wonder how the butt-out tax is fairing,in
Sacramento!!
canopfor on May 20, 2009 at 8:27 AM
Just make the illegal aliens ineligible for most benefits, and most of the CA budget problem is fixed.
Right_of_Attila on May 20, 2009 at 8:27 AM
Do you have some Steyn to quote here? If you are going to cite him as the Times’ defense and at the same time charge all Americans with wanting big government as long as they don’t have to pay for it, you might present some evidence.
BigD on May 20, 2009 at 8:28 AM
The voters ARE partly to blame. I’m happy to see them vote down these initiatives, but we’re at a crossroads as a nation. We either need to accept massive taxation in exchange for a large(albeit crappy and inefficient) government, or we need to return to the days of a smaller federal bureaucracy that lives within its means.
I still believe most people in this country want the latter, despite what Colin Powell may say. The problem is Obama has overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate and what he believes to be a mandate for “change”.
Doughboy on May 20, 2009 at 8:28 AM
That’s “you and me”, Allah, not “you and I.” To figure out compound objects like this one, break them down into components:
The One will force you to bail them out.
The One will force me to bail them out.
The One will force I to bail them out.
Take the ones that sound right, and combine them: The One will force you and me to bail them out.
Sorry, but this one gets on my nerves…
kiltedscotsman5 on May 20, 2009 at 8:28 AM
Heard Rush a little yesterday. Obama thinks California is an example of not what not to do, but what to do.
Marcus on May 20, 2009 at 8:29 AM
And kill that damned 10 billion dollar high speed trian, California dont need another choo choo…
doriangrey on May 20, 2009 at 8:29 AM
Why isn’t anyone in California politics stating the obvious: paying for illegals to use education, healthcare, etc is costing the state to go into deficits. They don’t pay their share of the taxes, but yet get those services for free. Someone has got to say that when they cut the budget, they have to cut the programs that give away to illegals and only give free services to US citizens.
texasconserv on May 20, 2009 at 8:30 AM
Lower taxes and lower spending. How hard is that for politicians to understand? (Rhetorical question, it is obvious they cannot understand the concept of spending less at all.)
Depends. Schwarzenegger/Nixon Republicans are part of the problem. Are there true fiscal conservative Republicans in California? Will they be able to take on the state unions and force concessions from those unions?
Nitpick: “Californians don’t really have to choose since The One will surely force you and I to bail them out”
“I” should be “me”. Sorry to be the grammar police, but “you and I” when it should be “you and me” bugs me. When you’re unsure, just drop the “you and” part and see how it reads.
rbj on May 20, 2009 at 8:30 AM
Now, Arnie can gather up all the illegals and the rest of the millions of free loaders in that state and move them into his mansion. If he wants other people to pay for the all the social parasites in California then he can have at it.
rplat on May 20, 2009 at 8:31 AM
Previous decisions have come-home-to-ro-o-o-ost!
Previous votes do have consequences!
California ejoyed the ride. Now it can pay for the ticket.
Time to send the message to the FEDS: NO. MORE. BAILOUTS.
Yoop on May 20, 2009 at 8:32 AM
By continuing to elect tax and spend politicians, yes. Other than that, not really.
BadgerHawk on May 20, 2009 at 8:33 AM
California voters, politicians, media commentators, of both parties, and so many other sectors of the State’s economy have been fiscally irresponsible for a very long time. I hope the federal government does not bail California out. The country needs to see the consequences of such rapid out-of-control government growth.
There will be painful cuts in government services, possible made more painful by politicians trying to punish voters. But even if the politicians did their best, the cuts needed will be painful. And the only alternative is painfully high taxes that will damage the private sector economy.
What’s will happen in California over the next few years, will happen throughout the entire United States in 12 years or less.
Loxodonta on May 20, 2009 at 8:33 AM
Over in getalife’s basement drinking Mountain Dew.
Del Dolemonte on May 20, 2009 at 8:33 AM
It’s even worse when someone “corrects” you when you are saying it correctly.
CDeb on May 20, 2009 at 8:33 AM
Question 1, Yes, far more of us than the MFMSM (Mother Effing Main Stream Media) has lead you to believe.
Question 2, Perhaps after 2010 when California goes up for redistricting and the Communist/democrat gerrymandering is ended.
doriangrey on May 20, 2009 at 8:34 AM
Just like Arnie’s other ballot initiatives he tried in his first year in office..
down in flames.
DaveC on May 20, 2009 at 8:34 AM
Ummm….Not really. The bill on all the lunacy that goes on there is coming due again, and again, they don’t want to pay for it. I guarantee the majority of these people will have absolutely no problem if California gets massive Federal bailouts (read my money and yours) and 5 years from now they’ll be right back in the same spot.
BigWyo on May 20, 2009 at 8:34 AM
Listen. Understand. That the liberals and RINO’s are out there.
They can’t be reasoned with, they can’t be bargained with; they don’t feel pity or remorse or fear…and they absolutely will not stop. Ever. Until you are dead.
Bishop on May 20, 2009 at 8:36 AM
kiltedscotsman5 on May 20, 2009 at 8:28 AM
No need to apologize.
I get irked when express lanes at the supermarket indicate “X Items or Less”
fluffy on May 20, 2009 at 8:36 AM
But every other state will have a problem with it. Especially the fiscally responsible ones. Things will get very ugly if California gets a bailout.
Doughboy on May 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM
In 1994 Californians voted for Prop 187 which would have accomplished this; then some lefty judge ruled it unconstitutional.
You just can’t win in Commiefornia.
Disturb the Universe on May 20, 2009 at 8:37 AM
I hope he tries.
If forcing the rest of America to pay for California’s lunatic spending binges isn’t a winning issue for conservatives, then nothing is.
CDeb on May 20, 2009 at 8:38 AM
Point one: Californians are not that bright. They go there for the weather. It will be a long time coming before they understand the connection between giving up their “do-gooded-ness” ans paying less in taxes. “do-gooded-ness” being a relative term depending on your level of liberalism.
Point two: Now is the time to be blistering the ears of the senate and house. No more bailouts. California is just going to have to figure it out. Make them balance their checkbook like the rest of us do.
anniekc on May 20, 2009 at 8:38 AM
Pay freeze while the budget is in deficit?
How about no pay for the legislature while the budget is in deficit?
myrenovations on May 20, 2009 at 8:38 AM
“I am ovah heah Come On get me!”
//Gouvernator
sven10077 on May 20, 2009 at 8:38 AM
Populism means never having to say you’re sorry, right? And with the “grown-ups” no longer running things in California–or elsewhere for that matter–we’re headed on a highway to Hell. Enjoy the ride!
cackcon on May 20, 2009 at 8:39 AM
Send the teat-sucking ILLEGAL ALIENS back to their countries of origin.
stenwin77 on May 20, 2009 at 8:39 AM
so now the politicans will have to actually work and find a way to live within
theirthe taxpayesrs means…glorious!
gatorboy on May 20, 2009 at 8:39 AM
The MFMSM (Mother Effing Main Stream Media)has deceived you into believing that California is far more liberal/communist than it really is. The vast majority of California is solidly conservative. Get more than 30 miles from the ocean and California is a very red state. Dont let the 7 or 8 blue districts fool you about Californians (There are 58 districts in California).
doriangrey on May 20, 2009 at 8:40 AM
we should all take the CA momentum & run with it–especially to the federal level. if liberal CA is fed up, you would think my VA delegation would wise up.
kelley in virginia on May 20, 2009 at 8:40 AM
Who would’ve thought that this wouldn’t make a great governor?
abobo on May 20, 2009 at 8:40 AM
Yes the voters do share part of the blame, but not for voting for these measures, but for voting for the democraps and RINOs who put California on a spending binge for the past fifteen years. But I do hope this causes some concern in democrap precincts of Congress, as the “I’m mad as hell and not going to take it anymore” attitude takes hold in the bluest of blue states.
eaglewingz08 on May 20, 2009 at 8:42 AM
The federal government had better NOT bail out that California government. My tax dollars had better not go to waste on stupid enviro-wacko projects that cost way more than they are worth. If they are out of money, they need to borrow it from banks that get TARP – at high interest rates, not the feds.
ThackerAgency on May 20, 2009 at 8:42 AM
Prop 13 passed in 1978 and two years later Ronald Reagan was swept into office in a landslide. Let’s hope California voters sticking it to Sacramento is a bellwether for things to come. Republicans need to start beating the drum.
Kafir on May 20, 2009 at 8:42 AM
That’d be a good cost cutting way to start. But hey, if you are against illegal immigrants on a fiscally responsible ground, you are still a ‘bigot’ or a ‘racist’ or something other than responsible, reasonable individual.
ThackerAgency on May 20, 2009 at 8:44 AM
Can California Republicans be relied upon to be fiscally responsible adults? Or, are they big government conservatives?
Loxodonta on May 20, 2009 at 8:45 AM
CA should have gone with Tom McClintock, but the same mentality that gave us McCain kicked into effect. The GOP figured that “moderate” Arnold was a better sell.
Disturb the Universe on May 20, 2009 at 8:45 AM
Will liberals ever make the connection between spending and the budget? I doubt it…
jeffn21 on May 20, 2009 at 8:45 AM
I would prefer Duncan Hunter, but what sane Republican would want to enter a statehouse that’s fraught with special interest corruption, massive union control, and the same liberal minded legislature that’s put this state in fiscal ruin?
If California wants to fix the proposition issue that many blame, the legislature could write a simple law, (constitutional) that states: “All funding props must be written with a balance of zero to the taxpayer”. End of problem.
Rovin on May 20, 2009 at 8:47 AM
“I eat California voters for breakfast. And right now, I’m very hungry!”
Bishop on May 20, 2009 at 8:47 AM
AP, the really nice deficit chart that you reference was actually originally produced by the Washington Post: the folks at the Heritage Foundation simply used it.
Henry Bowman on May 20, 2009 at 8:47 AM
bbb but Powell told me America wants more taxation and spending…i’m so confused…
elduende on May 20, 2009 at 8:47 AM
The LA Times was correct to state the voters are also responsible and they hit on it here but didn’t explain it.
What they are talking about is our “bond debt” that the voters in this state have run up with ballot initiatives. The politicians in the last 10 years used bond measure to get around the 2/3 spending approval requirement in the legislation by using these ballot measures that only required 1/2 approval by voters.
The voters seem to have no clue that our politicians were not cutting other programs to fund these bonds and the bond debt is up to $10 billion per year. If all bonds get funded this goes up to over $15 billion a year and unless CA puts an immediate freeze on all new bond debt we are going to continue to have out of control spending with no funding.
The voters of this state are also responsible for voting the same idiots back into office time and again even after they have been shown to be incompetent.
Yes, I agree with the LA Times that ignorant voters are also responsible for the problems we have in our state. I also fault the LA Times and rest of the media here in CA for not explaining to the ignorant voters what exactly running up this bond debt has done to the budget.
JeffinSac on May 20, 2009 at 8:48 AM
And kill the government-funded stem-cell research.
Disturb the Universe on May 20, 2009 at 8:48 AM
How about a 90% tax on any company hiring illegal aliens? Better yet, how about just giving California back to Mexico and let them bait it out?
MikeA on May 20, 2009 at 8:49 AM
The state government of California is a toilet bowl that needs to be flushed. Even a child understands when that happens. Elect leaders that work for the people’s best interests or be led like lemmings over the cliff of bankruptcy. It’s really can’t be more simple than you think.
volsense on May 20, 2009 at 8:49 AM
Budgets don’t “feel” very good.
bluelightbrigade on May 20, 2009 at 8:50 AM
I find it very hard to fell sorry for anyone in California. They are victims of the circumstances they created. Maybe I should say, victims of the circumstances they voted for.
milwife88 on May 20, 2009 at 8:53 AM
“In the meantime, your exit question: Republican revival in California next year?”
Not hardly. Californians love the nanny state, and love to be lied to, they’ll vote even more liberal next year.
Rode Werk on May 20, 2009 at 8:53 AM
I wish being forced to buy California meant that we each get a luxurious summer home in San Diego. Along with a GM car or two for buying GM. “Owning” stuff sucks.
aero on May 20, 2009 at 8:53 AM
Yup. They’ll blame this primarily on “Republican” Governor Schwartzenegger. Democrat President Obama will bail them out and be the hero who doesn’t make them give anything up. They’ll vote Dem alright.
aero on May 20, 2009 at 8:55 AM
Poor legislators. They’ve been working so hard to sink CA into the red…
Hey, this might be good for the LA Times… when CA goes under completely, maybe O&co will come in and take control of all things California – including the LAT
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 8:55 AM
I heard from a friend who was in DC yesterday (to talk to congress about healthcare issues) and said Nancy P. was running around like a headless chicken trying to muster up support for a California bailout.
He said it was kind of funny to watch her looking so desperate.
stenwin77 on May 20, 2009 at 8:56 AM
As a Californian, I’ve learned this is no victory. We’ll still continue to elect dems and gutless republicans.
jacrews on May 20, 2009 at 8:56 AM
All the voters have let out a big exhale. It’s up to government to cut, cut, cut…
When is the election for a new governor?
izoneguy on May 20, 2009 at 8:56 AM
The L.A. Times is right on this one. Liberals always want more from the government but they don’t want to be the ones to pay for it. It’s nice that they voted against higher taxes, but when it came time to vote for spending cuts in 2005, they chose instead to ally with the unions like SEIU and the California Teachers’ Association.
