For the last several years, the comparisons have been repeated aplenty. Texas is beating California, outcompeting, and outgrowing. And hey, look at California’s budget deficit, it’s huge and they are irresponsible.
I lived in Texas for most of my life, and I certainly don’t mean to disparage it. But, as Bill Lockyer says, it’s time for the state to get spotlight for a while.
Texas has a two-year budget cycle, which allowed it to camouflage its red ink last year, thanks in large part to billions of dollars in federal stimulus money. Now, however, “someone just turned the lights on in the bar, and the sexiest state doesn’t look so pretty anymore,” said California Treasurer Bill Lockyer, with evident satisfaction. (LA Times)
That spotlight comes in the form of a $27 billion budget deficit, larger as a percentage of the deficit than our own. At the same time, you have elected leaders who will apparently put their own career before the best interests of the state, even when you toss in some torture:
“A lot of the things we are doing arguably aren’t priorities for the people of Texas,” he said. “People could stake me and Gov. Perry on the ground and torture us, and we still would not raise taxes.”
Dewhurst provides some examples of bloat, like millions of dollars spent to put sand on beaches for tourists. But the real savings in the legislative budget plan come from slashing Medicaid and cutting per-student spending from more than $9,000 to $7,800 each year. The state’s cap of 22 students per elementary school class is almost certain to be lifted.
Well, maybe if he’s not on the ground? I’ve seen those FauxNews waterboarding videos, those people break pretty quickly.
At any rate, the bigger question is one of approach. For years, California invested in education, and reaped those rewards. We are still coasting on our past investments, our educated workforce, and all that jazz. But that can’t sustain us for much longer.
Meanwhile, Texas went the opposite direction, luring businesses from elsewhere with a race to the bottom technique. They will provide you the lowest level of services possible. Sure, the taxes are low, but I hope you enjoy paying for toll roads and private schools. Oh, you can’t afford them, well, enjoy the back of the bus. Income inequality ain’t so bad. Oh, and that “mini-boom” they are building, well, they are hurting now too.
At some level, this is more than repaid Schadenfreude. It’s a basic conversation about the role of government. Perry and the gang want you to believe that a survival of the fittest environment will make us all into machines ready to fight tomorrow’s battles. But the facts tell a different story. Both states are backsliding into mediocrity, and both states are trying to cut their way into the future.
Unfortunately, you can’t “win the future” if you are too busy “slashing the present.”
Harman (left) and Hahn with LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.Daily Breeze
Jane Harman has an interesting history. She was recently re-elected to her ninth term in the 36th Congressional district, with her main challenge being from the left. However, it looks like we will be having a special there soon:
California Rep. Jane Harman (D) will resign from Congress, according to two senior Democratic leadership aides, a surprise announcement that will set off a special election in her 36th district.
NBC’s Andrea Mitchell, who broke the news of Harman’s resignation, has reported that the California Congresswoman will take over as director of the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington. That job is currently held by former Indiana Rep. Lee Hamilton (D). (WaPo)
She is probably better known around these parts for her rather controversial positions on warrentless wiretapping, the defense budget, and the wars, but she was also active on health care issues, and was an early opponent of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
As for the district, the speculation so far has been on Janice Hahn, who previously ran for the district back in 1998. She lost to the Republican Steve Kuykendall, but since then the inclusion of Venice and Mar Vista means that it is a pretty strong Democratic seat. However, it is likely to change in the redistricting for next cycle.
Earlier today, I filed paperwork notifying the House of Representatives that I am in discussions to succeed former Rep. Lee Hamilton as President and CEO of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. I send this note because a decision is imminent and I wanted you to hear the news from me first.
This is an excruciating decision because the distinction of representing the smartest constituents on earth will never be surpassed – nor will my relationships with my exceptional staff and colleagues in Congress. But shaping and leading the Wilson Center is a thrilling new challenge.
I have always believed that the best solutions to tough problems require a bipartisan approach, and bipartisanship is the Center’s “brand.” Serving at its helm provides unique opportunities to involve the House and Senate, top experts, and world leaders in “great debates” about the most pressing foreign and domestic policy matters.
Should this opportunity come to pass, I would be required to resign my seat. But please know that I would remain in Congress for some weeks and do everything possible to ensure an orderly transition to whomever is elected to succeed me. Sidney and I will always retain our residence in Venice, be home frequently, and stay engaged at USC and active in the community.
