Schwarzenegger says raising taxes may be unavoidable

OC Register ^ | 3/31/04 | AP

[NormsRevenge]

Got it. Thanks.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Seems we have a lot of those.

[Incorrigible]

such as the guy posting the "RINO" picture

Hey! That's a good picture!

[Digger]

Also, He's in a very similar spot Reagan was in when he took Ca.'s governor's office. Speaking of which...didn't Reagan hike taxes twice as governor while cutting spending?...Wait I forgot...He's just the guy we all like around here a lot.

I knew RR & this fake is NO RR.

[Digger]

"When I look at the numbers, I can make up my mind about what that means,"

"On-the-job-training". I believe I heard that 3.5 BILLION of that stupid bond will be used to raise spending in 2005? Didn't we hear that this guy was a practical pol? Question - Do you feel that YOU could have done as good of job as this actor?

[William Tell]

cinFLA said: "He has already started but it is very difficult. Most of the spending increases set up by Davis are non-discretionary."

All of this was knowable prior to the recall election.

Nothing short of bankruptcy is going to cause Kalifornia to make the difficult choices. Arnold's support of the $15 billion "deficit bonds" simply pushed the date of bankruptcy back 12 months. There will have to be another $15 billion bond issue next year, or spending will have to be cut, or taxes will have to be raised.

If Arnold supports another bond issue, then that is what we will get.

Otherwise, if Arnold supports tax increases, then that is what we will get.

Spending cuts will never happen without court control of state spending brought about through state bankruptcy.

[expatpat]

He should remember Bush1 and his "Read my lips" broken promise.

[cinFLA]

The legislature is run by the entrenched democrats. How is that a fault of the governor?

[cinFLA]

How is posting and discussing current emotionally charged events and issues in a civil manner "punishing" ?

It was not in a civil manner. He highlighted in a demeaning manner adding veracity to a headline that said S said something that he DID NOT SAY! His obvious motive was to punish S, not engage in civil discourse.

[cinFLA]

I am sorry. I should have said YOUR motive, not his.

[cinFLA]

If you think that the Governor can just go cutting everything as he pleases, you don't understand California politics at all.

Ol Dan just doesn't understand.

[RightWhale]

"Read my lips" broken promise

That cost him the election. He could have placed blame on the legislative branch since they are the ones who create the budget and then force the executive to sign by threatening to have no budget at all, but he is a bigger man than that.

[NormsRevenge]

This years budget is larger than last year's, albeit some cuts have been made, BUT nowhere near enough.

I would not seek the position as I would not do well working around self-serving imbeciles who have forgotten who elected them to public office and who they are supposed to represent, but rather seek to push their own misguided agendas which is nothing more than socialism being stuffed down people's throats without regard for the damage and costs associated with its imposition.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

If you think that the Governor can just go cutting everything as he pleases, you don't understand California politics at all.

In your post you claimed that the governor was powerless to control spending against the liberal dominated legislature. This is not true. Just because you can't admit you're wrong has nothing to do with my understanding of california politics.

No where in my post to you did I advocate "cutting everything as he pleases" as you erroneously imply.

If you'll re-read my post again, you'll see that I only said that Ahnold has the ability to cut spending through the use of the line item veto.

Whether he uses it or not is another matter.

I will again predict that you will see Ahnold raise taxes before you will see him cut spending through the use of the line item veto.

[LexBaird]

The legislature is run by the entrenched democrats. How is that a fault of the governor?

Didn't say it was. Just that "non-discretionary" isn't a valid excuse for not reducing spending. "Non-discretionary spending" is just one of those weasle-word lies that politicians use to give themselves cover for spinelessness. They are basically saying that they can't cut spending because they haven't given themselves permission to.

It's like the "filibuster" and cloture rules in the US Senate. A thinly veiled fiction of arcane procedures useful for political cover. The people responsible could change it in a flash if they wanted to, but they prefer obfuscation to progress.

[William Tell]

Does anyone know how to include a link in a tagline?

California Freepers! Sign the RKBA petition.

[CyberAnt]

Hey! Don't look at me - I didn't vote for the guy! And .. this is why!

McClintock already had a WRITTEN plan to get CA out of debt WITHOUT raising taxes.

[goldstategop]

Its true the Democrats love tax increases. What to do when there's a crunch? Go over their heads, expose them in their districts as liberal tax and spenders and let the voters decide. Arnold has the popularity to make the case to voters in most of California outside of San Francisco. Say the Democrats block cutting spending and refuse to take measures to restore California's fiscal health. All it takes is the will to take the entrenched tax and spending machine here head on.

[Jimbaugh]

What is unavoidable is most profitable businesses leaving california before they go broke.