[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers
Daily Email Summary


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics
Event Calendar
February 2010
(view month)
S M T W R F S
* 01 02 03 04 05 06
07 08 09 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 * * * * * *
<< (add event) >>

Wire Services
Advertise Liberally

MBA Member

Blue CA Ad Network
Join Our eMail List
Email:

Photobucket

Yay Deal

by: David Dayen

Mon Jul 20, 2009 at 19:58:23 PM PDT


You may have heard this by now, but we have a deal.  The #cabudget hashtag should get you your fix.  The topline stats:

$15 billion in cuts, no new taxes, $11 billion in gimmicks and borrowing
$4-5 billion in local government raids
only an $800 million reserve (initially the talks were for a $4 billion one)
$6 billion in reductions to public schools, but an $11 billion dollar payment somewhere down the road though not in writing
yes, there's new offshore drilling in this deal, going around the Lands Commission, and without an oil severance tax for the producers
$1 billion assumed for the sale of the State Compensation Insurance Fund, which is not only unlikely but would really crush small businesses if sold
no suspension of Prop. 98
basically a reinvention of state government, more austere, and precisely when folks need the opposite.

Story here.

...three furlough days a month for some state employees still in place for the rest of the year
$500 million in cuts to Cal Works
smiles all around from Dem leg. leaders as they cheer that "we did not eliminate the safety net for California."  Poking a big hole in it, apparently, qualifies as A-OK.
...we're also cutting $1.2 billion to corrections without releasing any prisoners, as per the actual politics as usual.  The only way you can do that is by cutting every treatment or rehabilitation program in the prisons, or eliminating overtime for corrections officers.  In other words, we're turning prisons into Public Storage units.

UPDATE by Robert: The main takeaways here:

• Arnold and the Republicans got everything they wanted - a cuts-only budget that protects their wealthy allies and the big corporations from having to pay their share and that makes everyone else suffer.

• California's government is functioning as intended - producing right-wing outcomes despite large Democratic majorities. I will continue to blame specific legislators for agreeing to this shit, but lasting change will only happen when we press the reset button on state government.

UPDATE by Dave: Just to state the obvious, only the Republican leaders have agreed to this.  We still aren't through the process where individual Yacht Party members have to be bribed for their votes.

Of course, we aren't through the process where progressives just say "no we're not voting for that, try again," but I've never seen that process come into play.

UPDATE by Robert: More elements of the deal, from John Myers at KQED CapNotes:

• Background checks for IHSS providers
• Fingerprinting of workers and clients (so if you are disabled and cared for at home, you will be treated like a common criminal merely because you need assistance)
• "Some state parks will close" even though parks generate more tax revenue than they cost
• OC Fairgrounds to be sold
• Integrated Waste Management Board to be abolished, despite the fact that its annual cost is statistically negligible

The February deal was bad, but this is far worse.

...CalPERS reports $56 billion loss. Local governments are going to have to make up part of this shortfall - but with what money? The legislature has guaranteed mass bankruptcies for local governments with their raid on local funding, which was probably the point of Arnold's insistence on such raids.

David Dayen :: Yay Deal
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Yay Deal | 42 comments
The deal is an embarassment (5.57 / 7)
And any Democrat that votes for it should be ashamed.

The whole thing is an insult to California, but the oil drilling really stands out as a big old "fuck you" to the state. It shows Arnold and the Republicans can demand pretty much anything they want to, the environment and common sense be damned, and Democrats will just meekly go along with it.

I know Democratic leaders believe they have to make these deals to have a chance at winning a 2/3 majority in 2010, but I can't imagine why voters (especially progressives) would feel any motivation to stick around for the downticket races and give these people their votes.

Of course, this should remind us that California has an inherently conservative government. We are not a blue state when it comes to non-federal politics.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


Shame On Bass. Shame On Steinberg (4.00 / 2)
We need to find a firewall of Democratic assembly people and senators that will refuse to vote for this.

We cannot influence the GOP.  But we can influence our own side.  I say we do so.

Call your reps.  Every fracking one of them.


[ Parent ]
THe video is worth watching (0.00 / 0)
One word: glad

WTF?

I'm proud to work for Kamala Harris for AG.


String of expletives (4.50 / 4)
I have nothing but incoherent rage to offer right now.

Disclosure: Union staff, former staff for Manuel Perez, elected DSCC delegate for 80th AD, board of Democrats of the Desert

Wonder if we Santa Barbarians (5.00 / 1)
can reciprocate with a big F you to those folks who agreed to this offshore drilling scheme.

I hope so (6.50 / 2)
They're going to force you all to accept new offshore drilling AND take your local funds.

I'm sure Santa Barbara and Ventura residents will be curious about Tony Strickland's take on this deal.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave


[ Parent ]
From what I understand (0.00 / 0)
the oil from our Channel isn't of the grade that is used for autos..its used for pavement, etc.

And I hope they have some plan who to stick with the bill for all the damage caused should a major spill happen again. Not holding my breath on that one. I'm sure it will be the locals.

I'm sure the $2,000 a night Bacara is going to love this news, especially as it is right next to a refinery that I'm sure will be getting more action than usual.

I am so angry I am shaking. Pedro's getting a piece of my mind tomorrow...and his wife is running to take his seat next election, too, as he is running for Attorney General. Can't stand listening to Tony speak so what ever he says it ends up like Charlie Brown's parents.


[ Parent ]
Gee--enough to get the Ventura Dems united to get him out??? (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Vote No. Hell no. (0.00 / 0)
Call your representatives and tell them you expect them to vote no.

Bass and Steinberg do not have the right to do this.  If they were dumb enough to endorse this, they need to hear what-for.


if by (0.00 / 0)
"statistically negligible" you mean $0.00 since the Waste Management Board is paid for by waste management companies and not the General Fund.

Just wondering... (0.00 / 0)
...were this dictation of terms to be rejected, what are the chances that terms that aren't as bad could be agreed to?

I know this ain't much, but what's in this for people like myself; CSU students attending school on financial aid?

What would happen to people like us should these terms of surrender be rejected?

"The real cynics are the ones who tell you that everything will be alright." - George Carlin


It depends how many Democrats stood firm (0.00 / 0)
and how many Republicans refused to vote for it.  They would try to buy off votes from either side they thought they could get them.

[ Parent ]
With all due respect... (0.00 / 0)
...that doesn't directly answer my question.

What I'm wondering is, what would happen if this budget "deal" is rejected and no other such "deal" is agreed to by the 28th--the day that John Chiang says the state runs out of cash?

Would we see a wholesale shutdown of government (in my case, the shuttering of the universities)?

"The real cynics are the ones who tell you that everything will be alright." - George Carlin


[ Parent ]
Oh, you mean if *no* deal is passed? (0.00 / 0)
I don't know.  I expect that they'd probably find the votes they needed someplace, like last time, but I don't know the alternative.

[ Parent ]
Exactly. (0.00 / 0)
As bad as these terms of surrender are, I guess I'm just relieved at the prospect of a raw deal than none at all.

To say I'm conflicted about this is putting it charitably.

"The real cynics are the ones who tell you that everything will be alright." - George Carlin


[ Parent ]
Not conflicted at all (5.00 / 1)
I already called both of my representatives (both dems) and asked them to vote no. One staffer said, "On which bill? There are about 11 in total that make up the budget deal." If anybody has more information on that, I'd love to see it. So I told her I was against the new drilling, the all-cuts deal, and stealing from the counties and cities.

[ Parent ]
I bid $100 for the Orange County Fairgrounds (4.00 / 1)
I guess I'm going to the Fair this summer after all; it may be the last one.

Maybe they're going to build the hugest WalMart ever.


no no no---this goes to Arnold's buddy (4.00 / 1)
track this one and you'll see another Republican payoff.

[ Parent ]
Shocked! Shocked, I say! (0.00 / 0)
But if that's true, he may not be paying top dollar and thus maximally helping reduce the deficit!  Shocking!

By the way, if you have details, please spill 'em.


[ Parent ]
I just contacted my Assm. (0.00 / 0)
I asked Assm. Galgiani to vote no on the upcoming budget deal. It was the least I could do. However I'm not going to waste my time contacting Sen. Denham. He'll probably say this is a great version.

"You've slipped into my life as easily as vermouth into a glass of gin... quickly and just a bit too smooth"

Call Denham (0.00 / 0)
Wouldn't it be great if he heard from hundreds or even thousands of his constituents? Wouldn't it be terrific if he heard that there's no support for this deal with the devil? Wouldn't it be wonderful if all the Norquist representatives found out there is no support for those policies in their districts?

A girl can dream.


[ Parent ]
I guess I could contact Denham (0.00 / 0)
It wouldn't hurt...maybe.

"You've slipped into my life as easily as vermouth into a glass of gin... quickly and just a bit too smooth"

[ Parent ]
I do suppose... (5.00 / 1)
...I'll call Asm. Nielsen and Senator Aanestad and "congratulate" them for helping the rest of the Republicans to eviscerate social services for the millions of Californians that rely on them every day.

A permanent purge of Republicans from state government is looking better and better each day.

