How to Solve the Budget Crisis in Three Easy Steps

Tom McClintock for Governor ^ | Tom McClintock

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

California’s budget crisis is not complicated and it is not intractable and it is not mysterious. Over the last four years, population and inflation have grown at a combined rate of 21 percent. Revenue has grown 28 percent. Spending has grown 40 percent.

Our distress is not for lack of revenue but for lack of discipline. And to restore that discipline, three simple acts are all that is needed to put California’s financial crisis behind us.

First, the immediate budget shortfall requires policy makers to abide by the first law of holes: when you’re in one, stop digging.

Most of California’s deficit is not the difference between what it is currently spending and what it is currently taking in. It is rather caused by the projected increases in state spending over the next 18 months. Most of the deficit is not a matter of cutting current spending – but rather arresting the growth in future spending.

That growth is driven by a variety of constitutional and statutory mandates. But virtually all of them can be suspended by the legislature at any time by the same vote that it takes to enact the budget. The principal exception is service on the debt.

Thus, merely suspending these mandates and reducing current expenditures by 9.5 percent – and then holding at that level for 18 months – would eliminate the deficit without the tax increases, raids on local government and pilfering of pension and special funds that the Governor has proposed.

Could your family cut its spending by 9.5 percent in hard times? In this recession, many families are doing exactly that. Their state government, which is now spending a larger portion of their earnings than at any time in our history, could profit from their example.

Secondly, the discomfort of frugality could be eased dramatically if accompanied by a comprehensive review of every state agency and program now on the books. California State government spends roughly twice per person what Arizona spends, and yet Arizona delivers a vastly higher level of service in every category including academic performance, electricity generation, water delivery, and highway and housing construction.

The difficulty in conducting such a review – and acting upon it – is that every program has a highly motivated constituency that jealously and expertly guards its budget. Faced with the long overdue need to close obsolete military bases, the federal government confronted the same paralysis caused by interest group pressure. Ultimately, Congress broke the gridlock when it took the task of reviewing bases out of the political arena and gave it to an independent panel of management experts that returned a comprehensive recommendation for a single up-or-down vote.

This mechanism prevented the political logrolling, mutual back-scratching and parochial grandstanding that had long blocked the consolidation and closure of obsolete bases. The same thing desperately needs to be done with California’s bureaucracies.

Finally, with the state’s fiscal affairs back in order, a constitutional spending limit must be restored. California had such a provision from 1979 to 1990, commonly called the Gann Spending Limit, restraining the growth of state expenditures to the combined growth of population and inflation. State spending still more than doubled during this period, but only as fast as the economy could sustain it. In 1990, the limit was blown into the stratosphere by Proposition 111.

If the Gann Limit had been restored at the outset of the Davis Administration, California’s current budget would still be 21 percent larger than it was four years ago. But instead of a $35 billion deficit, California would enjoy a $5 billion surplus this year – and $30 billion cumulatively over the last four.

These three simple acts would solve California’s current budget crisis and prevent future recurrences. Will they be enacted?

Probably not. And that’s the only reason why California’s budget problem is intractable. It is not answers but action that is missing.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Looks like someone has an actual plan.

[Those_Crazy_Liberals]

blah blah blah. Will he even break 5% in the end?

[byteback]

I think most of us realize that reduction in government spending is the answer. Now the job is to elect the best salesman.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Our job is to elect someone who will actually do it. We don't need someone who already talks about "providing everything for the people." That is not a fiscal conservative. It is a socialist.

[ambrose]

Don't waste your breath on these out-of-state RINO scumbags. They're a lost cause.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Yes, he will break 5%.

The website is loading slowly. I'm guessing there is heavy traffic on his site.

http://www.tommcclintock.com

[jla]

This all sounds familiar.
> Freeze, or reduce, spending.
> Review all agencies and present a detailed analysis of the waste in them, ala the Grace Commission.
> Pass a Balanced Budget Amendment.

Now, along with tax cuts, what we have here is good ol' fashioned Reaganomics. And we all know how that, pleasantly, turned out.

BTW...been meaning to tell you that Canticle of Deborah is a wonderful nic.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

I know, but there are actual thinking California voters who do not swim in the shallow end of the voter pool ;-) McClintock can win through a consistent outreach to the conservative base of this state. We are the ones who turn out rain or shine.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Thank you ;-)

[microgood]

We don't need someone who already talks about "providing everything for the people."

That was a rather disturbing comment. I heard the representative(the one that funded the recall) say on Larry Elder that he thought he really meant provide opportunity like Arnold got when he arrived (as Larry was playing that quote non-stop on his show).

[Solamente]

Maybe Arnold will bring Tom McClintock into his administration?

[byteback]

McClintock can win through a consistent outreach to the conservative base of this state.

Like the outreach we had for Governor Simon?

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

The rep was trying to put the genie back in the bottle. The truth is, that is what Arnold really desires. As long as he is out speaking freely expect more slip ups like this one. He wants businesses to come back so he can tax them for social programs. LOL, what business in their right mind is going to consent to that? Even if he manages to get a few back, those businesses will have to raise the price on their product and lower employee salaries so they can meet the tax expectations and still turn a profit. That's not realistic.

He is a socialist. He has absolutely no platform and as of this very moment Richard Riordan is putting together his "issues" team. Watch out. These two are Democrats in Republican clothing.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

I strongly doubt it. Riordan is in control now and that is about as far from Tom McClintock as one can get. Remember, Riordan contributes money to Democratic candidates. Riordan is politically left of Davis.

[tubebender]

McClintocks numbers will grow as Arnold crawls back under his rock. Even Fox News was panning him this evening. I don't expect A/S to last till the election...

[Veggie Todd]

Like the outreach we had for Governor Simon?

Simon ran a horrible campaign. John and Ken on KFI 640 radio in Los Angeles would put him on the air and give him every chance in the world to state his position on the issues, but he would freeze up. He couldn't but two sentences together without sounding like a bumbling idiot. That's why he lost.

McClintock is polished and has the right ideas. If we can just get him some air time and ink in the papers, people will see that he's the best choice.

[Veggie Todd]

but = put. jeez....

[Hildy]

Excuse me, when did he say this?

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

It was in a press conference the day he announced his candidacy. I believe that was last Wednesday or Thursday.