Oh, it’s going to be a fun month.
First, anyone who opened up their statement this week from one of the remaining Wall Street institutions still standing, like, say, Morgan Stanley, found the statement contained a single word: RUN!
And California can’t get itself a budget. Oh, yes, on Monday the legislature passed a budget, such as it was. But it isn’t really a terrribly good budget, according to the governor, in that it doesn’t include a “rainy day fund” for future moments of fiscal crisis (which seem unpleasantly likely) and will only create a worse budget situation next year.
“It kicks that can down the alley,” Arnold said during a news conference at the state Capitol according to the San Francisco Chron. “And if that wasn’t bad (enough), on top of that to give me … a fake budget reform.”
So a furious Schwarzenegger said that he will veto the budget.
If he makes good on his promise, it will be the first time in modern California history that a state budget has been vetoed.
The legislature fired back, and let various press outlets know that they will override Arnold’s veto. (Take that! Bam! Pow-pow!)
The governor didn’t blink: He said that if lawmakers decide to override him, ….He’ll just kill most of the legislation they passed this year. (Override that, mo-fos!)
“Hundreds of bills will be vetoed,” Arnold said according to the LA Times.
In response to all of the above, those still in possession of their senses called for a state consititional convention, reports the San Jose Mercury News:
The Bay Area Council, which represents the chief executives of Google, Yahoo, Chevron, Wells Fargo and other major San Francisco Bay area businesses, is leading the charge for a state constitutional convention to revamp state government.
“This year’s budget deadlock shows better than perhaps any other recent event that our state needs a constitutional convention to fix a governance system that is hopelessly broken,” Jim Wunderman, president of the Bay Area Council, said in a statement.
[SNIP]
Among some of the changes being proposed:
— Adopt a two-year budget cycle.
— Reform California’s taxing and spending systems, along with its ties to local government spending.
— Remove the two-thirds vote requirement to pass a budget in the Legislature.
California is one of just three states with such a high threshold, along with Arkansas and Rhode Island.
The two-thirds vote requirement is often cited by Democrats, who hold a majority in both houses of the Legislature, as a primary cause of the state’s almost annual budget stalemates. It allows Republicans to hold up the budget until their demands are met—demands that often have little or nothing to do with the proposed spending plan.
“Our budget process is broken,” said Assemblyman Sandre Swanson, D-Oakland, a member of the Assembly Budget Committee
It would certainly seem so.
I think that the 2/3 threshold may be too high, but I never liked major bills passed which left a 49.99% minority realing and ignored. Conservative Republicans should have some concerns met, even in California.
Is it the budget that needs a 2/3 threshold?
I thought it was that a 2/3 majority was required to raise taxes on the people, which is the big sticking issue, because Republicans keep blocking the Democrats from removing loopholes like mortgage interest, etc.
To answer my own question, the budget does need a 2/3 majority to pass.
P@yday Loan
I was pleases to hear that the California Legislators had finally come to their senses and had passed a budget that did not raise taxes, especially with the economy in such turmoil. But now I have learned that instead of BALANCING THE BUDGET, they voted to go to the “P@YDAY LOAN†window and ask for a cash advance on their paycheck (TAXES), and call that balancing the budget.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payday_loan
Now we all know that getting a cash advance on your credit card does not balance your budget, at least all of us except those who reside in Sacramento apparently.
Their plan would require hundreds of thousands of businesses and individuals to hand over more of their taxes sooner (P@YDAY LOAN), so the state could use the cash infusion to pay its bills.
To the taxpayer it is sort of like having to pay the electric bill October 1st for the electricity you may use in November and December. It only makes sense if you are a politician.
Of course next year we will be in a worse mess.
Gallup Daily: Obama 47%, McCain 45%
If the Los Angeles/ California people who showed up yesterday in Beverly Hills for Obama’s $28,000/ plate dinner, and then the frugal and larger $2500/ person reception, had donated half that money to the state or to social programs directly that they claim to care so much about, they could have saved some of those programs outright that are under contention here in the state budget.
Craig Ferguson wondered on his show last night, what hay the media would have made of these events if the Republicans had held them, right after the stock market crashed, not to mention the Metrolink ridden by working stiffs, and the victims in Texas and New Orleans. Only the party of the working stiffs could get away with this. (Not that the MSM is biased, or anything.)
There IS a lot of noise to reduce the 2/3 requirement to pass the budget to half, but since California and LA in particular have become regions where the gimmes outnumber the givers, that could be a recipe for more failure/ exodus/ property and business owner rebellion from the region in the long run.