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: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
It worked just fine when they passed Prop 13 in 1978. And it worked just fine when they passed Prop 187 in 1994, but the damned Supreme Court somehow ruled it unconstitutional. It worked great when they recalled Gray Davis.
It was the DENIAL of direct democracy by liberal judges that put California on an unsustainable fiscal trajectory.
rockmom on May 20, 2009 at 9:20 AM
There, that’s better.
Vashta.Nerada on May 20, 2009 at 9:20 AM
And just think. Next year, Gavin Newsom could be on the ballot in the Governor’s race. Imagine if that idiot gets elected.
Doughboy on May 20, 2009 at 9:22 AM
IMO the Republicans AND Schwarzenegger should just walk away now and tell the Democrats to fix this mess or resign. We need to make them own this disaster the way the House republicans made the Democrats own the Porkulus. Republicans have to figure out a way to make taxpaying voters understand the consequences FOR THEM of allowing non-taxpayers to control the government.
rockmom on May 20, 2009 at 9:25 AM
There was only one true conservative who has run for governor and of course I can’t remember his name. His solution to the budget crisis was across the board cut of 10-15% in everything. This would affect me personally since I am an independent contractor to the state. I’d go with a cut but I want all the ridiculous programs for noncitizens to stop.
Every time they want to raise taxes to pay for their overspending, and so they can continue overspending. With their backs against the wall, the legislature should start cutting back. I guess they think the feds are going to bail them out.
Blake on May 20, 2009 at 9:26 AM
If they are for big government, they are not conservatives.
Johan Klaus on May 20, 2009 at 9:27 AM
These Children have been spoiled
I’ve arrived here just in time
By chance I’ve brought the punishment
That best befits the crime
Brimstone and Treacle
And cod liver oil
Liberal doses of each
These are the treats from which children recoil.
The lessons I’m going to teach
Just follow my model
And don’t Molly-coddle
It may lead the irksome to irk
So seek satisfaction
From punitive action
Brimstone and Treacle will work.
Loxodonta on May 20, 2009 at 9:28 AM
Then you ruled out most of the GOP, Bush, and most of the people running in the last GOP primary… I knew there was a reason I was unhappy last year.
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:30 AM
+10
Upstater85 on May 20, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Good for Cali, but they better not get a bail out from the federal government unless they stop paying their legislators a penny.
ThackerAgency on May 20, 2009 at 9:32 AM
Great, now I get to pay to bail them out. Remind me just why I do that again? Oh yeah, that’s right. I go to jail if I don’t. I thought slavery was outlawed; guess I was wrong. Enslavement of the law-abiding, hard-working, productive citizens of this country is government policy, and I get no help from the so-called “civil rights” phonies.
mr.blacksheep on May 20, 2009 at 9:35 AM
I live in California and that’s been my beef for years; where are the courageous politicians that will finally address this elephant in the room? Answer: nowhere to be found.
Addressing this one issue, which many know is one of the main factors to our fiscal mess, is the kiss of death for any politician. He/she will immediately be labeled a racist and the pro-illegal alien groups will be all over this person, not resting until that person and his family are destroyed.
Voting these props down is the first step: we need to get rid of every single legislature and start over with a fresh batch of conservatives. Again, that is unlikely to happen in this state. A new governor will not be the answer; it’s our state legislature that is loaded with the most leftist idealogues you will ever find in any government.
yogi41 on May 20, 2009 at 9:37 AM
What the Nanny State needs now is a very good Nanny. And Mary Poppins knew that there were times for a spoonfull of sugar, and times for brimstone and treacle. Generations of Americans grew up on that, but now only remember the sweet parts.
Brimstone and Treacle and carbolic soap
These are the tools of my trade
With spoonfulls of sugar you don’t have a hope
Of seeing that changes are made
Where manners are chronic
My tincture’s the tonic
That’s certain to wipe off a smirk
Just pour out a ration
In matronly fashion
Brimstone and Treacle will work.
I won’t stand for simpering, whingeing and whimpering
Sucking of thumbs is absurd
Observe every letter
For children are better
When they can be seen and not heard.
