Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

In yet another budget development Monday, the state Controller's Office said it would continue to pay state employees their full salaries even if no budget is signed by Monday.

Well, looks like Gray-Out will still get his weekly check even if the budget isn't passed in time.

1 posted on 06/25/2002 7:39:17 PM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
more on the budget
2 posted on 06/25/2002 7:40:08 PM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: randita
Well if the budget contains 4.8 billion in program increases and 4.8 billion in tax increases why not eliminate the program increases and forget about the tax increases...now can we all just get along...hmmmmmmmmmm
3 posted on 06/25/2002 7:50:12 PM PDT by kellynla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: randita
Let's see, what was that Davis ad about Simon not being able to run a state?
4 posted on 06/25/2002 7:56:16 PM PDT by socal_parrot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: randita
Hate to butt in here ... but this is a lousy article, pure and simple. (No, Randita, I'm not criticising you for posting it - I'm ripping into the fellow who wrote it).

What's the total budget? How severe are the cuts? How significant are the tax increases? You wouldn't know from this article, so I'm about to tell you.

The total budget is about $80 billion, so a 4.8billion hit is about a 5% across the board cut. If I were governor, I would make the cut. If your income went down by 5.5-odd percent, I'm sure you would grumble and pull through somehow. No big deal.

This article is talking as though these cuts would be the end of the world, and yet for some reason what would be cut is never explained. Local programs? What local programs? What percentage of local budgets is this?

How can we make a meaningful judgement on the budget crisis without knowing what the proportions are? The article strikes me as a special plea to raise taxes, but it doesn't give us alternatives. I find that shameful and almost certainly biased.

D

5 posted on 06/25/2002 8:23:07 PM PDT by daviddennis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: randita
Davis said at a press conference Monday that it was the GOP's "patriotic duty to ensure that we meet the Prop. 98 guarantee."

Davis you Clymer, it's YOUR patriotic duty to resign.

9 posted on 06/25/2002 11:10:20 PM PDT by Drango
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: randita
HeHeHe...I would love to see prop 98 overridden and watch the teachers union scream. This prop was a scam to insure that they get the biggest chunk of the budget no mater how high tax revenues were and the peons of Calif fell for it.
10 posted on 06/25/2002 11:10:39 PM PDT by tubebender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: randita
An appellate court ruled last month that the state could continue to pay workers absent a budget, but only at the federal minimum wage. But since the case is going to the state Supreme Court, the decision is not final and the paychecks can go out as usual, said Rick Chivaro, chief counsel for Controller Kathleen Connell.

If the California Supreme Court declines to hear the case or agrees with the appellate court decision, do we (the state) get a refund from the state employees who would then have been overpaid from July 1st until a budget is signed?

13 posted on 06/26/2002 8:28:49 AM PDT by heleny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson