Dan Walters is touting a UC Riverside poll on budget issues that interviewed 276 respondents, 63% male, with a 42-38-11 split among Democrats, Republicans and independents.  He does this with a straight face.

It barely matters what such a flawed poll shows, but I’ll mention it anyway.  According to 276 people, 57% support the 2/3 requirement for passing a budget, 24% preferred a simple majority, 6% in between, 4% other (?), and 6% don’t know.  Given the bad methodology, these numbers mean nothing.

But I’ll tell you who has historically taken numbers like these as the gospel’s truth and used them to mute themselves about any reform efforts for thirty years.  That would be the leaders of the California Democratic Party.  And they latch on to any poll numbers showing a view like this as a blunt instrument to kick hippies, not a starting point for the political advocacy and opinion leadership that can and should be done to change perspectives.

Here’s the problem, in a nutshell.  In 1978 California passed Prop. 13, and Democrats have run for cover ever since.  They should have put up a fight immediately.  But instead, Democrats cowered in fear of losing power, despite the demographic shifts in the state since the mid-1990s, so they lay low and never advocate for the necessary reforms, and buy completely into the myth that the 70’s-era tax revolt remains alive and well, and they take public opinion polls like this as static and unchangeable through anything resembling leadership.  Obviously Republicans are insane in this state, but they can barely manage 1/3 of the legislature (and if we had a half-decent campaign apparatus among California Democrats they’d lose that too) and shouldn’t be feared in any respect.  Yet our Democratic leadership exists in a post-1978 fog, a kind of “Sacramento Syndrome,” where they’ve come to love their captors on the right, and have bought into their claims.

Meanwhile, the David Binder memo, with ten times the poll respondents and a clear majority favoring a broad swath of tax increases over spending cuts to deal with the deficit, goes unmentioned by virtually everyone in this state.  And in that desert, voters go vainly on a futile search for leadership.  They find nothing but shell-shocked politicians.

…As if on cue, view for yourself the craptastic “Post-Budget Reform Push” press release Assembly Speaker Bass just dropped.  You’ll be thrilled to know that your state government will be more “user-friendly” when leaving AIDS patients and the poor to die on the streets.  You can almost smell the fear coming off this press release (on the flip):

BASS LOOKS TOWARD POST-BUDGET REFORM PUSH

SACRAMENTO-Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) today announced the California Assembly will begin preparing information and analyses on ways state government can better serve Californians.  The move is in advance of a joint Assembly-Senate government reform effort expected to begin in July following passage of solutions to the state’s budget deficit.

Bass released the following statement regarding the effort:

“As the Budget Conference Committee continues to meet and we work to resolve the state’s budget deficit, Senator Steinberg and I are also looking ahead to developing a bicameral, bipartisan, back-to-basics approach to reform what is wrong with California’s system of government.

The following are examples of goals this effort could include:

Making government more customer-friendly.

Giving Californians more value for their tax dollars by making government more efficient and accountable.

Cutting through the gridlock caused by outmoded rules and undue partisanship-gridlock that only leads to late budgets and last minute decision making.

Consolidating agencies and functions so they make sense and save money.  Not just blowing up boxes, but also folding, stacking and storing others more efficiently so the ones we need fit the room we have for them.

Building on the upcoming recommendations of the bipartisan Commission for a 21st Century Economy so our revenue system makes more sense.

Making government more transparent and accessible from around the state.

The Assembly will immediately begin compiling a wide variety of ideas, information and input on these areas.  This way the bicameral reform effort will have the resources and data they need to move forward quickly and effectively with a lot of the necessary groundwork already out of the way.

We will also be looking at ways to involve outside experts and stakeholders, as well as increase public participation in the reform process.

Senator Steinberg and I have been talking frequently about this, and I know he and his team are making similar headway in the Senate. I look forward to sharing our collective information and working together to help give Californians the government they deserve.”

 

Finally yesterday’s media blackout on the march on the state capitol is over with. Unfortunately, the two sources I was hoping would end that blackout–the LA Times and San Francisco Chronicle–are still missing in action. Sure, the Chronicle has an article on students protesting cuts in education, but it’s about a protest that occurred across the border in Nevada to lobby Republican Governor Jim Gibbons; 35 students from a high school in Ely did this, and the absence from school apparently counted as a school activity. In any case, it’s an AP wire article.

Allow me to back up a bit. The march at the state capitol was held to protest possibly looming cuts in education at the college level. It was held to demand a return to non-fee-based, free access to education at the college level. Granted, Governor Schwarzenegger spared community colleges in his latest budget. Our fear was that we may be next. So, the Student Senate for California Community Colleges called for a march to be held yesterday (beginning at Raley Field in West Sacramento). The march culminated with a rally at the west side of the state capitol.

