Posted on 01/11/2006 5:11:14 PM PST by NormsRevenge
SACRAMENTO Democratic legislative leaders praised Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's budget yesterday as the best he's proposed since coming to office in late 2003.
Yet they issued harsh criticism in the few areas in which they disagree with the governor.
Legislative Democrats say they will fight Schwarzenegger's proposal to freeze cost-of-living increases for the poor and disabled, resist his proposal to cut child care funds for welfare recipients and block his request to give the governor new powers to make midyear budget cuts.
They even suggested they might seek voter approval to delay the implementation of Schwarzenegger's pet project: a ballot measure he sponsored in 2002 to fund after-school programs for schools.
A delay in implementing Proposition 49, which the Legislative Analyst's Office has advocated, could free about $428 million for other programs this year.
Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, D-Los Angeles, demonstrated the Democrats' mixed reaction yesterday, calling the budget "leaps and bounds" above the previous two submitted by Schwarzenegger.
But he also said the governor has tried to balance the budget at the cost of the poor.
Assembly Democrats, Núñez said, would not accept Schwarzenegger's proposal for a 15-month delay in the federal cost-of-living adjustment for poor, aged and disabled people who receive grants from the SSI/SSP program.
"It's totally unacceptable. It's not going to happen," he said. "It'll happen over my dead body in this legislative session."
By contrast, Republicans offered more uniformly positive reviews.
"I am pleased that the governor has proposed a budget that does not raise taxes on hard-working Californians," said Assembly Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield.
Schwarzenegger's budget needs approval by two-thirds of the Democrat-dominated Legislature. Normally, a proposed budget amounts to an opening bid in a complicated bargaining ritual that doesn't end until summer.
Last year, the Legislature agreed to freeze welfare grants and to delay the federal cost-of-living adjustment for SSI/SSP recipients for three months this year and next.
Schwarzenegger has proposed a new delay. Under his plan, SSI/SSP recipients would have to wait until July 2008 for their federal cost-of-living adjustments, which under current law they would receive in April 2007.
State officials estimate the delay would save $48 million in the next fiscal year and about $185 million the year after.
Schwarzenegger defended his decision.
"We're not picking on anyone," he said. "When you look at the whole thing, you make decisions on thousands of different items. It's all balancing."
But Senate President Pro Tempore Don Perata, D-Oakland, said it was unfair to deprive the state's poorest residents of an increase in funds, especially when so many other programs are growing.
In April, single SSI/SSP recipients will get grants of $836 a month, while couples will get $1,472 a month.
"George Bush, for crying out loud, who is as flint-hearted as they come, let go with his cold dead fingers of $50 million targeted for the elderly and now we're going to go and rip that off from them. Does that seem very responsible?" Perata said.
Schwarzenegger also has proposed cutting about $200 million in welfare spending, including $114 million in child care funds for welfare recipients.
During his talk yesterday, Schwarzenegger also offered a scaled down version of Proposition 76, which would have given the governor broad new powers to cut the budget. Voters rejected the measure in November.
Schwarzenegger proposed giving governors new authority to deal with budget crises by granting them the power to make midyear cuts. Education funding could not be cut under his proposal, however.
Núñez rejected the idea.
"The voters already spoke to that. They don't want to hand the governor over more power," he said. State Sen. Wes Chesbro, D-Arcata, said the governor and the Legislature already have the power to make budget cuts together under Proposition 58.
Chesbro, chairman of the Senate budget committee, said disputes between the Legislature and the governor are more narrow than last year, when Schwarzenegger sought significant cuts in health programs and state employee pensions and proposed less money for schools than education groups believed they were owed.
As a result, he said, this year's proposed budget presents an opportunity for the governor and the Legislature to reach an agreement more quickly.
"In general, it's a better budget than we've seen in a long time," Chesbro said. "But there are some major problems."
Good for Schwarzenegger.
Let's line up every yokel who wanted to change the Constitution so this socialist/nazi could be elected President, and laugh at them till they want to dig a hole and crawl in.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Ahnold has often said that he admires Pat Brown. Massive infrastructure was built under PB's leadership.
I'm a little confused. Did you intend to say: even if the taxpayers don't get a refund.
I have a mixed reaction to: Democrats don't want to see California prepared for the future. That's not where the votes for them are.
Yes, Democrats pander to their base for voting support.
No, Democrats depend on unions for campaign contributions.
This is very confusing to me. In a secular socialist welfare state like California, doesn't the bulk of the budget find it's way into the pockets of "the poor" by one means or another? Welfare, health care, schools, food stamps, etc., etc.?
Nice to finally see a nice thread about the Gov. The Dem posturing and theatrics here is truly shameless. The state gains nothing from investing in welfare dependency building giveaways. Increasing health care access for children was a nice touch, although the state still is too inept to enroll eligible people into it as it is.
Yeah a voting base that expects the limitless growth of government and more checks. Its the unions that run the State Capitol. The Democrats themselves are just supporting players in the drama the former have scripted.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Why is it the best? Does it increase waste, fraud, abuse and overall spending on pork by 100%?
The seal of approval every Republican must have /sarcasm
An overlooked, little understood, little discussed but accurate observation.
During Edmond Brown's administration, cultural/racial minorities had little political power in California, not even in the CADEM. Unions prevailed only in the large, metropolitan areas, principally in Los Angeles and San Francisco Counties because of the traditional, heavy industries in those locations.
Today, racial/cultural minority blocs from Los Angeles County have risen to positions of leadership and power in the California Assembly and will soon do so in the Senate. Unions hold sway in both the Assembly and Senate, principally because they have been successful in unionizing government employment.
It would be nearly impossible in California today to pass "open shop"/"right-to-work" legislation or eliminate the "prevailing wage" provision of state contracts, even without federal participation.
ROFL. Calcowgirl and Carrie Okie would nominate that for the funniest statement of the year.
LOL. Actually, I think a good portion of the budget goes into the pockets of the rich, in the form of pork and other shenanigans.
The budget spends I think 5% more than last year...
The general fund increased by 8.7%, the total budget by 7%. The general fund is up 37% from when Arnold took office. Here are some number comparisons I posted
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
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.