Loxodonta on May 20, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Color me impressed with the Californicators vote to cut their government goodies. Right now they’re exhibiting all the political acumen of a 5 year old: want, want, want. Mine, mine, mine. Where are the adults, indeed.
quikstrike98 on May 20, 2009 at 9:38 AM
Has Airfarce One landed with its team of rescue specialists?
Obama is using the california business plan. I am sure Obama will not only send pork dollars, but they will require California to spend extra money it doesn’t have.
seven on May 20, 2009 at 9:41 AM
Teachers Unions need to be outlawed
jp on May 20, 2009 at 9:44 AM
Do you mean Tom McClintock?
yogi41 on May 20, 2009 at 9:46 AM
Purge!!!
BigWyo on May 20, 2009 at 9:47 AM
I wonder how many of these Californians knew about the Ogabe plan and they figured the goodies can still be had but the other states would do the paying?
Bishop on May 20, 2009 at 9:47 AM
What was the voter turnout?
I doubt this was a case of the liberals turning out and voting against taxes but for more goodies. Most cities were only voting on the Props. I kept reminding folks at work it was a voting day – most had forgotten and none cared except me and the other conservative.
I waited in line 45 minutes to vote in Nov at a poll place just for my district and 2 minutes yesterday to vote at a place that covered 5 separate districts.
On off elections with no ‘cool’ candidates to vote for, liberals can’t get anyone to turn out.
JadeNYU on May 20, 2009 at 9:47 AM
Go ahead mess your state up. Give the most generous public employee pension plans in the world, who cares the federal government and our wonderful new Administration will fix everything. Don’t feel bad, California, I live in Illinois and we are right behind you in the bread line.
Seriously, what incentive does any state have to cutting spending or running balanced budgets?
Angry Dumbo on May 20, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Didn’t the voters a few years ago also reject Schwarzenegger’s ballot initiatives that would have cut spending and defanged public unions? If so, the LA Times and Allah do have a point.
Golden Boy on May 20, 2009 at 9:51 AM
I suppose everyone that voted no is now a hater, racist and against the children.
darwin on May 20, 2009 at 9:51 AM
Keys for California recovery.
1 Cut down business rules regulations and severe taxation
2 Free up the flow of water for agriculture and abandon regulating how farmers raise animals.
3 Drill for oil.
seven on May 20, 2009 at 9:53 AM
Waiting for the state of California to turn up on Craigslist. China might snap it up before Obama can print up enough Monopoly money, though. You gotta call fast and have the cash ready when bargains turn up on Craigslist.
China could fit a few billion surplus males in a state that big. They need storage.
aero on May 20, 2009 at 9:54 AM
USSC law says the state must pay for their education. And limited health care is also required by federal law. There is also public health policies as far as vaccinating kids. Incarceration, we of course, want to pay for. Housing we don’t.
But, we don’t have to pay for higher education or treat them as California residents. We don’t have to offer non-emergency healthcare. And housing never. But they get around a lot of stuff by not requiring proof of citizenship for these benefits.
If they make living here less desirable, more will return home and it help a great deal.
Yes, thank you1
Blake on May 20, 2009 at 9:57 AM
I live in California. I can see Mexico from my house!
SilverStar830 on May 20, 2009 at 10:01 AM
Gee i don’t remember Acorn sponsoring drive by tours of the Judges home who overturned Prop 187./s
heshtesh on May 20, 2009 at 10:03 AM
Janeane Garofalo, are you listening?
Still think it’s “racism, straight up”?
The people of Caliornia (or as you might call them, rednecks) have spoken. the “bluest” of the blue states overwhelmingly rejected these insane tax and spend policies.
Taxpayers all across America ain’t too happy right now either. Maybe you should go on Countdown again and admit that you were wrong.
As if that is ever going to happen.
UltimateBob on May 20, 2009 at 10:04 AM
Many of the problems in the USA as well as CA come from liberal activist judges who fight against the obvious will of the people. They have taken our country down the tubes by rediculous rulings, they have become the last word on everything we do, and the other two branches of government just fall in behind. If we are going to give them that much power, at least we should be able to fire them!
Christian Conservative on May 20, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Awww, where oh where is my widda fwend Grow Fins, who so proudly proclaimed that the pick of Jon Huntsman to be Ambassador to China was another nail in the conservative coffin?
Yeah.
Party ID: tied for the first time since 2005.
