August 20, 2008

Budget Borrowing, Or Not?

[see below for update]

BUDGET DAY 50 -- Welcome to the newest saga in the budget drama of 2008: will the budget impasse be resolved with borrowing big bucks earmarked by voters for other government services, and are legislative Republicans leading the charge?

In fairness, this isn't actually a new topic; rather, it's newly prominent... after Governor Schwarzenegger called out his fellow Republicans yesterday at the end of yet another unsuccessful budget meeting.

At issue: the possibility of borrowing a few billion dollars from money set aside for everything from local government (through 2004's Proposition 1A) and transporation (through 2002's Proposition 42 and 2006's Proposition 1A) to early childhood programs (through 1998's Proposition 10 tobacco tax) and even money for mental health programs (2004's Proposition 63).

While there's not enough money in these accounts to completely close the budget gap, it's believed that these bucks, plus spending cuts and... well, some good old-fashioned budget gimmicks... could probably get the state at, or near, closing the $15 billion deficit.

But the voter-approved initiatives require the money to be paid back sooner rather than later, sometimes with interest. In other words... it would be a one-time solution that would probably add to fiscal headaches in years to come.

Schwarzenegger's accusation yesterday that it's Republicans pushing this as a solution left the leaders of both GOP legislative caucuses angry.

But it's been mainly Republicans who have expressed public willingness to consider such a plan; Democrats have pretty consistently shot down such talk when it's surfaced the last few weeks.

One interview in particular with reporters that immediately stuck in the craw of local government folks and others (and I know, because a portion of it aired in a story of mine the next day and the phone started ringing just after our newscast) was given by Senate GOP Leader Dave Cogdill two weeks ago today.

Cogdill didn't necessarily say that he wanted to borrow the money, but acknowledged such action as a way out of the jam.

His unedited comments, first to the idea of a tax hike, and then to the issue of borrowing, can be heard below.

In a written statement released yesterday after the governor's public dressing down of Republicans, Cogdill tried to make the point that such borrowing would only happen if Democrats refused to cede any ground off their program priorities.

"If Democrats want to increase spending," Cogdill's statement reads, "they are going to have to either raise taxes or borrow money."

In other words, is it Democrats demanding certain spending... or Republicans rejecting certain revenues? Such ponderances lead to the same kind of brain freeze as a good milkshake.

One thing seems certain: should such borrowing be the ultimate solution to this standoff, it will probably be impossible to ever figure out just whose fingerprints are on it.

[update 2:38pm Schwarzenegger, in a news conference laying out a new budget proposal, seemed to close the door on the borrowing plan, but only after a little prodding from my follow-up question. His final comments on the suggestion: "It is not a wise idea, and I will not do that, no."]

August 6, 2008

Take Legislators’ Pay For Good, Says Guv

Governor Schwarzenegger may have just latched on to an idea for an amendment to the state Constitution that would probably be the easiest to pass in history: no legislative pay for a late budget, and no payback of missed pay... forever.

The governor's late afternoon news conference included a swipe at legislators who are retroactively paid after a budget is enacted (both they and their staffers are not paid during budget impasses).

"They shouldn't get paid, and they should never make that money back," said Schwarzenegger. "We've got to have consequences."

I've heard lots of citizens grumble the same thing over the last few weeks; and if anyone could raise the money to qualify an initiative on the issue and win, it would probably be the guv.

June 4, 2008

A Drought of Water, A Flood of Propositions?

The main story out of today's news conference from Governor Schwarzenegger is, of course, important news: the governor has officially proclaimed a drought in California but has stopped short of imposing water restrictions, opting instead to first try and get the word out for more water conservation.

Schwarzenegger is using the proclamation to renew his push for borrowing $11.9 billion to create long-term solutions to California's water woes. Water bond negotiations broke down here in Sacramento months ago and have been in limbo ever since.

And so now to our minor but noteworthy point: the governor hopes to add the water bond to the ever-growing ballot that voters will be handed at the polling place on November 4.

"Put it on the ballot this November [and] pass it," he said at today's Capitol news conference, "so that we can start building, and so that we can secure the water for the future."

For those not keeping score at home: the November ballot already consists of eight measures-- seven voter-circulated initiatives, one measure placed on the ballot by the Legislature. That includes the proposition that's likely to crowd out all others for attention, an attempt to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriages.

Add #9 if Schwarzenegger's political team successfully gathered enough voter signatures to qualify a redistricting reform measure. And most politicos think that they did.

Add #10 if you think the victim's rights intiative known as "Marsy's Law" will qualify. And that, too, seems likely.

Add #11 for a $5 billion bond encouraging fuel-efficient vehicles and energy research.

Add #12, #13, and #14 if the governor gets his trifecta of budget reform, authorization to sell $15 billion in bonds against future California Lottery revenues, and now... water bonds.

14 ballot measures is a heck of a hefty ballot. Not that there haven't been hefty ballots in years past in California. But it certainly would seem that this particular myriad of complicated subjects, layered on top of an historic presidential campaign, could saddle the voters with quite a challenge.

Needless to say, Schwarzenegger thinks they're up to the task. "I think that the people enjoy participating in the political process," he said.

His complete answer, which focuses more on the policy issue at hand, can be heard here.

Having lined all of these proposals up, perhaps it's time for a reality check. The budget reform and lottery ballot measure plans are the stickiest of wickets, so much so that the odds of both of these making the November ballot currently seem a little long.

Reality check #2: the Legislature and governor are technically supposed to submit any ballot measures for November by June 26. Ummm... okay. That formal deadline has been stretched to the point of breaking in the past, and would apparently have to be stretched again this time.

Reality check #3: negotiating multiple complicated things at the same time is a tough act to pull off at the Capitol, even though Schwarzenegger today (as you can hear below) urged legislators to give it a shot.

But were it all to come true... 14 ballot measures, four of which would be near and dear to Schwarzenegger's heart... then consider this: which one(s) would he campaign for? Which would he raise money for?

In other words, how many ways can you slice the time... and spread the influence... of the state's most recognizable politician?