You have elected me to nine terms in Congress – an honor without equal. I hope you understand how truly grateful I am for your friendship and support.
But this budget, even with Brown’s “halfway solution,” would still net some draconian cuts. For example, look at the suggested $750 million of cuts to the developmentally disabled:
Most areas of Brown’s budget proposal include specific reductions, but the plan lists only $216.5 million in detailed cuts in the Department of Developmental Services. The budget asks for another $533.5 million in unspecified reductions, with the department expected to come up with ideas by the end of March.
“I think we need to really look at the issue in a more full manner than just say, ‘We’re going to have an arbitrary number put into the cuts,'” Assemblyman Jim Beall, D-San Jose, said at a legislative hearing Thursday. “I don’t think people with developmental disabilities deserve that.”(SacBee)
There are two competing interests in how you make cuts. First, if you tell departments how much the cut will be, and then tell them to make it, you are likely to get somewhat more knowledgeable cuts. Of course, this may lead to the preservation of personnel over services. However, if you give specific cuts, at least there is some idea of what’s going to happen.
But when you give over half a billion of unspecified cuts? Well, frankly it is too much to balance out even with the most severe of cuts. Adding another $12 Billion of cuts would essentially require the closing of our prison system and higher education. It simply isn’t a serious solution. Adding additional tax cuts would put us on the path to Somliaization.
And as Skelton referenced yesterday, our initiative system is broken. We are asking our voters to make micro decisions on issues that they just don’t understand. Perhaps that could be construed as elitist, but honestly, how many people really have the time to think about tax policy decisions? Legislators take months of time to discuss and analyze the issue, but voters are supposed to do it in five minutes at the ballot box?
At the very least, Brown has given up the ghost of stupid budget tricks. Perhaps the Republicans can join him in the real world as well?
In a state ruled by direct democracy in many ways, George Skelton’s column might be something close to seditious speech:
All that said, “check-ins” with the voters are what regular elections are about. The way our republican system of democracy was set up by the framers of both the U.S. and California constitutions, the people elect representatives to make decisions about spending and taxes.
You didn’t see either the Clinton tax increases or the Bush tax cuts being put to votes of the American people. That occurred at the next elections, when the people voted whether to rehire their representatives.
Only in screwy California, where we have an out-of-control initiative system and a bloated Constitution that Sacramento often stumbles over when it does try to make decisions, do voters perpetually get handed such policy-making power. (LA Times)
Here’s the situation we face. We have a state of 37 million voters. At most 10 million of them turn out to vote on any regular basis, or less than a third. Now care to guess how many of these people spent more than 5 minutes researching the issues they are going to vote on?
This is why we moved away from an Athenian-style direct democracy to a representative democracy. Our American founding fathers understood that not every voter had the capacity to take everything into context to make the decisions we expect of our legislators. You could argue that the information age has brought the knowledge necessary closer to the people, but in the end, uninformed voters are making decisions without all of the facts.
Even in a state of 1 million people the system would be impractical, here it’s downright unworkable. Skelton takes Brown to task for boxing himself into the corner, but really, it was something of an electoral practicality. He may have won without it, but it sure made it a lot easier. But, here we are, in a position where Brown is now forced to bring this to the voters instead of just doing his job and making the decisions for the state with the Legislature.
Of course, Skelton goes on to throughly lambaste the Republican caucus for being pretty much worthless and waste of taxpayer money. (It’s true!) But the real point here, is that while this is where we are headed in the short term, it is ultimately unsustainable to continue to run of the world’s largest economies by plebiscite.
One of the real wonders of the superminority system that the Republicans are thrilled with is the ability to pretend like you have no control, but then actually exert an effective veto. For years, the Republicans have traded their votes (but don’t call them trades) for whatever sort of crazy legislation that they are looking for.
But Republicans said they have for years put out ideas for changing the state that have been summarily rejected by the majority Democratic Legislature, and they have no reason to expect something different. The challenge from Brown is a red herring, they said, and an attempt to knock Republicans off their message.
“The governor is the one who is supposed to prepare a balanced budget,” said state Sen. Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar (Los Angeles County), who is the top Republican on the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee. “The governor put out his own budget with an $11-to-$12 billion hole in it. That’s not our responsibility, that’s his responsibility.”