Big blue state CA: gives the middle finger to liberals who demand higher taxes and more spending.
And for further proof that the tide is turning, pay attention to the gubernatorial race in New Jersey.
Message to GF and our other lefty trolls: just because you WANT to declare the conservative movement DOA simply doesn’t make it so. There are signs of life everywhere you look. Which must absolutely haunt your dreams of a utopian liberal society.
BardMan on May 20, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Suggest we all write our congressmen and senators to vote NO on bailing out CA. I’m going to suggest to Inhofe and Coburn (my senators) that they start filing lawsuits against the drive to bail out everything. Surely it is unconstitutional. But from my last comment at 10:06 regarding activist judges, that may not work either.
Christian Conservative on May 20, 2009 at 10:10 AM
It’s facile but wrong for people like AP and the LAT to say that “the voters” bear responsibility. It’s not all the voters, but specifically the media’s favorite voters, the “moderates.”
A majority—moderates plus conservatives—oppose tax increases, and a majority—moderates plus liberals—oppose spending cuts. It’s not the liberals or conservatives who are irresponsible in that equation; both those groups have rational, coherent political philosophies. Moderates are not moderate because they believe in balance or judgment or good government, they’re moderate because they believe in nothing.
Fabozz on May 20, 2009 at 10:10 AM
No, they rejected paying for all the giveaways which they still demand.
quikstrike98 on May 20, 2009 at 10:11 AM
There was also the guy that ran against Davis, Simon, I think. That was a ridiculously dirty campaign.
Count to 10 on May 20, 2009 at 10:12 AM
I also walked right in and cast all my NO votes in a matter of minutes. Turn-out was indeed low. Here’s a good link to how every County turned out and the results.
Rovin on May 20, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Now I’m asking why people didn’t see this IN NOVEMBER?
Bob's Kid on May 20, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Meg Whitman needs to save California already!
youngO on May 20, 2009 at 10:14 AM
Hate to burst your bubble, but Meg’s another RINO.
pugwriter on May 20, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Real impressive. They voted to not pay for their own lunacy. But they love,love,love, their wet dream nanny state. I agree that that they will now vote more liberal then ever. I work with a west coast team every day. They are all about their ” feelings”. And that “feeling” is mostly narcissism.
DeweyWins on May 20, 2009 at 10:19 AM
Actually they didn’t reject paying for the giveaways, they rejected paying MORE for them.
I think this vote sends a clear signal to Sacramento: You’ve soaked us enough, now it’s time to start tightening your own belt to make ends meet.
UltimateBob on May 20, 2009 at 10:20 AM
CC,
As a life-long resident of California, I don’t want one penny to come to the aid of this state from our Federal government. I want every state legislator to get back to work and cut spending programs across the board. This is the message that the voters sent yesterday despite the spin from the liberal media.
Rovin on May 20, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Is she a fiscal conservative? If she is, does anything else matter? If not, she is part of the problem.
Loxodonta on May 20, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Perhaps if California Republican’s just “moderated” a bit and “crossed the aisle to work to get things done on behalf of the voters” this whole mess could be cleaned up! Or maybe not…
sabbott on May 20, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Haven’t seen that troll around these parts in a while. Maybe he / she / it has been banned?
UltimateBob on May 20, 2009 at 10:23 AM
They recalled Davis and Ahnold is even worse. Why not recall him? Just keep doing it until you get it right.
Frankly, a cardboard cutout of Ronald Reagan could not do worse than the oaf in office now.
SKYFOX on May 20, 2009 at 10:23 AM
I am so happy I could dance all over the place! I voted NO on all measures yesterday. I could tell a lot there did same thing. This man walking out told his friend, it is easy voting NO on all. Is time that The Californian People wake up to what is going on. Now, I will try to find where to sign the Petition to recall the Gubernator. I didn’t vote for him in the first place. I knew he would screw us up. Guess many were star struck. We have a lot of work to do. Would be real nice if CA. went Bankrupt. That is what we need.
sheebe on May 20, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Saying NO to the state gov’t wouldn’t work (and still might not if the courts in CA decide it’s not “fair”) IF California could print money.