Instead, the paper that broke the media blackout was the Sacramento Bee. I’m not a real fan of the Bee–especially since it’s home to Broder lovechild Dan Walters–but the paper can be good on occasion.

The march went well enough, but I returned home to what seemed like a media blackout on the march. I did see one report last night–on KTVU, which did about a minute-long segment–but little else.

The downside of the Bee article in question is that it seems to merely touch base on the protest in the broader sense of Mac Taylor’s revelation that the State is still $8 billion in the red.

The article, in addition, doesn’t mention who all made speeches: among them, Democratic Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, SF Assemblywoman Fiona Ma (who for her part urged us all to “hold our nose” and vote for Arnold’s Special Favors in May), Hawthorne Assemblyman Curren Price (who was there to promote AB 462, which would levy a one-percent tax increase on the rich to help pay for education), and various members of the Student Senate of California Community Colleges (among them Vice President Troy Carter) and speakers from various other community colleges, not to mention the president of the California Students’ Association.

It doesn’t mention the presence of an local of the AFL-CIO. It doesn’t mention that SEIU set up a table to hand out free sack lunches to workers, students, and anyone else who wanted one. It doesn’t mention the presence of International ANSWER, the Peace & Freedom Party, the Socialist Worker’s Party, or the Party of Socialism and Liberation. Come to think of it, it doesn’t mention much of anything at all other than the fact that students marched, chanted slogans, and waved around placards.

The Bee article, though, does contain a video report, which I would recommend watching to get a better idea of how the march and rally went down if you couldn’t make it out.

More personally, though, there was a stark contrast to the participation by students from CCSF–which I heard had to take eighteen buses up to the march–and our contingent from Shasta College, which couldn’t even get one bus completely full. Students from as far south as Los Angeles and quite possible San Diego traveled four or five hundred miles to show their support for higher education, and more students from Shasta College couldn’t be convinced to take a lousy three-hour road trip.

Granted, I’m well aware of the limitations faced by students here; a lot of them, in addition to working full time, also attend school full time. A lot of them are older and have children. My biggest fear, though, is that more people didn’t come because of apathy or ignorance than because of irreconcilable circumstances.

The march was a rousing success, though I was slightly disappointed that the rally at the state capitol ended before 1:30 when it was supposed to continue for another half-hour.

Cross-Posted from No Special Favors.

In both the Friday and Saturday editions of the Los Angeles Times, right on page A1 above the fold, there was a graphic of a “tax calculator,” which projected the additional taxes an individual would pay based on certain factors like income, number of dependents and values of vehicles.  They have a corresponding tax calculator on their website where users can type in the data and get the precise tax hit coming to them.  The Sacramento Bee has the same thing.  Talk radio was having a field day with these calculators over the past couple days, getting people to call in and disclose their statistics and telling them how much money they will owe.  This led to perverse complaints like the lady making $126,000 a year ranting about an $800 tax increase.

In my life, I have never seen a “spending cut calculator,” where someone good plug in the services they rely on, like how many school-age children they have, or how many roads they take to work, or how many police officers and firefighters serve their community, or what social services they or their families rely on, and how much they stand to lose in THAT equation.  Tax calculators show bias toward the gated community screamers on the right who see their money being piled away for nothing.  A spending cut calculator would actually show the impact to a much larger cross-section of society, putting far more people at risk than a below 1% hit to their bottom line.

But of course, people who are perceived to depend on state services probably don’t log on to the LA Times and the Sacramento Bee websites very often to calculate their tax burden.  In reality, we all depend on the state for roads and law enforcement and libraries and schools and county hospitals and on and on.  And in Los Angeles County, one in five residents – almost 2.2 million people – receive some form of public aid.  So wouldn’t it make sense to portray the real cost of spending cuts in the same way that tax increases are portrayed?

Contra Dan Walters, it is completely untrue that “liberal Web sites” are unilaterally condemning cuts to education and health & welfare spending.  We fully understand that a $42 billion dollar hole cannot be filled by revenue alone.  We certainly condemn corporate tax cuts at a time of massive deficits, or counter-productive actions like selling the lottery, which will produce net losses in the long-term.  But there is no question that the media mentality is to highlight the tax side of the equation over the spending side, and dramatically portray the tax increases – splashed across the front page – while relegating the spending cuts to further down the page.  It feeds the tax revolt and distorts the debate.  And it’s completely irresponsible.

• After he gets his way on redistricting, Arnold wants to go after open primaries. They have the system in Washington, and I’m not sure that it has produced the “desired” results.  I suppose the desire is more moderates, but call me unconvinced for the time being.

• This is big from Dan Walters:

Republicans insisted on a no-new-taxes budget this year and because their votes were needed to pass any budget, they got it. They’re maintaining their no-new-taxes stance even as the budget crisis deepens. But clearly, one reason for delaying any new budget action is that in another few weeks, Republicans will be less powerful.