He added later, “We’re the minority party here, we don’t have a lot of say.”(SF Chronicle)
Of course the thing here is that the Governor has presented a balanced budget. He gave all of the details of exactly what he would like to do with the budget. But so far, the GOP caucus has flat-out rejected his plan. And they are all too happy to let Brown negotiate with himself.
In other words, they are attempting to play the old move the football game again. They’ll just wait on something coming out, so they can bash it. They know that Californians will reject their proposals, which would by sheer mathematics have to include massive cuts to K12 and higher education, along with the possibility of eliminating the social safety net.
The Republicans are playing the long game, but as it is they are hurting California. They are slowing us down from working to build our economy for the 21st Century. It’s just crazy.
The GOP was getting a little bit unsettled by the tack Jerry Brown has taken: demanding that they give voters a choice. You see, they want to give the voters a choice between tax increases and tax decreases. Carla Marinucci has it:
Jon Coupal, who heads the influential Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, told the Chronicle/SFGate.com today that some Republican lawmakers in Sacrameto came up with the idea after Brown argued at Monday’s State of the State address that GOP lawmakers may be seen as “thumbing their nose” at voters by blocking a special election to allow them to weigh in on tax extensions and billions in budget cuts.
Asked how Republicans could meet or even counter Brown’s challenge, Coupal said: “I think it’s quite easy.”
“I think the Republicans should agree to put those tax increases on the ballot on one condition: parallel tax reductions.”(SF Gate)
So, you know one of the oldest tricks in the handbook to killing a ballot measure? But an opposite campaign that will trick voters into just saying, a pox on both their houses.
In other words. No. No. No.
This is only a choice in so far as voting in Myanmar (or Egypt) involves a choice. This is a way to kill the revenue increases and leave our state choking to death. This proposal is a flat out non-starter.
While Brown’s speech struck a hopeful, but realistic, note, Assembly Republican leader liked the former, but entirely ditched the latter. Over the flip, you can find the full text of that speech, but there’s really not a lot of there there.
Her basic point: We’ll cut, but don’t cut stuff we like. Cut, Cut, Cut, and forget about revenue.
Let’s make life more simple by focusing on what’s most important. Let’s maintain our parks, roads, schools and public safety. Let’s create jobs by helping business owners instead of hurting them
We believe the best solution to help close our deficit is not by raising taxes, but by creating private sector jobs. That is done by lifting regulations and by reducing frivolous lawsuits.(SF Gate)
At this point, figuring out what she means is a lot of guessing. She and all of the Republicans haven’t been so kind as to give us any signals of what kind of cuts they would like. But let me tell you this, with Prop 98’s funding requirements, there is no real plan where you support the schools at similar funding levels and cut $25 Billion. It just can’t happen.
As for “lifting regulations and reducing frivolous lawsuits.” Non sequitur much? While I understand a growing economy would eventually bring in additional revenue, that does not even begin to answer the questions that we are facing. Some of the regulations Conway wants to eliminate? Start with AB32 global warming pollution regulations, which stand to net the state buckets full of green jobs.
Furthermore, our state already has dramatically curtailed so-called “frivolous lawsuits.” What Republicans mean when they say that is really “we want to be able to screw you, and get away with it.” That’s the case with MICRA and the near elimination of medical malpractice law, and that’s the case with our ever diminishing consumer protection litigation. So, in the future, a simple find/replace might be helpful on that front.
So, in net, what do we have here from Conway? How about this:
I like puppies, but don’t make me pay for them!
As Californians, we are blessed to live in a state that in many ways is the best in the world. Yet we also face challenges that threaten both our way of life, and the future of our beloved state.
We are struggling with the nation’s 2nd highest unemployment rate and a budget deficit that is out of control.
That’s discouraging, but also challenging. The pioneers who settled our state never were deterred by the obstacles they faced. We simply have to forge ahead, as they did.
Tonight, Governor Brown put forward his ideas to solve California’s most urgent problems. Assembly Republicans stand ready to work with the governor and the majority party to achieve our common goal – getting California back on track.
We share the governor’s goal of passing an honest and on-time budget. It is our hope that Governor Brown focuses on cutting spending and on long-term reform.
We need to break away from the failed status quo. That means rejecting higher taxes, attacking wasteful spending, and doing away with the policies and programs that got us into this mess in the first place.
Will that be easy? No. We have a $25 billion deficit. But living within our means is the right thing to do. It’s what families and businesses already do.
At churches and grocery stores, I meet people who are coping with our economy in a sensible manner. They are hardworking, industrious and innovative Californians who don’t care about political games.
