|
 |
July 06, 2003 THE CALIFORNIA BUDGET CRISIS....The Hartford Courant ran an article yesterday that provides a pretty balanced look at the California budget crisis and what caused it. Basic points:
It's a good summary. But why do I have to go to the Hartford Courant to read it? As for why we can't seem to resolve our budget mess, that's the result of a witch's brew of extremists safely ensconced in gerrymandered districts, term limits keeping a perpetual crew of amateurs in charge, a ridiculous two-thirds requirement to pass a budget, and the California Republican Party's insane hatred of Gray Davis. If you're interested, here's a pretty decent description of the Golden State's dysfunctional politics. Don't you wish you lived here? Posted by Kevin Drum at July 6, 2003 10:48 PM | TrackBackComments
I do live here. And what I keep wondering is, after the dust settles and California becomes Arkansas, who are the voters going to blame? The extremist Republicans, or the intransient Democrats? Or has Davis just become the convenient whipping boy for everything from budget problems to acne? Posted by: craigie at July 6, 2003 11:19 PM | PERMALINK"a ridiculous two-thirds requirement to pass a budget" This is one of the dirty little secrets of the current fiasco. Kevin, I think you should run in the recall election. Just promise to get rid of the two-thirds requirment for the budget, (ie. It's time to just let democrats run the legislature, like they're meant to.) I always wonder why republicans are such obstructionists. Hell, no one's getting hurt by Estrada having to sit around for a vote, but the freaking California budget is in a sham because they're using a tiny minority to keep the bill from being signed until after they get enough signatures on their recall ballot. And let's not forget about their buddies at Enron who screwed anyone who used electricity in California (San Diego got hit first; wonder if Darryl Issa will remind people of that?). Posted by: Kombiz at July 7, 2003 12:05 AM | PERMALINKThat Times article makes it pretty clear that California is just the largest example among the states of what's been going on in the US House since '94 and more recently in some of the actions of the US Senate as well. The country needs a better way of redistricting; one that's fair (and perceived as fair), but which doesn't favor incumbents. I have no idea how to construct it, but I think it's becoming more necessary every cycle. I read an analysis in one of the papers that only about 35 of the House seats up for re-election last year actually were contested. That's not at all what the founders had in mind. Posted by: Linkmeister at July 7, 2003 12:05 AM | PERMALINKBesides the Hartford Courant, you might check out Rough & Tumble for a pretty comprehensive daily list of CA political coverage. Posted by: TomF at July 7, 2003 12:17 AM | PERMALINKUmmm... can you name the state legislature which isn't a hotbed of lunacy? California's is pretty wild, granted, but here in New York, our legislature's not a lot better. The recall campaign is quite frightening, though--a very Banana Republican device. Posted by: Thersites at July 7, 2003 02:12 AM | PERMALINKI think that in some ways, this is a result of DLC politics. Davis (and California) got screwed, blued and tatooed by the GOP-backed energy companies. The Democrats (along with the GOP) may have put California in a position where it could happen, but even once it did, Davis wasn't willing to flat-out blame the GOP for this. He should have some energy company executives on trial. If there needs to be some Texas trunk-stuffing, with executives (and documents) mysteriously appearing in California coutrooms, too bad. Even when Davis was betrayed, he's unwilling to turn on them in return. He seems to feel that he can 'do business' with them. Posted by: Barry at July 7, 2003 03:53 AM | PERMALINKI wonder why any intelligent Republican would want the California governorship at this point. All of them are certainly clueless as to how to get the state out if its financial problems. So why bother? Posted by: raj at July 7, 2003 07:27 AM | PERMALINKMaybe the California National Guard can threaten to invade another state. Remember the 1930's, when the Arizona and California national guards nearly started shooting at each other over water? Invasions work wonders on a Dear Leader's popularity rating on a national level, so why not? Nevada is an international menace, is run by a lunatic, and is rumored to have stored dangerous nuclear materials suitable for a terrorist 'dirty bomb'. Delenda Est Las Vegas! Posted by: squiddy at July 7, 2003 08:01 AM | PERMALINKKevin You wonder why the Hartford Courant is where the story is published? It's simple - that's where the bulk of the bonds brokers live! California's debt rating is on the floor right now, and as the bulk of the debt instruments are traded on the East Coast, where better to expect to see the story of our economic troubles displayed in an easy to understand format? Enquiring Investing Minds Want To Know! Posted by: pessimist at July 7, 2003 08:02 AM | PERMALINKClearly these things are Gray Davis's fault, as a result of being really not a nice guy and not having starred in Terminator. Davis Must Go. Posted by: John Isbell at July 7, 2003 08:22 AM | PERMALINK"Don't you wish you lived here?" I was in San Jose over the weekend, and the weather is very nice indeed. Shouldn't the mess being made in Sacramento actually increase the likelihood of challengers' success in 2004? Every non-incumbent gets to run ads talking about what his opponent did wrong. Sherry Bebitch (how unfortunate) Jeffe's piece feels sensationalized to me. That's not intimidation, honey, that's the public square. Citizens are supposed to debate and argue with each other, especially when their government is in turmoil. Posted by: PG at July 7, 2003 08:54 AM | PERMALINKToday's LA Times has an article about what the state GOP proposes to cut in order to get a budget without raising a penny in taxes. Among their notions of "wasteful spending" to be eliminated are: the Seisic Safety Commission, health care clinics for Native Americans, and a $50 monthly payment to poor blind people to care for seeing eye dogs. Okay, so screwing the poor is a typical GOP tactic, but killing the state agency which is responsible for earthquake safety? In California? I currently have the misfortune to live in CA, but I thank my lucky stars that it will only be for another year or two. Posted by: YT at July 7, 2003 08:56 AM | PERMALINKKevin, remember, whereever you are, Oakland has it worse! Posted by: Adam at July 7, 2003 08:56 AM | PERMALINKHere's today's article regarding the Sunday session and what the GOP wants to cut, including: The Republican plan would cut all state funding for abortions. It would do away with the Seismic Safety Commission, whose role is to protect the public from earthquake hazards. And it would reduce by 60% the budget for the California Youth Authority, the agency responsible for disciplining youthful offenders. Other cuts included eliminating health care clinics for American Indians (saving $6.5 million); withholding the $50 monthly payment to poor, blind men and women to help feed their seeing-eye dogs; doing away with medical evaluation of low-income children ($51 million); and ending a program that pays for the burial of foster children. * Cutting elementary school education by more than $1 billion a year. The savings would come partly from postponing children's enrollment in kindergarten. * Lopping $450 million from the state prison system. * Withholding from the University of California and California State University systems a sum of money that each would need to run a large campus.