This is shaping up as a strong election for Democrats, perhaps a real wave; they could come very close to two-thirds majorities in both legislative houses, and perhaps even go over the top.

As a practical matter, then, it will be easier, perhaps much easier, to enact the new taxes that Schwarzenegger, Democrats and groups such as the Education Coalition want when a new Legislature begins its session in December.

We’ve known that for a while now. This will be a Democratic Year, but now the High Broderists are taking notice. Look out Republicans, but more important than that is Walters point: Dems will have more power post-November 4.  We should use it.

• Yup, they are doing drive-thru voting in Orange County. Only in the OC.

• Julie Lee, the woman who helped bring down former SoS Kevin SHelley, got probation on her corruption charges.

• Arnold seriously hates Republicans. Seriously. Except that he is so totally down with their policies. You know, just the ones that make rich people richer and the poor poorer, not the really crazy ones.  Or something like that.

• Dan Walters ponders whether Democrats are losing their will. And if they do, will Arnold stand up against a borrowing budget?

• Perhaps this oil spill legislation will bring something positive out of the mess of the Cosco Busan.

• The California Chamber of Commerce took positions on the props. They went Yes on 3, 11 & 12, No on  1A, 2, 5, 7, 10. The rest are no position.

• Of interest to me as a Berkeley Alum, the tree sitters will be removed from the grove by the stadium shortly. The University has pretty much won at every court, and they will begin to build the controversial athletic training facility where the grove of oak and redwoods once stood.

• Another one: There’s going to be another bus headed from Orange County into Nevada to campaign for Barack Obama. Here’s the information… Dave here: actually, there are several buses to Nevada this weekend from California.  This is one of the targeted weekends.  At MyBO you can enter in your zip code and find the trip in your area, if you’re so inclined.

Anything else?

The SacBee is California’s traditional font of conventional wisdom, these days embodied by the Dans, Walters and Weintraub.  When the Dans are laughing at your political posture, you have lost the CW.  And with today’s column, Weintraub is calling the Republicans out:

The most conservative Republicans in the state, the ones who occupy the state Senate (joined by the Assembly Republican leader), have finally shown us why they have been resisting the Democrats’ big, permanent tax increase proposal and the governor’s smaller, temporary one for the past two months.

Their answer: They want the state to borrow more.

Borrow, Borrow, Borrow.  The truth is that they don’t have any real solutions, and truthfully, the lottery “solution” isn’t one at all. The Republicans have picked up the Governor’s discarded lottery amortization plan and are trying to run with it.  However, it doesn’t even really “kick the can” to next year, as we couldn’t possibly get any money from the lottery plan this fiscal year. It simply is not based in reality. But even if the media is willing to accept that, and occasionally they are, the GOP’s budget is still not working.

Actually, Schwarzenegger’s plan – relying on a temporary tax hike and $10 billion in accelerated lottery payments – also pushes the problem into the future. But it does work for at least two years longer than the Republicans’, giving the state’s economy three years to start growing again and giving the Legislature time to figure its way out of this mess. The Democrats’ plan, with permanent tax increases on high-income earners and business, would probably keep the budget balanced the longest, at least until the next economic downturn.

I’m just guessing here, but the likely outcome for this year will be a sales tax increase.  It is a poor choice as it is fundamentally regressive, taxing those who spend more of their income at a higher percentage. So, if you live hand to mouth, well, be prepared to pay more in taxes, but if you’re barely consuming anything off your income, don’t worry, you’ll just pay a negligible amount in additional taxes.  It makes no sense to ask those among us who need the money to pay more.  Yet, that’s where we are headed. …probably…

But either way, the one thing that is clear is that there will be some sort of revenue increases for this fiscal year.  The Republicans now acknowledge there is no reasonable way to get around the need for additional funding for the budget. Now they must come to terms with their base. That they lied to them. That they sold them a bill of goods of the expectation of lots of services with no taxes.  That they care more about the Club for Growth’s agenda than the people of California’s agenda.

Oh, and there’s the other CW repository, Governor Blow up the Boxes, who is calling the Legislative Republicans out on this fundamental detachment from reality.

“Their budget is not fiscally responsible because it simply pushes our problems to next year,” Schwarzenegger said in a statement Sunday. “We were sent to Sacramento to solve problems once and for all – not kick the can down the alley for others to deal with in the future.”

All of this on top of Dan Walters’ column from a few weeks ago?  Instead of prolonging the inevitable, let’s just deal with this now. The Republican party in California has sold itself to the Club for Growth devil, and now it’s time to pay the piper.

Well, I don’t know how else to explain Walters’ column today in the Bee:

Republicans posture as bulwarks against spending-crazy Democrats, but the hard facts prove otherwise. As a detailed chart published this week in The Sacramento Bee demonstrates, the two chief contributors to the state’s chronic budget deficit have been spending that Republicans, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, championed.

