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

Skip to comments.

Rescue California, the sequel
Dan Weintraub Weblog ^ | January 14, 2004 | Dan Weintraub

Posted on 01/15/2004 9:30:29 AM PST by John Jorsett

Edited on 04/12/2004 6:03:42 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Rescue California, the campaign committee funded by Rep. Darrell Issa to gather signatures for last year’s recall campaign, has morphed into “Rescue California… from budget deficits” and will sponsor a spending limit initiative that it hopes to place on the November ballot. The measure is largely patterned after a limit authored by Assemblyman John Campbell and Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, and offered as the most conservative alternative during December’s debate over spending limits and reserve requirements. It would cap spending growth at the rate of population growth and inflation, with half of any revenue above that amount going toward an accelerated repayment of Schwarzenegger’s $15 billion bond, if that passes in March. The other half would go to a new budget reserve that could reach 10 percent of the general fund. Excess monies after that would be split between school construction and sales tax reductions.


(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: calgov2002; darrellissa; hjta; rescuecalifornia; spendingcap

1 posted on 01/15/2004 9:30:30 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
He has said he would not seek to place a stricter limit on the ballot. But will he oppose one if others qualify it?

Since David Drier has gone on talk radio and said that Schwarzenegger wouldn't, the answer is no.

I notice that the plan as described doesn't return all of the excess money, but devotes part to sales tax reductions and part to school construction. The latter is a bit troubling: voters ought to be asked to support bond issues for that purpose.

2 posted on 01/15/2004 9:36:13 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
He has said he would not seek to place a stricter limit on the ballot. But will he oppose one if others qualify it?

Since David Drier has gone on talk radio and said that Schwarzenegger wouldn't, the answer is no.

I notice that the plan as described doesn't return all of the excess money, but devotes part to sales tax reductions and part to school construction. The latter is a bit troubling: voters ought to be asked to support bond issues for that purpose.

3 posted on 01/15/2004 9:36:20 AM PST by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
He has said he would not seek to place a stricter limit on the ballot. But will he oppose one if others qualify it?

Prop 58 is already on the March 2004 ballot. It does almost nothing new for spending limits, but dangerously allows the state to borrow money through bonds for general spending, something currently prohibited by the state constitution.

If any true spending limit gets on a ballot, it won't be this March's ballot.

4 posted on 01/15/2004 1:20:32 PM PST by heleny (No on propositions 55, 56, 57, 58)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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