They don’t have a sense of panic nor a sense of dread. They simply want big government to become responsible, reasonable government. We must provide essential services but we must do so with efficiency and frugality. We must cut spending. And we must do it now.
The people have made it clear: they don’t want to pay higher taxes. Voters have rejected every tax increase on the last two statewide ballots. It’s time for Sacramento to finally to listen to the people.
Republicans stand united as the only line of defense for California taxpayers. We believe the best solution to help close our deficit is not by raising taxes, but by creating private sector jobs. That is done by lifting regulations and by reducing frivolous lawsuits.
For far too long, the Legislature has strangled our economy by imposing mandates, regulations and taxes. It’s no wonder that companies have been leaving California for other states.
For the past six years, CEO magazine has ranked our state as the worst place to do business in the entire nation. We cannot allow that to continue.
Let’s make life more simple by focusing on what’s most important. Let’s maintain our parks, roads, schools and public safety. Let’s create jobs by helping business owners instead of hurting them.
And let’s balance the budget. Remember, with more people earning a living and paying their fair share of modest taxes, we can make our state great again.
We must also rein in soaring public pension costs and make government programs run more cost-effectively.
As simple as that sounds, it won’t be easy, because years and years of poor decisions precede us. But we can learn from those mistakes. To do so, Democrats and Republicans must work together to restore the people’s faith in their government.
Assembly Republicans offer our hand of cooperation. We look forward to working across party lines to cut the deficit, encourage new hiring and end the “tax-and-spend” mentality with true common sense.
I hope you will be part of this movement against our broken system. Call or email your legislators to express your views. Together, we can do this. Thank you.
Over the flip, you’ll find the State of the State speech. You might want to wait until I find a video, to get a real feel for the speech, as he went off-script on several occasions. He also basically outed his applause lines as hedges. My favorite being when he talked about cutting regulations, and then spoke out loud the words I was thinking: “only the unnecessary ones.” Oh, and then there were the “see I’m giving something to everybody there, it was vague.”
Yes, yes it was. Not vague enough to really make everybody happy, but at least vague enough to avoid the literary bloodbath. But, he did go straight for the heart of the issue, essentially demanding a vote on revenue.
At this moment of extreme difficulty, it behooves us to turn to the people and get a clear mandate on how we should proceed: either to extend the taxes as I fervently believe or cut deeply into the programs from which–under federal law–we can still extract the sums required. Unfortunately, these would most probably include: elementary, middle and high schools, the University of California, the California State University system, prisons and local public safety funding, and vital health programs.
While he has been reluctant to point the proverbial gun at anybody’s head, that is what is pointing at our heads right now. If we simply go for a cuts only regime, there simply won’t be the cuts that we need to make to balance this thing. That’s especially true if Brown follows up on his no gimmicks plan.
But, this budget is far from a real winner. There is no real attempt to go after revenue that is a) more progressive and b) better for the state’s economy. Let’s face it, the sales taxes that he has proposed are far too weighted towards the poor and middle class as a percentage of income. The oil severance tax still hasn’t come up in a serious way. It’s just been a toss away from one Democratic legislator or another. (It was Tom Ammiano’s turn in his press release last night.)
We need real sustainable revenue that will pull us out of this boom/bust cycle. The revenues Brown is calling for makes for a decent emergency rescue plan, it’s not a real solution.
Ultimately, the voters of California will have a decision. It’s just how it gets there, and when it happens. A delay only makes the situation worse.
As Prepared
Thank you Lt. Governor Newsom, Speaker Perez, President Pro Tem Steinberg, Senate Republican Leader Dutton, Assembly Republican Leader Conway, constitutional officers, members of the legislature, distinguished guests, and my fellow citizens:
First of all, I wish to thank all of you in this chamber for the cordiality and good will that you have extended to my wife and me during these opening days of what will be an extraordinarily difficult and wrenching legislative session.
California faces a crisis that is real and unprecedented. Each of us will have to struggle with our conscience and our constituencies as we hammer out a sensible plan to put our state on a sound fiscal footing, honestly balance our budget and position California to regain its historic momentum.
Although our state’s economy has started to recover, we will not create the jobs we need unless we get our financial house in order. It’s absolutely essential that we do our work boldly and without delay.