Does anyone else think that part of this could be related to term-limits? The legislative members don't have a long-term interest in making sure things work out interpersonally or financially. As for 2/3 requirements, I submit the Senate filibuster of Bush nominated judges. Wait, wait, maybe a minority party blocking a budget is less important than federal judges so it is ok..... (I probably shouldn't have mentioned that since now no-one will talk about the term-limit conjecture, but oh well.) Posted by: Sebastian Holsclaw at July 7, 2003 09:03 AM | PERMALINKSebastian - the term limits hypothesis has been put forward in various press outlets (including the Economist)
and has some validity. But the real culprit is the way redistricting
happened; by providing safe seats for everyone in the legislature, it
created districts with marked ideological character that give their
representatives *zero* incentive to compromise. Compromise might even be
bad as it could get you recalled or defeated in the primary. Similarly, the 2/3 majority requirement wouldn't be an issue if
people were talking to each other and working towards a common goal. It
would be a great checkpoint to make sure that everyone's interests were
being met. But the minority isn't interested in compromise, and the
majority doesn't have the political skills or tact to bring about a
compromise, so we gridlock. I'm completely with you on the evils of gerrymandering. Historically gerrymandering was used to keep specific politicians in power (often Speakers in a legislature) as well as specific politicians who didn't want to deal with competition. I wonder how gerrymandering interacts with term-limits. Does it make things even more 'party' oriented than before? Does it have some other annoying effect? If I didn't have to do some work today, I'd look into a budget crisis term-limit correlation just to see if there is one. Posted by: Sebastian Holsclaw at July 7, 2003 10:14 AM | PERMALINK"I wonder why any intelligent Republican would want the California governorship at this point. All of them are certainly clueless as to how to get the state out if its financial problems. So why bother?" -Posted by raj at July 7, 2003 07:27 AM Because it's an opportunity. Think of the financial equivalent of martial law/state of emergency. All sorts of things could be done. Posted by: Barry at July 7, 2003 10:59 AM | PERMALINKWhy did you have to go to the Hartford paper? Having lived in California, here are some thoughts.... Papers like the LA Times and Orange County Register want to demonstrate that they are great "national" newspapers, so state and local news is relegated to the back section or a separate section. National and world news get top billing. Local radio shows are almost all owned by national media conglomerates, and they broadcast nationally-syndicated shows. Meanwhile, Los Angeles TV news spends its time showing car chases and reporting on crimes. So local news -- like California's budgetary problems and the idiotic way they deregulated electricity -- are not reported until the problem blows up into a crisis. It's not just California. The dismal state of local finances across the country seems to have been underreported until recently. Everybody is too busy talking about the latest Washington scandal, child kidnapping, and so on. It seems like a general problem with the media these days. Posted by: John at July 7, 2003 01:57 PM | PERMALINKBoth the statements above together are not supported by your own data. Posted by: Steve at July 7, 2003 09:25 PM | PERMALINKReality is not affected by our apprehension of it. Posted by: Watanabe Tsune at January 25, 2004 05:55 AM | PERMALINKHey I really like your site. Online Casinos with Speedy Online Casino Games Guide Posted by: Online Casinos with Speedy Online Casino Games Guide at June 11, 2004 06:11 PM | PERMALINKGlobal Free Pics - I Want Net Sex - Sic Galleries - Tranny Trick - Real Butts - Public Amateurs Posted by: Free porn thumbs at June 21, 2004 05:44 PM | PERMALINKcongrats mate! Fine job and fine site! Posted by: online casinos at July 26, 2004 12:53 AM | PERMALINK
Best XXX Sites - 943 check out the hot blackjack at http://www.blackjack-p.com here you can play blackjack online all you want! So everyone ~SMURKLE~ Posted by: blackjack at August 23, 2004 10:34 AM | PERMALINK6816 Herie http://blaja.web-cialis.com is online for all your black jack needs. We also have your blackjack needs met as well ;-) Posted by: blackjack at August 24, 2004 08:47 PM | PERMALINK1091 check out http://texhold.levitra-i.com for texas hold em online action boodrow Posted by: online texas hold em at August 25, 2004 04:46 PM | PERMALINK |
|
|
Powered by Movable Type 2.63 
|
||||