"The real cynics are the ones who tell you that everything will be alright." - George Carlin


prisoners (4.00 / 1)
we're also cutting $1.2 billion to corrections without releasing any prisoners, as per the actual politics as usual
- dday

vs.

and large numbers of state prisoners would have their sentences scaled back.
- LATimes

Can anyone pin down the details on this?

Disclosure: I'm awesome.


my information (0.00 / 0)
comes basically from Capitol Weekly's live on-site coverage.  Would be thrilled to be wrong.

[ Parent ]
Some events make you wish (6.00 / 3)
the Dead Kennedys were still a fully functioning unit:



k/o


Unanimous Vote, Right? (6.00 / 2)
I going to naturally presume that since they got all they wanted that most to all Republicans will vote "yes" on a budget for once.

The biggest insult I could think of is for Democrats to support this with only the minimum number of Republicans voting for it.  If any Republicans get to vote "No" as part of this deal and there is no strong media strategy pointing out their obstructionism then why jump off this bridge?

2008: The Year of the Young Voter

2009: Leading the Change

www.youngdems.org


I'll say right now (0.00 / 0)
If this doesn't pass with unanimous Republican support and the bare minimum of Democratic support, let it not pass at all.  That's what refusing to own someone else's mistake is about.

[ Parent ]
Where to from here? (4.50 / 2)
The Dem votes certainly will be there.  

"The February deal was bad, but this is far worse."  It has already been snidely pointed out to me tonight that I am one of the reasons we're now here---because I am one of those "head in the clouds liberal fools" who refused to stamp approval on the Feb deal at the polls...and quite frankly I am feeling quite sick to my stomach at the moment.

So what's next?  Some questions we need to be wrestling with right now...and I can think of no better place than here to begin:

1.  Is a ConCon the way to go?  If so, how can it be structured so that it is not slickly managed by deep-pocket "facilitators?"

2. How can we begin the conversations that must be had in living rooms and meeting halls throughout the state about what has transpired, the immediate impacts and the larger implications?  How can we ensure that people can share ideas and that their ideas do indeed matter?   This to me seems essential no matter what and certainly so if the concon idea starts taking hold...

3.  How can we bring more people in...bring those meeting on a smaller scale together for larger events ---events that truly signal a wide and deep citizen movement....Online tools?  What do we already have?  What do we need?  

4.  Can we grab a hold of, use and grow the nascent citizen journalism movement to document and communicate?  

I'm sure there are many more questions...but I would like to suggest that one way to start might be to head off to a meeting of the city council, county supervisors and/or local school board...   Listen...document...and then bring some friends and neighbors together and talk about what's happening...share fears, anger, ideas...record and maybe the good folks at Calitics will be interested in some reports back.   I for one am ready to begin...something, anything.  

Can we at least toss around some ideas?
 


You don't have to accept that (0.00 / 0)
It has already been snidely pointed out to me tonight that I am one of the reasons we're now here---because I am one of those "head in the clouds liberal fools" who refused to stamp approval on the Feb deal at the polls...and quite frankly I am feeling quite sick to my stomach at the moment.

We would be here even if the manure sandwich had passed in the special election. There just wasn't much money for this year in those propositions -- not enough to even pay for the 7 billion the governor wasted with his IOU brinksmanship.


[ Parent ]
I have to say that reading here that "this is worse" (5.00 / 1)
irritates me somewhat.  The problem with the February/May proposal was the structural changes it imposed that might have been as lasting and Prop 13.  (Well, that and the fact that, given how the deficit has burgeoned since then, those changes would have done little to solve the problem anyway.  Who's kidding whom?)  We always knew -- at least this is how I presented it to people in southeast LA and northern Orange counties -- that we'd have more pain this year and that, quite frankly, people would die due to the upcoming budget.  The advantage -- which was a victory in May and remains a victory now -- is that the changes to the system aren't permanent, though of course the scars (meaning the deaths, injuries, lack of education, etc.) will be.

My opponents in these debates last May argued that what we were voting on was the best deal that could be had.  People here disagreed.  But even if theoretically our Reps could do better, it was foreseeable that they probably wouldn't.  By taking the position we did, we had to be willing to accept the consequences.  The shock here at how badly this turned out shocks me.  Would members of the Calitics Board go back and change their actions in April and May, knowing this result?  If not, then it's "not worse."

What it is is disgraceful.  What it is is an impetus to explaining what has happened to the public and to action.  You're asking the right questions: how do we leverage what has been imposed on our party -- and I hope that Democrats at least make a show of letting this pass only by a bare majority -- into public understanding of and revulsion towards both Arnold's means and ends?