My intention is to make California again a leader in job creation, renewable energy and state of the art efficiency, innovation of all kinds and a solid primary and secondary education. Our universities are world renowned and I intend to see that they continue to enjoy the respect of students and scholars throughout the world. We also have to restructure our criminal justice system, carefully realign state and local government functions, and streamline state government. All of this can happen if we find the courage and summon the will to tackle our budget deficit head on and deal with it honestly and without purpose of evasion.
This is not a time for politics as usual. The stakes are too high. Our overall financial system, which came close to absolute breakdown, has not fully stabilized. Where we go from here-either more austerity or more stimulus-is hotly contested. Even the cause of the mortgage meltdown remains in dispute.
Voters are clearly telling us that our state and our nation are going in the wrong direction. Yet, our two main political parties both in Washington and in California are as far apart as I have ever seen them. Still, I know that politics is at the heart of democracy. It is the essence of our structure of freedom and the way in which we as a people make our collective decisions. We owe it to ourselves and to our forebears-and to our children–to rise to this occasion, do what is right and regain the public’s trust. Kicking the can down the road, by not owning an honest budget, is simply out of the question.
If you are a Democrat who doesn’t want to make budget reductions in programs you fought for and deeply believe in, I understand that. If you are a Republican who has taken a stand against taxes, I understand where you are coming from.
But things are different this time. In fact, the people are telling us–in their own way–that they sense that something is profoundly wrong. They see that their leaders are divided when they should be decisive and acting with clear purpose.
We are still a very rich society. In two years alone, Californians will have added more than $100 billion to their personal income. Yet, our State’s credit rating is the lowest of the 50 states, unemployment is higher than the national average and some journalists are calling California a “failed state.”
The times call out for vision and for discipline. Discipline so that we live within the revenue which the state collects each year, and Vision so that we rise above mere party, act as Californians first, and put our trust in the people.
Under our form of government, it would be unconscionable to tell the electors of this state that they have no right to decide whether it is better to extend current tax statutes another five years or chop another $12 billion out of schools, public safety, our universities and our system of caring for the most vulnerable.
Let me read to you, Article 2, Section 1 of the California Constitution:
“All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their protection, security and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform it when the public good may require.”
When democratic ideals and calls for the right to vote are stirring the imagination of young people in Egypt and Tunisia and other parts of the world, we in California can’t say now is the time to block a vote of the people. In the ordinary course of things, matters of state concern are properly handled in Sacramento. But when the elected representatives find themselves bogged down by deep differences which divide them, the only way forward is to go back to the people and seek their guidance. It is time for a legislative check-in with the people of California.
At this moment of extreme difficulty, it behooves us to turn to the people and get a clear mandate on how we should proceed: either to extend the taxes as I fervently believe or cut deeply into the programs from which–under federal law–we can still extract the sums required. Unfortunately, these would most probably include: elementary, middle and high schools, the University of California, the California State University system, prisons and local public safety funding, and vital health programs.
My plan to rebuild California requires a vote of the people, and frankly I believe it would be irresponsible for us to exclude the people from this process. They have a right to vote on this plan. This state belongs to all of us, not just those of us in this chamber. Given the unique nature of the crisis and the serious impact our decisions will have on millions of Californians, the voters deserve to be heard.
Do I like the choices we face? No. I don’t. But after serious study of the options left us by a $25 billion deficit, the budget I have proposed is the best I can devise. If any of you have other suggestions that you think are better, please, share them with us. After all, we are in this together.
In recent days, a lot has been made of the proposed elimination of redevelopment agencies. Mayors from cities both large and small have come to the capitol and pressed their case that redevelopment is different from child care, university funding or grants to the aged, disabled and blind.
They base their case on the claim that redevelopment funds leverage other funds and create jobs. I certainly understand this because I saw redevelopment first hand as mayor of Oakland. But I also understand that redevelopment funds come directly from local property taxes that would otherwise pay for schools and core city and county services such as police and fire protection and care for the most vulnerable people in our society.
So it is a matter of hard choices and I come down on the side of those who believe that core functions of government must be funded first. But be clear, my plan protects current projects and supports all bonded indebtedness of the redevelopment agencies.
From the time I first proposed what I believe to be a balanced approach to our budget deficit – both cuts and a temporary extension of current taxes – dozens of groups affected by one or another of the proposed cuts have said we should cut somewhere else instead. Still others say we should not extend the current taxes but let them them go away. So far, however, these same people have failed to offer even one alternative solution.