That’s what’s wrong with a currency tied to nothing. There’s NO LIMIT on how many dollars the US can print, even if the currency’s value begins to fall fast against other currencies or other assets. That won’t stop the federal gov’t. They don’t want to protect the value of the dollar–they’re willing to bankrupt the entire nation in the service of their social redistributionist goals.
No nation can thrive or survive without prudent limits on the amount of currency it prints. California may or may not have reached a reckoning day, but the US reckoning day is still coming, and we are all going to pay very very dearly.
JiangxiDad on May 20, 2009 at 10:25 AM
Changing this quote from the L.A. Times:
To this:
…and I could easily go along with the editorial.
jon1979 on May 20, 2009 at 10:27 AM
I think it turned into Aynbland, or Anneinca.
JiangxiDad on May 20, 2009 at 10:27 AM
As I remember it was the Democrats in both houses in the state of California that forced the gov into this since they rejected his budget cuts
Arnold is just playing the adult – he put it to the voters – knew they were going to vote it down
EricPWJohnson on May 20, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Step 1. Deport all the illegal aliens there.
Step 2. Disband the criminal government labor unions
Step 3. Eliminate all deficit spending.
That will kick the system in the huevos. Then the people will have to adjust to reality and make some decisions.
saiga on May 20, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Couldn’t agree more. I’ve been here forever and I am ready to let it burn (figuratively, not literally.)
If people voted NO under the assumption that Obama will bail out the state, they should have their heads examined. I don’t want a single dime of taxpayer money from South Carolina or Alaska or Ohio to pay for the fiasco in California.
The state needs to step back, declare bankruptcy, tear up all its union contracts and start over. Enough is enough already.
BardMan on May 20, 2009 at 10:29 AM
Unions basically obtain there power through extortion.
Dasher on May 20, 2009 at 10:30 AM
She’s in the mold of Romney; in fact, she was his adviser when he ran for President.
The one thing that I don’t like about her is that she is against off-shore drilling; to me, that’s unconscienceable. But if the choice is between Meg and Jerry Brown (which it’s looking like it might be), then I will vote for Meg, knowing full well any Governor is in a tough position as long as we continue to have those lefist clowns in the State legislature.
yogi41 on May 20, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Only a “fool” would suggest something with so much common sense…the government does not need people like you around…back to public school.
right2bright on May 20, 2009 at 10:31 AM
I want Obama to pass as much crap as he can as soon as he can. Sure the tea party movement will protest, but the more he passes the more resounding the thud of the collapse will be. To pay for this we have to rprint money indefinitely and all lenders except the fed are looking to get out of the dollar. How’s that going to work out for us?
What concerns me the most is an unreformed GOP running the country. They will not reform Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, or or any other institution but will distract America and kick the can down the road by cutting taxes, tapping American energy reserves, and raising the feds interest rates. This will make Americans complacent and the desire for our much needed reforms could die out. That is my fear. That is why there is no RINO to smal to hunt. No matter how small the GOP would get the pendulum will swing back and better it be in the hands of conservatives, not Republicans.
Theworldisnotenough on May 20, 2009 at 10:33 AM
You can see “Mexico” in every school, hospital, and Home Depot parking lot…
right2bright on May 20, 2009 at 10:33 AM
Excellent steps! This is why I hope we go bankrupt. That would crunch the Unions. Not sure if they will get the illegal’s out, but maybe the Citizens will realize how much they have hurt our State.
sheebe on May 20, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Maybe, just maybe, if California goes under, then others will begin to see that foolish spending causes governments to tumble.
The problem is, it begins a “balancing” act, how much spending do “we” tolerate, and yet keep the gov. unions happy.
right2bright on May 20, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Just a microcosm for the effectiveness of government. Spend $10 for $1 dollar of the private sector and produce no results.
WashJeff on May 20, 2009 at 10:38 AM
They kind of tried that with Prop. 13, where 2/3 had to vote for any tax increases…that didn’t stop them.
And they always have the “Romney ploy”, instead of taxes they institute “fees”.
right2bright on May 20, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Really. What give aways? Of the roughly 4,000,000 people who voted last night, what give aways do they receive? I voted. What give aways do I receive? Do tell.
nico on May 20, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Maybe, just maybe, if California goes under, then others will begin to see that foolish spending causes governments to tumble.
I don’t know, Michigan has been a cesspool for quite a while now, and those fools continue to elect the dumbest people they can find including the Shamwow in the White House.
Bishop on May 20, 2009 at 10:39 AM
Ballot initiatives A-E were soundly defeated by 60-40 margins. F, which denies the legislature from receiving raises in deficit spending, passed 70-30. It’s a good start.
The biggest problem facing CA is not the state legislature but the people of CA. They not only keep re-electing the same mindset to pass a whole bunch of dopey laws that spend a whole lot of money in the legislature, but year-after-year, pass ballot measures that increase spending, expand government. The spending includes lots of debt in the form of bonds.
Perhaps we will now see a turn around in the state towards more fiscally responsible behavior. I have seen the opposite for so long that I am rather skeptical that this sudden urge of responsibility will quickly fade once the economy recovers and things here in CA go back to “normal”. I don’t think things are miserable enough for people to really get their heads screwed on straight in the long term, yet.
Weebork on May 20, 2009 at 10:52 AM
That should be “you and me.”
Here’s how to know: “force I to bail them out.”
Alana on May 20, 2009 at 10:53 AM
My sympathies. It isn’t easy living near East L.A. is it?
chemman on May 20, 2009 at 10:55 AM
I think the “conservatives” on this thread are deluding themselves. The problems in California are based on the fact that everyone wants something from the government. The only difference between a California conservative and liberal is in the specific items they want from the government. Direct democracy does definitely not work in those circumstances. Everyone votes their own selfish wants and lets the government square the circle for them claiming ignorance when it can’t. So the government now has to figure out how to pay for the candy everyone has voted for themselves.
Sure, there are structural problems, including the gerrymandered districts that almost guarantee a Democrat majority. But electing Arnold as a Republican is a joke – he is a Democrat plain and simple.
Stupid people making stupid decisions leads to these outcomes.
Pleeeeeeease don’t move to my state now that you screwed up your state.
dpierson on May 20, 2009 at 11:03 AM
We really need leaders willing to speak the truth
“Look, we thought we could cure social and economic ills with government spending. But social security, medicare, etc., etc. have failed. We’re devaluing our country and impoverishing our children, but we’re not solving the problem. So we have to end it all. Its gonna hurt, especially for those counting on social security etc. But the money simply isn’t there, and will never be there. Government is no different than you. It cannot spend money it doesn’t have.”
Iblis on May 20, 2009 at 11:04 AM
Great one! President ShamWow. LMAO.
Perfectly appropriate, since his entire presidency is a sham, but his supporters nonetheless are “wowed” by him.
UltimateBob on May 20, 2009 at 11:04 AM
Got enough paint thinner for that broad brush?
nico on May 20, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Let me make it clearer to you:
California Republican Conservative.
dpierson on May 20, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Correction:
California Republican is not equal to Conservative.
(Took my unequal sign out on posting)
dpierson on May 20, 2009 at 11:11 AM
I can only speak for my immediate area. We live in a large residential area in an upper middle class neighborhood. My wife and I got there an hour and a half before the polls closed, and according to the ballot counter we were only the 148th and 149th people to vote that day.
My suspicion is that the state legislature called a special election knowing voter turnout on these are traditionally low, and thought that it would be enough to squeak out a victory on at least some of the measures. Luckily for us it backfired and the small number of people that did turn out were obviously fired up to send a message.
Or they’ll just continue to increase business taxes. Your company may cut jobs and scale back hours, and your bills may go up, but rarely do people make the connection.
TheMightyMonarch on May 20, 2009 at 11:12 AM
You are now on a DHS list, if you weren’t before.
And I agree to your common sense solution.
daesleeper on May 20, 2009 at 11:17 AM
Tax revolt is really overselling this election, particularly with what may turn out to be a record low percentage of voters. While the 30 to 1 number is accurate, there were actually unions at odds with each other (e.g., the public school teachers and college professors unions issuing multiple mailers with the exact opposite recommendations). While the cuts will provoke a backlash, they may also provoke a constitutional convention, which would likely consider reducing the 2/3 requirement for budgets and taxes. While this would somewhat defang the GOP minority, Arnold’s greatest legacy (well, make that only legacy) will likely be the redistricting measure due to go into effect next year (taking district drawing away from the politicians, reducing gerrymandering, and potentially moderating both parties a bit. Probably the GOP picks up seats from this, but instead of deciding elections in primaries (as many seats are decided today), both parties would likely face more competitive general elections and the prospect of needing to appeal to the center more to win.
okonkolo on May 20, 2009 at 11:19 AM
Voter turnout was about 20% – that’s hardly a clear message.
