Skip to main content

A Brief Lesson In Why California is Economically Dysfunctional

State budget woes grow deeper as rosy projections come up short

Washington hasn't come to the rescue. Hopes for a tax windfall were dashed last month.

As the reality of a $20 billion deficit sets in, California leaders are bracing for another summer of difficult state budget talks.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will kick off serious budget discussions Friday with his May budget revision.

(Emphasis mine.)

The California state budget process looks something like this:

  • By January 10 of every year, the Governor presents his state budget to the Legislature (California Constitution Article 4 Section 12(a)).
  • The Legislature hashes at it.
  • By mid-May, the Governor submits his May revise, the “revise” taking into account changes in the economy, shifting spending priorities, etc.
  • The Legislature resumes chewing.
  • The Legislature must pass the budget bill by June 15 (California Constitution Article 4 Section 12(c)(3)).
  • El Guv has certain line item veto authority, but in general he either approves or rejects. Generally, they sign.
  • The budget goes into effect July 1.

All of that is in the state constitution. This timeline is a mystery to no one.

Except the state Legislature and the Sacramento Bee, that is.

The May revise isn’t supposed to “kick off” serious discussions, it’s supposed to be part of the on-going discussions. “Serious discussions” aren’t supposed to begin in the summer, they should have been going on all spring. Summer is when the budget goes into effect.

Instead, the Governor is telling the Governor of Arizona how to run her state, while the California Legislature is handling vital issues, like deciding who to name a highway after. Starting tomorrow, they may opt to start doing the job they should have started on January 11.

And this is why the California budget is a cesspool.

Here endeth the lesson.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home. Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes . In Batman Begins , I blamed Katie Holmes . Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal , who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film,...
1 comment
Read more

DVD: The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008)

Awful. The film is an environmentalist wacko wet dream. No one else could like this thing. I’m trying to think of something positive and all I can come up with is how positively awful it is. The original The Day the Earth Stood Still is a science fiction masterpiece. In it, Klaatu comes to Earth with a simple message: Do what you want among yourselves and on your planet. But if you attempt to export your violent way to the stars, Gort and his friends will hit you with so many lefts you’ll beg for a right. (Gort being the cosmic version of Chuck Norris, you see.) The ultimate warning was that we needed to change our violent ways if we expected to be accepted among the stars. In this remake, the aliens are environmental busy-bodies who have bought into the entire notion that we puny little humans are capable of destroying the planet. Therefore, we must be eliminated so that the planet, for God knows what reason, can try again. To count the ways in which this film makes no sense ...
1 comment
Read more

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that ...
Post a Comment
Read more