As I have said before, I have not come here to embrace delay or denial, but to get the job done. If you have solutions that are truly viable, by all means present them. We need everyone’s best thinking.
Wherever I look, I see difficult choices. But I also see a bright future up ahead and a California economy that is on the mend. When we get our budget in balance, California will be in a strong position to take advantage of its many assets and its strategic location on the Pacific Rim. As the countries of Asia and south of our border continue to thrive and expand their trade, our state will play a leading role, as it always has, and reap unimagined benefits.
We have the inventors, the dreamers, the entrepreneurs, the venture capitalists and a vast array of physical, intellectual and political assets. We have been called the great exception because for generations Californians have defied the odds and the conventional wisdom and prospered in totally unexpected ways. People keep coming here because of the dream that is still California, and once here, their determination and boundless energy feeds that dream and makes it grow.
When I first came to Sacramento, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak had not yet invented their personal computer. There was no wind generated electricity, and we didn’t have the nation’s most advanced building and appliance efficiency standards as we later adopted. Of course, Yahoo, Google, Facebook and Twitter did not exist-not even in someone’s imagination.
California’s economy has grown from less than 200 billion dollars when first I came to this rostrum to now over two trillion dollars expected this year. California has been on the move-a marvel, even a miracle and some kind of gift.
Yes, I will work with you on the issues-from water and realignment to healthcare and prisons, to agriculture, schools, environment and transportation. We must also face the long term challenge of ensuring that our public pensions are fair to both taxpayers and workers alike. Finally, at a time when more than two million Californians are out of work, we must search out and strip away any accumulated burdens or unreasonable regulations that stand in the way of investment and job creation.
But let’s not forget that Job Number 1 – make no mistake about it – is fixing our state budget and getting our spending in line with our revenue. Once we do that, the rest will be easy-at least easier because we will have learned to work together and earned back the respect and trust of the people we serve.
Well, today Jerry Brown gives his first (well, of this term) State of the State speech. He gave a preview of what was on his mind last week:
“The budget is a key point, but we have to have some optimism, too, about how great everything is and how rich California is and how we’re going to create all these jobs and have enough water and fix our schools,” he said. “There’s a lot of issues, whether it’s reform of schools, whether its water, whether it’s energy, whether it’s crime. Those are things I’m really interested in; but at the same time, if we don’t get this budget fixed, California will flounder, and it will really be a real impediment to doing all the other good things the state should be engaged in.” (SF Chronicle)
Brown has a history of short speeches, so it would be surprising if he actually got to many issues beyond the budget. (You can check a history of the previous speeches at the Chronicle) Given that he likes to write his own speeches, and indicated that he would do so on this one, can this speech really afford to be anything other than a cheerleader for his budget?
Phil Angelides is something of a blast from the past in California politics, but since President Obama appointed him to head the investigation into the financial crisis, he’s been a busy guy. The report came out yesterday, and is now available online.
So, what does the report say? Well, in short, banks disregarded or badly miscalculated risk. Angelides, in radio interviews, alleges CEOs of actively disregarding risk.
Enabling those developments, the panel found, were a bias toward deregulation by government officials, and mismanagement by financiers who failed to perceive the risks.
The Fed, under Mr. Bernanke’s predecessor, Alan Greenspan, failed to develop mortgage lending standards that could have stemmed the flow of bad mortgages into the financial pipeline, the panel found. “The Federal Reserve was clearly the steward of lending standards in this country,” said one commissioner, John W. Thompson, a technology executive. “They chose not to act.” (NY Times)
There really isn’t anything too shocking here. It is more a matter of scope than of any new knowledge. Unfortunately, the problem is that we haven’t really made the changes necessary to prevent a repeat. However, the commission did [refer a few criminal complaint
The commission’s chairman, Phil Angelides, said he hoped the report would help bear witness to a preventable catastrophe. “Some on Wall Street and Washington with a stake in the status quo may be tempted to wipe from memory this crisis or to suggest again that no one could have seen or prevented it,” he said.
But little on Wall Street has changed. One commissioner, Byron S. Georgiou, a Nevada lawyer, said the financial system was “not really very different” today from before the crisis.
“In fact, the concentration of financial assets in the largest commercial and investment banks is really significantly higher today than it was in the run-up to the crisis, as a result of the evisceration of some of the institutions, and the consolidation and merger of others into larger institutions,” he said. (NY Times)
