Voters Like Spending Cap But Not Its Cost (Liberal L.A Times Big Government Whine Alert)

Los Angeles Times ^ | 10/07/05 | Evan Halper

[goldstategop]

The Republican governor is pitching Proposition 76, which he calls the "Live Within Our Means Act," as the best way out of California's chronic deficits. But voters appear to lose interest when they learn of the sacrifices that will be needed to allow the state to truly live within its means.

The measure makes clear that it can't be done without limiting spending on the education and healthcare programs that account for more than three-quarters of the state's general fund.

"Voters like the idea of government living within its means," said Mark Baldassare, director of research for the Public Policy Institute of California. But "when you tell them the specific places that take up most of the budget and would need to be cut, they are not areas where people are comfortable with the state scaling back."

[goldstategop]

As the Los Angeles Times paints it, Californians like a spending cap but appear to reject it because it would hurt the schools. And the very partisan title given to Proposition 76 by Democratic Attorney General Bill Lockyer is intended to hammer home the point its cruel to the children: But once they heard the title that Democratic state Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer had given the measure — "The State Spending and School Funding Limits Initiative"... support plummeted. The Democrats hope voters support of Big Government will be greater than their aversion to higher taxes needed to support the beast.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[randita]

This phenomenon (of mandatory spending) does not only apply to CA. More and more, it's applicable to the federal budget as well. Trimmable discretionary spending is becoming an inceasing smaller piece of the pie.

[stopem]

The Republican governor is pitching Proposition 76, which he calls the "Live Within Our Means Act," as the best way out of California's chronic deficits. But voters appear to lose interest when they learn of the sacrifices that will be needed to allow the state to truly live within its means.

"Live within our means"? Californians don't appear to do that in their personal finances, I am referring to the outrageous cost of housing in California and the folks who are not living within their means but are paying more than their incomes allow for housing by getting the unusual mortgages.

The libs want it all but from what this article implies surprisingly they aren't proposing raising taxes like they did in the past. Interesting. So keep on spending money you don't have?

"Among other things, it attempted to take away renters' tax credits from thousands of senior citizens, eliminate dental care for the poor and charge tens of thousands of low-income Californians premiums to obtain healthcare. It called for slashing the salaries of workers who provide home care to the frail elderly and disabled, and would have reduced state contributions to the pensions of teachers and other public employees.

Eliminate dental care and charge premiums for healthcare, why not? No one pays for my expensive dental care here in Texas. As for healthcare? Taxpayers pay for medicaid to cover healthcare.

California must have one heck of a giveaway package for their citizens, no wonder they are going broke.

[goldstategop]

The problem with cutting spending is voters like it in theory but when it comes to services - they say sky's the limit! Politicians have long ago learned voters only want their neighbor's pork cut but they expect the politicians to bring them home the bacon. So as long as people expect the government to do everything for them its going to remain big and living beyond our means is going to be an on-going fact of our public life.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[goldstategop]

People in this country live beyond their means. If you ask how they can afford everything on what they have, you'll find them confiding in you they're borrowed to the max and plan to keep borrowing on top of that too. If they do it, why is any one surprised the government also lives beyond its means? Its only behaving as the people who elected it want and if any one wants real cuts in spending, I haven't seen any one actually step forward to demand them.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[Proud_USA_Republican]

So keep on spending money you don't have?


Bingo.

[goldstategop]

Yep. Its funny - sometimes I don't think we have real money. We can even borrow the bank's money and spend it and borrow still more. So again... why work for a living? They're gonna give you the money anyway!

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[Proud_USA_Republican]

California real estate is a prime example. So many are living beyond their means by using their homes equity as personal ATMs. Keep believing their homes will appreciate at 15 to 20% a year.

From all the time I spend in California, it becomes apperant that many live in a constant state of delusion about what they expect to be provided to them and what their net value is.

[goldstategop]

Only an Argentine-style crash would wake people here up. I don't plan to be around when it finally does happen.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

[AFPhys]

whew... shades of this all over --- from CA to DC to France & Germany.

We have to get rid of socialist thought and the entitlement mentality pronto, or we'll all be paying the piper with a real, honest-to-God, world-wide depression.

[stopem]

And how do we get our politicians to understand that?

[AFPhys]

First off: if you don't pay taxes, you don't vote.

Second: if you can't pass a simple test regarding economics, our political system, and current events, you don't vote until you're educated about them. Renewal on this requirement sufficient every ten years or so.

If you ever served in the Armed Forces of our the United States, these requirements are waived forever in recognition that you know more than the average bear about the true worth of our nation.

[FairOpinion]

THIS is why we need Prop. 76:

Polls show voters like the idea of controlling state spending, but dislike cutting services. Education and healthcare absorb more than three-quarters of California's general fund.

2005--06 general fund expenditures (in billions of dollars)

K-12 education 39%: ($36.6)

Health and human services 32%: ($27.1)

Higher education 11%: ($10.2)

Corrections and rehabilitation 8%: ($7.4)

Other 10%: ($8.7)

* Source: California Department of Finance

[FairOpinion]

An important point:

"A large chunk of voters — 49%, according to Baldassare's polls — said they wanted spending controls. But once they heard the title that Democratic state Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer had given the measure — "The State Spending and School Funding Limits Initiative" — the number dropped to 26%."


As usual, people believe the Dem lies, because they don't bother to find out anything for themselves.

[goldstategop]

Education alone soaks up half the state budget. Another third goes to auto-pilot social welfare programs. Now if we can't cut those - then the state budget will never be balanced. Voters have to decide if they want government to live within its means or if they don't care what Sacramento spends on schools and services. Both approaches are mutually incompatible.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)