All Schwarzenegger has done since then is give the people of California what they voted for. He tried to cut spending and the people shot him down mercilessly. What’s he supposed to do? The budget isn’t going to reconcile itself.
Caiwyn on May 20, 2009 at 8:57 AM
As goes California, so goes the rest of the country.
I just hope the old saying is true.
Mr. Grump on May 20, 2009 at 8:57 AM
20 months, although another recall is in the works.
jacrews on May 20, 2009 at 8:58 AM
The California Republican Party should pull Arnold’s party membership card. They should publically reject the governor, so they are not saddled with his unpopular policies going into the next election.
They have to campaign as the party of responsible spending, tax cuts, and fiscal responsibility. It is simply not possible to do that with Ahnold as their spokesman.
gridlock2 on May 20, 2009 at 8:58 AM
The most frustrating thing is that many on the left and now the new left (leftists RINOs) would say the GOP needs to become more like Schwarzenegger…
They’d all agree that America needs to become more like California…
Yeah, I think any self-respecting Fiscal Conservative needs to take a hard long look at CA and see if that’s where they want to be in 5 years. Then, within 5 seconds they’ll agree, “HECK, NO!” and then they need to start attacking Barry’s Nanny-State-Wet-Dream with all they got.
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 8:58 AM
Hmmm, that’s a damned good question. In California being a conservative doesn’t automatically make you a Republican. From what I can tell most of us Conservatives here in California vote more or less republican but would genuinely be offended at being called a republican. I suspect most of us fall somewhere between Conservative Republican and libertarian, (not the bat $hit insane Ron Paul libertarian).
What we want, is less government, less taxes, less regulation, less illegal immigrates and basically to be left the he11 alone. Quit telling me how to run my business, who I can hire, who I can fire, quite taxing my business to DEATH, quit taxing my every single move, just leave us the he11 alone.
doriangrey on May 20, 2009 at 8:59 AM
Keep voting for tax & spend democrats and all the producers will leave.
If the big one does not destroy Kalifornia then the socialists will.
They better not count on D.C. to bail them out….things will change
and we hope Obama will be gone in a few short years so we can get back to work.
izoneguy on May 20, 2009 at 8:59 AM
I know who made up that 30% of voters who wanted all the tax bills, the denizens of Oakland; the laziest people on earth inhabit that dump of a city.
Or Alameda maybe, they are lazy flockers too, though the guy who brought Chinese food to my house in Alameda on his bike and only charged a dollar…THAT dude was alright.
Bishop on May 20, 2009 at 8:59 AM
Not a huge fan of the French Revolution, but maybe Nancy hears the commoners getting upset… She knows the “let them eat cake line” just isn’t going to cut it…
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:00 AM
Doesn’t matter much what the voters say. Obama will make us, taxpayers in the other 49 states, bail out California. Then he’ll run California like he runs Chrysler.
petefrt on May 20, 2009 at 9:00 AM
Don’t forget this little jewel in that LAT article (emphasis mine):
Horsesh*t!
Read LAT’s “quick take” of Prop 1A (emphasis mine):
See those parts about “increase” and “trigger an extension of…taxes”???
Friggin’ LAT tries to blame voters for refusing to “cap” spending in this instance, but the GD proposition REQUIRED FURTHER TAX INCREASES to be done, and EXISTING TAXES TO BE EXTENDED – before – any “caps” would be placed on spending.
F*ck you, you effeminate elietist a$$hole wh0re MSM and the horse you rode in on!!! No voter in this election had a straight opportunity to “cap” spending AT ALL!
Guaranteed the voters would have approved a cap in spending, if it didn’t come tied to further taxation!
/GRRRRRRRRRRRR
Wanderlust on May 20, 2009 at 9:02 AM
Sen Butt Graham is not impressed…
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:03 AM
Schwarzenegger is a great example how becoming part of the club changes you. Term limits should be priority number 1 when we start rebuilding from the ashes.
TheBigOldDog on May 20, 2009 at 9:03 AM
Fantastic! So instead of Cali idiots paying state taxes for their 3rd world cesspool of a state, now I will pay the taxes for them. California won’t cut any spending, ever. Now that the ballots failed, they’ll just go to Barry and get federal moneym aka as money from the other 49 states.
Pretty fucking brilliant move by California when you think about it.
angryed on May 20, 2009 at 9:03 AM
Now vote out the spenders.
Socmodfiscon on May 20, 2009 at 9:04 AM
So far I see Obama only running GOP states like LA or SC… He doesn’t want to upset his leftists allies…
I think in the end it would be almost better if he ran CA… Then we could hold him directly responsible for that mess.
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:05 AM
PLUS Constitutionality would come into play and the Supreme Court might have to get involved…
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:05 AM
As you sow, so shall you reap.
Nothing will changed until the people are forced to change. That takes a disaster that can’t be ignored.
TheBigOldDog on May 20, 2009 at 9:06 AM
And what club would that be? The Kennedy Clan?
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:06 AM
The kleptocracy. Also know as Politicians and Government employees.
TheBigOldDog on May 20, 2009 at 9:07 AM
If the California Supreme Court had allowed Proposition 187 to stand, the state would not be where it is today. It’s hard to imagine any free people voting higher taxes on themselves to pay for benefits for people who are in the state illegally and not paying taxes themselves.
I lived in California from 1989-1991 and there was a small budget crunch then, but Gov. Deukmejian handled it pretty easily, and with a Democratic legislature – and a more entrenched one at that, with Willie Brown as Speaker of the House and no term limits. The difference between then and now is about 8 million illegal immigrants who have drained the state’s resources and put in on an unsustainable path of taxing a shrinking middle and upper class to pay for an exploding Third World population.
rockmom on May 20, 2009 at 9:08 AM
Term limits should be priority number 1 when we start rebuilding from the ashes.
TheBigOldDog on May 20, 2009 at 9:03 AM
After eradicating the zombie hordes, of course.
Term limits? Now THAT would be an epic fight; trying to force lifers to rein-in their own feather nesting.
The only problem is that if term limits did happen, the pols would simultaneously enact legislation that a simple two year Congressional term would qualify for a lifetime 150% pension with full bennies.
Bishop on May 20, 2009 at 9:09 AM
maybe california should get rid of their initiative system, because direct democracy doesn’t work.
Chiasmos on May 20, 2009 at 9:09 AM
Oh, well, by extension, that is the Obama-Kennedy-Johnson-Roosevelt Clan (after they all had an orgy…)
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:09 AM
I’m sure that’s a big part of it. The bottom line is however, the people of California have been unwilling to do what is necessary to put an end to it. Until they are forced to experience prolonged, unavoidable pain, nothing will really change. They are reaping what they sow.
TheBigOldDog on May 20, 2009 at 9:11 AM
I lived in California from 1989-1991
Coincidentally so did I, working construction on the gigantic housing boom going on in the great San Fran bay area. Modesto was a people farm, and I recall thinking “where the hell are all these people coming from?”
Bishop on May 20, 2009 at 9:12 AM
California Love – 2Pac
They certainly did.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on May 20, 2009 at 9:12 AM
“Everybody get to de choppah!”
Akzed on May 20, 2009 at 9:12 AM
Unfortunately, if Obama bails them out, they (the welfare suckers) learn absolutely nothing… This isn’t going to change anytime soon.
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:13 AM
The MFs ought to at least voluntarily turn in their paychecks. In 1990 a bunch of them did when there was a slight deficit and the state had to stop paying other state employees. I worked for a member of the Assembly that year, and back then most of them had a semblance of a conscience about such things, and were deluged with angry phone calls if they didn’t turn in their pay.
rockmom on May 20, 2009 at 9:14 AM
I couldn’t agree more.
TheBigOldDog on May 20, 2009 at 9:15 AM
Bingo! Both party’s want no part of term limits, which should tell the citizens something right there!
Keemo on May 20, 2009 at 9:15 AM
You need a functional political party with fiscal conservatism as its dominant issue: Smaller government and taxes that are low enough that they don’t further slow the private sector but actually stimulate economic growth which will in turn generate more tax revenue.
My guess is that means the Party of Reagan. It also means that all other social issues must be placed second. Who gets how much out of a smaller budget, and what favorite social issue gets passed or thwarted, all of that will have to be of secondary importance to getting a smaller budget. This means a lot of people will have to learn to bite their tongues and stop calling one another names.
California can show our country the way out of our hopium addiction.
So please, gather the adults together and do it! It’s for the children!
Loxodonta on May 20, 2009 at 9:16 AM
Can we all agree Obama is not necessarily a socialist…? He’s more of a Californist. Now, the message from the right should be, if you want to look like California in a few years, vote for Barry!
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:18 AM
I have an LAT subscription – for the coupons. The rest of it either goes into the garden as mulch or goes straight to the circular file.
I don’t know why anyone would actually read that pathetic rag. Even years ago when we still had a functioning journalism system in this country, it was an abomination.
commenter on May 20, 2009 at 9:18 AM
Lox you so silly
You know who’s in charge
That’s right. The adults!
/getalife.
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:19 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 Next »