Of course, you knew that months ago, didn’t you? Given the article they ran on Wednesday I suppose logic reigns supreme over at the Bee these days. Why? Well, our spending isn’t “out of control” save for spending on prisons, and if you can call 46th in the nation “out of control”, K-12 education. Of course, the money used to  used to backfill to municipalities bank accounts because of the cut on the Vehicle License Fees put whallop into the state budget too. And we are spending pretty much exactly the same percentage of personal income in the general fund as we did in 1981 under Republican Governor Deukmejian:

1981-82: $21.7 billion (6.78%) … 2007-08: $103.5 billion (6.82%)

Republicans, feel free to admit that you are wrong and concede to the massive power that is Dan Walters.  We’ll take that budget tomorrow please.

Walters takes Arnold to task on more point, the fact that his plan will blow a hole in the budget as soon as he leaves office in 2010.  Great, we’ll stabilize the budget only to lull people into a false sense of security. Preach on Dan…

It’s very revealing that Schwarzenegger is now proposing a temporary 1-cent sales tax increase and some business tax changes to close the deficit. By happenstance, they would raise some $5 billion a year, close to the $6.1 billion that his car tax cut now costs – but only for a few years, after which revenues would drop sharply. By then, however, Schwarzenegger would be gone and it would be another governor’s headache.

Schwarzenegger is at least semi-willing to face the music with his new tax proposal, even if it’s temporary. But privately and publicly, Republican leaders are demanding that either spending be cut – except the spending they advocate – or money be borrowed from local governments, transportation accounts or other programs to close the gap.

Is that fiscal responsibility? Not by any rational definition.

Um…go Dan Walters?

Conservative Dan Walters says your stunt of slashing state employee has failed. That’s when you know the CW has well and truly turned on you, especially for a faux moderate like Arnold. And that’s just what happened to Arnold Schwarzenegger in today’s Bee.

In an article entitled, “Governor’s latest political stunt is a dud,” the big font of political wisdom that is Dan Walters proceeds to say what we’ve been saying here the whole time: Arnold is a cheap 3-ring circus master. In fact, we said that many times back in 2006, but that was just an election. Who cares if Arnold chooses to ignore the fiscal realities and to attack Phil for proposing tax increases to fix the deficit? Right, that’s just an election.

But, for Walters, this is as close as you get to really laying into our faux moderate Governor:

Arnold Schwarzenegger, it would appear, just can’t help himself. The man who achieved success as a bodybuilder and action movie star with over-the-top, attention-getting stunts keeps trying to make them work in politics – and keeps failing.

The governor’s latest political stunt is a grandiose order … Other than creating much angst among innocent state workers, however, Schwarzenegger’s stunt appears to be having little impact. It has not altered the conflict over whether taxes should be raised or spending cut to close a deficit. The administration is undercutting itself by exempting thousands of workers from its provisions and issuing conflicting decrees on its effects. And state Controller John Chiang says he can’t do it. (SacBee 8/5/08)

Combine this with the growing pundit consensus on the 2/3 rule and you have, well, what we’ve pretty much been saying here for the past several years.  Thanks for reading, Dan.

I really don’t know where this came from other than the shrinking class of California political pundits just understanding common sense, but they are all gradually coming on board with the notion that what’s killing the state is the 2/3 requirement, and that until it’s fixed, nothing in the Capitol will materially change.

Most of George Skelton’s column today concerns the “dance of death” – a ritual slaughtering of budget proposals through the normal legislative process until one survivor comes out on top.  There is too much of a top-down approach in the legislature, with the Big 5 making the determination on the budget instead of the relevant committees having a crack at it.  But near the end, Skelton reveals the truth:

My nomination for additional budget reform: Eliminate the ludicrous requirement of a two-thirds legislative vote for passage of a budget. Only two other states suffer the same straitjacket. California would have had a budget weeks ago if it could have been passed by a simple majority vote. The governor still would have the final say with his paring knife.

This mirrors exactly what conservative Dan Walters said in his column the day before.  Walters wants to keep the requirement for tax votes, but he does seem to understand that without the accountability that a majority budget vote provides, there’s no way to peg the fortunes or failures of the state on any one political party.  Not only does it hinder legislators from doing their jobs, it impedes the opportunity for voters to determine the cause and effect.  It’s the “killer app” for governmental reform, and must be the first, last and only step in the short term to end the perpetual crisis at the heart of a broken system.

Now, this reform will not come easy.  Republicans will caterwaul at losing the only leverage they currently own.  The only path to this solution comes with actually getting a 2/3 majority in both chambers, and then offering the solution up for a vote in time for the next governor to reap the rewards.  The Drive for 2/3 is monumentally important (and it’s likely to be a two-cycle process) to restore functionality to Sacramento and allow legislators to do the work their constituents sent them to the Capitol to do.