Capitol and California
Comments (0) | | Print

Dan Walters: Revised state budget is still a sham

Published: Friday, Sep. 19, 2008 - 12:00 am | Page 3A

Yes, that was a puff of white smoke floating over the Capitol Thursday afternoon; nearly 100 days past the state constitutional deadline for enacting a state budget and after false starts and detours too numerous to list, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders agreed on a spending and revenue package.

Unless there's another political hitch – and one can never discount that possibility – the deal will be ratified by the Legislature today and legislators can go wherever they go when they're not fouling up things in Sacramento, including an assemblyman who's scheduled to marry a television anchorwoman on Sunday.

Both legislative houses passed a hastily drafted budget package early Tuesday morning, only to face a veto threat from Schwarzenegger, and on Thursday he and legislative leaders had two brief meetings and agreed on a slightly tweaked version. But it's really no more than another get-out-of-town budget that will, more than likely, begin falling apart as soon as it's signed.

The new deal changes one major revenue source – increased income tax withholding for California's workers – that had raised hackles in the media and public, substituting tougher penalties on corporations that underreport taxes. And it tightens up access to a so-called "rainy day fund" aimed at smoothing out future income-outgo gaps, if that fund ever grows big enough to be useful.

Those are at best, however, marginal improvements in what still remains a stopgap budget filled with accounting gimmicks and questionable "spending cuts" and "revenues" – and still leaves the state's fiscal house in great disorder. It makes little, if any, headway on closing what those in the Capitol call the "structural deficit" – the chronic gap between revenues and spending that was plaguing the state even before its economy went into the tank.

Budget mavens are already talking about at least a $7 billion hole in the 2009-10 budget, even if the economy doesn't worsen, which is entirely possible.

The new scheme envisions that voters will approve, probably at a special election early next year, allowing the state to borrow against future lottery profits. In fact, early planning for next year has $5 billion of lottery-backed borrowing being used to close part of that $7 billion-and-counting deficit.

That uncertain lottery loans figure so prominently in the initial planning for the next budget is, unto itself, a strong indication that Schwarzenegger and legislators are still locked in a three-way duel over how to fix the endemic budget dilemma.

We Californians, and those we elect to state office, still cannot agree on what it is we want from government and how much we're willing to pay for it.

We reject both the heavy new taxes that the Legislature's liberal Democrats espouse and the scorched-earth spending cuts that Republicans advocate in public but are, in reality, unwilling to make.

Truly, the budget dilemma is merely symbolic of our larger civic dysfunction.


Call The Bee's Dan Walters, (916) 321-1195. Back columns, www.sacbee.com/walters.


About Comments

Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.

What You Should Know About Comments on Sacbee.com

Sacbee.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. (See our full terms of service here.)

Here are some rules of the road:

• Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "report abuse" button to notify the moderators. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.

• Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.

• Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.

• Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand. If you want to discuss an issue with a specific user, click on his profile name and send him a direct message.

• Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.

• Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.

• Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.

• Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

You should also know that The Sacramento Bee does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "report abuse" button to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at feedback@sacbee.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.

If you submit a comment, the user name of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them, but you may ask our staff to retract one of your comments by sending an email to feedback@sacbee.com. Again, make sure you note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us your profile name.


Sacramento Bee Job listing powered by Careerbuilder.com

Quick Job Search
Buy
Used Cars
Dealer and private-party ads
Make:

Model:

Price Range:
to
Search within:
miles of ZIP

Advanced Search | 1982 & Older