The rap on progressive activists is that all we do is kvetch like children about how we're not getting what we want.  This is the time to commit to giving that notion the lie -- or to accept it.  This is a gut check.  Do we argue, based on handwaving, that things could have been different if our reps had just held fast?  Or do we hold that we did the right thing last spring regardless?


[ Parent ]
Thank you, Seneca (5.00 / 1)
Your words here are the perfect fortification needed now.  I too was quite irritated by the "this is worse" line, especially when coming here last night looking for some reinforcement (and, yes, my reply to the bitterness last night was that structural changes in the props would have heaped more insanity on an already criminally insane system.)   You're so right, this is a gut check.  So let's straighten up and take the next steps on what will be a very long slog forward.

[ Parent ]
Well, I just expanded this comment into a diary (0.00 / 0)
if you care to visit it.

I think that Robert (and David, in his later story) have just reacted without thinking through the implications of their expressed positions.  We need to reiterate that we were right then as well as now.  We're not only fighting Republicans, but -- as you know -- we're fighting Democrats within our party who would love to blame us for this result and ideally see bloggers feel impelled to hush up.  Sometimes I think that they were happy that Prop 1A failed because it allowed them to shift the blame onto voters and justified whatever cave-in would follow.


[ Parent ]
Je repete (5.00 / 1)
We would be here anyway.

There was nothing in the February/May propositions that would have prevented this. It was just more permanent shock doctrine.


[ Parent ]
That can't be said enough (0.00 / 0)
because the firehoses of blame are about to be trained on us.

[ Parent ]
Make a movie. (5.75 / 4)
No, I'm serious.

California's so-called political media is incapable of dealing with issues and impacts that affect ordinary people. The blogosphere only reaches so far, and quiet get togethers in people's living rooms and community centers to "disscuss" matters, while useful on the micro-scale, don't necessarily have a lot of popular/populist appeal.

But as we can see by reference to the Capitol's Corner Office, Californians respond remarkably well to movies, movie stars and advertising blitzes. So. Use what works, only do it for the People instead of for the rich and well-connected.

Make a movie that will devastate the Clowns in the Capitol, all of them, starting with Gov. Stogie. Tell the story of what's been done to California and Californians under his reign of error, how much worse off ordinary Californians are since the recall, and how much worse it's gonna get under the Deal now being surreptitiously hailed (Yay).

Make a movie that will inspire outrage and action.

Let the People take over the process of re-writing the Constitution, and let them not do it in fear of the Rich leaving the State.

Let the People fear nothing.

Make a movie that ends this charade.


A SiCKO for California (0.00 / 0)
I think this is an excellent idea.  Given the way the corporate press works in California, if you want information to get out, you need to do something like Soviet dissidents did back in the day -- you need a sort of underground press, or samizdat.

Films by Michael Moore or Robert Greenwald have had this function, and they've been quite useful as ways of telling a complex story and getting it out to lots of people.


[ Parent ]
Mel Gibson to run for CA Governor (0.00 / 0)
Why not?  This state is going to look like a scene out of "Mad Max" anyway.


Oil Drilling? (5.00 / 1)
Without severance, how does allowing oil drilling improve the state's budget?

One assumes drillers will have to purchase the right to drill from the state (leases?). Are such payments one-time events? Annual? Centennial?  


Maybe it's just there because (0.00 / 0)
without it this deal wasn't good enough for Arnold to accept.

</snark>


[ Parent ]
how did this happen?!?! (0.00 / 0)
Maybe I'm a little slow.  Maybe I haven't read enough of this blog.  But HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?!?!?  NO tax increases at ALL???  ONLY cuts??!?  I know people are saying that this wasn't exactly a fair compromise and that the Dems clearly just laid down and let the Republicans just walk all over them, but WHY?!?!?  I guess because they couldn't come to an agreement any other way, but how can that be?!?!  Don't the Dems have the majority???  I guess they needed a 2/3 majority to pass the budget, but a) wouldn't it take a lot more Dems to get to compromise than Republicans? and b) how could they have not gotten ONE tax increase?!??!

Has anyone played that little game on many sites, including the LA Times, where you get to try your own hand at balancing the budget??  It completely makes clear that to not make any tax increases and still expect to balance the budget is LUDICROUS.  And I would be PERFECTLY happy paying those higher taxes!!!!  

Good god, can anyone explain this train wreck to me?!?!


Did you read the diary? (0.00 / 0)
It and the ones around it provide a pretty decent first cut at an explanation.

[ Parent ]
Yay Deal | 42 comments
Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads
Photobucket


Support Calitics:

Shop on Amazon.com

Advertisers

California Friends
Shared Communities
Resources
California News
Progressive Organizations
The Big BlogRoll

Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch
Powered by: SoapBlox