“This deficit is funded entirely with borrowed funds from Proposition 57, approved by voters in 2004. Although the public was promised that this bond would only be used to pay for past deficits, it is in fact being used to cover deficits for 2004 ($0.6 billion), 2005 ($2.9 billion) and now 2006 ($6.4 billion).
You mean Arnold... LIED? Gasp! Whoda thunk it?
Cut, CUT, CUT!!! Not.
I expect that Tom is now back on your hit list, seeing as he's no longer useful towards Arnold's profligate ends.
The head of the San Diego Tax Fighters, Richard Rider, (an author of the ballot argument against Prop 58) is on a rampage lately. He recently sent out email blasting this. Another one of his emails was posted at Flash Report a couple days ago regarding the State of the State speech and Arnold's leftward leaps. (It was titled "The Terminator Morphs into Girlie Man." You probably need to scroll back to the archived pages on the blog to find that one.)
Governor Spendanator Runs AmuckSan Diego – In his latest State of the State speech, Governor Spendanator has come up with another whopper of a budget, once again proposing to spend more than the state takes in. The Democrat legislators doubtless will match his figure and raise it. Since the governor never uses his powerful line item veto, the actual budget likely will be even larger than the one he is proposing.
But what about Proposition 58, the Balanced Budget Act? This constitutional amendment was overwhelmingly passed by California voters in the spring of 2004.
Doesn’t Prop 58 preclude such deficit spending? That’s what governor Schwarzenegger and his cronies told us in their ballot argument. Perhaps now is a good time to look back at what we were told by the politicians, and compare their promises with what actually occurred.
A little background: The new governor wanted $15 billion worth of bonds issued to give him the breathing room to get spending under control. That became Prop 57, and it passed easily. To make it legal, the California constitution had to be amended so that bonds could be issued to pay for routine operating expenses – there was a restrictive requirement that such bonds had to be used to actually build something! Thus Prop 58, the mislabeled “Balanced Budget Act,” was also put on the ballot to cleverly repeal this safeguard while pretending to control spending. It passed easily, getting over 70% of the vote. After all, how many voters would oppose a measure requiring a balance budget?
Three taxpayer advocates (including yours truly) co-wrote the ballot book arguments opposing this measure. We pointed out that this measure would NOT require a balanced budget. The proponents flat out lied about this requirement, as results proved. We were 100% right, and they were dead wrong.
(snip)