I guess somewhere in California is another RINO like Arnold who will sell himself as the savior and get elected because of high name recognition. Unless the people of California extract their collective heads from their rear nothing is going to change.
dpierson on May 20, 2009 at 11:19 AM
ILLEGAL ALIEN ENTITLEMENTS
nondhimmie on May 20, 2009 at 11:19 AM
dpierson on May 20, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Thanks. I’m fairly involved with conservative politics (and, yes, there are some) in California. We don’t vote for hand-outs. We don’t vote for bond issues. We don’t vote for RINOS. But, we do know how a gnat feels on an elephant’s ass.
I get a little tired of people (not you, as it turns out) making generalizations that everyone in California is “on the take”. That depends quite a bit on income. A lot of us are “on the give”.
nico on May 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM
Meg Whitman is no conservative…another RINO. She can run a company but her heart is with the libs on social programs, just like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett. These famous CEO people are not the answer. They’ve been in that rarified atmosphere of Silicon Valley and Napa Valley and have lunch at the French Laundry. They buy cases of $100 bottles of wine like we buy the cheapest water at Walmart.
Don’t be fooled again by faux Republicans. Someone that walks the talk. Someone that’s not necessarily a super-star or is even telegenic…McClintock would be the right person. Heck, I could do a better job as a 30-year veteran as an Executive Secretary to the venture capitalists in Menlo Park, CA.
luvstotango on May 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM
LOL!!!
Watch the trolls come out and say that not voting for tax increases is racist!!!
Kalifornia is a ridiculous state with ridiculous laws – run by ridiculous politicians. Vote the ridiculous politicians and their grubby your money is mine mentality out of Kalifornia and out of America.
izoneguy on May 20, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Sacramento, Where You At?
Christien on May 20, 2009 at 11:28 AM
This is the kind of tragic outcome that results when not enough illegal aliens go to the polls to support their own interests.
/s
califcon on May 20, 2009 at 11:31 AM
I agree with you that there is a minority of true conservatives in California, but the California GOP is not conservative. There are too many country-club conservatives that think if you drink wine and eat cheese you qualify as conservative. From what I have seen most Latino voters are actually more socially conservative then most of the white Republicans. I am not sure about their fiscal stand however.
dpierson on May 20, 2009 at 11:31 AM
The scare ads that they ran promoting the tax proposals promised that if the additional funding was not increased, we’d lose firefighters and (*gasp*) teachers. Frankly, that is one reason I voted *against* the two proposals, because I think public education in California and especially in Los Angeles is an obscenity.
It’s massively over-staffed at the administrative level, a huge percentage of schools in non-white areas cannot graduate students who can pass idiot-level comprehension tests, there are constant race riots and shootings, and California taxpayers are being demanded to fund for free the spawn of the millions of illegals who have slunk across various borders and are living off the taxpayer teet. Not to mention the liberal anti-American bias that is routinely taught from kindergarten levels up through the hallowed halls of Marxist Berkeley U.
So if Arnold *promises* fewer teachers, fine. Sounds good to me.
NahnCee on May 20, 2009 at 11:33 AM
What is encouraging about this is that most of the people who voted yesterday saw through the deceptive advertising for these props. Proponents had outspent opponents by 10 to 1, their ads were blatant lies, but it didn’t work this time. Why? Because the voter demographic for this election was quite different than last Nov 4th. Now that the starry-eyed lemmings who voted for Obama have their Messiah, they were not all that concerned about this alphabet soup of ballot propositions (assuming they could even comprehend what the issues are in the first place), so they didn’t bother. It was the smarter, more informed, middle-class voter who made it a point to go to the polls yesterday to send a message that we are fed up with this liberal tax and spend idiocy. Call it tea-party part deux if you will. There are still some common-sense thinking people left in this state.
infidel4life on May 20, 2009 at 11:34 AM
I’m usually not one to panic until it’s time and I think it may be time folks. How far are we going to let this go before we do something? I don’t know what to do and our congresspeople are doing nothing so I’m asking for ideas. I went to the tea party in D.C. and it was awesome, but it only got coverage as anything other than a racist, teabagging, hate Obama fest on ONE news channel so getting the word out for the July one seems difficult. I want to stop this landslide we’re in b/c I’m actually scared that once this gets to a point, there will be no turning back, if we’re not too late already.
This govt has at least begun to socialize/nationalize medicine, banks, car companies, etc. in only four months. We will be paying an ungodly amount of taxes (ALL of us, not just the “rich”) very soon and for what? Some of us are going to receive the same mediocre healthcare as everyone else while paying for it ALL. We’re bailing out people who took out mortgages they couldn’t afford and now we’re bailing out those that refinanced for whatever reason too?? We will be told what cars we may drive, while stuck in more expensive cars that are less safe. While living in VA, I will be bailing out California which is full of sanctuary cities and $20 million “green” classrooms.
I’m at the end of my rope with this rewarding failure junk, but I also know complaining to a bunch of like-minded people will get us nowhere so what can we do??
hollygolightly on May 20, 2009 at 11:38 AM
To quote you, sir, that is HORSESH*T.
In 2005 Shwarzenegger championed Prop 76, which would have limited state spending plus the average of three previous years’ revenue growth. If there was no revenue growth over the previous three years, there would be no increase in spending. This measure would have halted California’s government expansion in its tracks.
California voters rejected it by a 25% margin. And the LA Times is right to call them out on it. California voters still want big government, but they always want someone else to pay for it.
It’s easy to forget that Schwarzenegger tried to be a fiscal conservative at one time, but the voters of California would not allow him to remain that way.
Caiwyn on May 20, 2009 at 11:40 AM
What % of the CA electorate even pay taxes? Sounds like nobody bothered to show up at the poll booths except grumpy people from the fringe of the GOP.
dhimwit on May 20, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Here’s a solution to Collie-fornia’s budget woes, inspired by Sarah Palin:
Ahnuld should sign an executive order allowing the state government to sell offshore drilling leases in unexplored areas along the entire California coast, except within 10 miles of San Francisco and Los Angeles, with a “drilling rights tax” payable to the State, as well as a small tax on any oil or gas eventually extracted.
This will attract drilling companies to California, providing immediate revenue to the state through the leases, and long-term revenue from the oil and gas tax.
Then, offer a discount on state income taxes for any currently unemployed American citizen (NOT illegal aliens) living in California hired onto the drilling rigs for a few years, which would reduce unemployment benefits paid by the state.
In order to satisfy the environmental lobby, oil-drilling rigs must observe the same environmental restrictions as those in the Gulf of Mexico, whose oil rigs never leaked even when struck by hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005.
Since fish also tend to congregate around oil rigs, the state could offer fishing licenses on oil platforms, with the proceeds to be split between the drilling companies and the state.
More jobs, less people on unemployment, lease and tax revenue to the state, less reliance on imported oil, what’s not to like?
Steve Z on May 20, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Keys for California recovery.
1 Cut down business rules regulations and severe taxation
2 Free up the flow of water for agriculture and abandon regulating how farmers raise animals.
3 Drill for oil.
seven on May 20, 2009 at 9:53 AM
4 Get reimbursement from Federal government for the cost of all the illegals that cross the border.
From public housing, schooling their kids, welfare, cost of the criminal activities committed by illegals. The law of unintended consequences, Gov fails to stop illegals from entering, (that is their FUNCTION.) That forces CA to incur cost. That cost needs to be recovered.
As ugly as that notion is to me, it is fact.
If the Fed did its job and controlled the border, then Ca would not have as much of a problem as it does.
ColdWarrior57 on May 20, 2009 at 11:41 AM
I live in California. I can see Mexico from my house!
SilverStar830 on May 20, 2009 at 10:01 AM
Do you live in San Fran?
heshtesh on May 20, 2009 at 11:44 AM
Even without “Liberal Activist Judges” and the illegals California would still be up the creek. You simply cannot divert such a large amount of money from the economy to the government – period.
Unless that thought process is fixed there will be budget issues during every recession. Stop asking the government to fix stuff and do it yourself.
dpierson on May 20, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »