SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: FaultLine who wrote (22985)1/5/2004 1:22:27 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793706
 
Yeah, it's 36 degrees on my front porch right now, brrrr...

Get out your Ukelele, sing a "Little Grass Shack," and dream on.

lindybill@HUMUHUMUNUKUNUKUAPUAA.com



To: FaultLine who wrote (22985)1/6/2004 10:07:57 PM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793706
 
If you want to know what is going on in Political California, read Weintrab.

California Insider
A Weblog by
Sacramento Bee Columnist Daniel Weintraub
January 06, 2004
Blowing up the boxes
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s first State-of-the-State address Tuesday was not filled with new content. But it did set a tone, reinforcing his two-edged style of calling for bipartisan cooperation while threatening to go directly to the voters if legislators don’t give him most of what he wants. In what a top aide said was the opening shot of a eight-week campaign to persuade voters to pass the first pieces of his fiscal recovery plan, Schwarzenegger added few new details to an agenda he laid out in the campaign and early days of his administration and barely mentioned the state budget, which he will address in depth on Friday.

But Schwarzenegger didn’t need to delve into details in this speech, which was his first chance to be seen at length by the people of California. His inaugural address Nov. 17 was at 11 a.m. on a workday and was probably seen by relatively few voters. So this speech was aimed as much at them as at the legislators seated in the chambers. Viewed on television, he seemed polished, prepared, at ease. The speech swung back and forth between inspired rhetoric and nuts and bolts talk about the workings of government. It was a fairly effective introduction to his vision for California: get the fiscal house in order, reform government, create a climate that encourages job growth, and then – and only then – spend the revenue that flows from that new prosperity.

In a 26-minute address interrupted about 40 times by applause, the new governor recapped the progress he and the Legislature have made since he took office – rolling back the car tax, repealing an unpopular bill that gave drivers licenses to illegal immigrants, and passing a $15 billion bond measure, state budget reserve requirement and balanced budget amendment that will appear on the March 2 ballot. He also warned of tough measures ahead, saying the budget he will propose Friday will contain “cuts that will challenge us all” and vowing to stick by his pledge to avoid any tax increases.

“We cannot give what we do not have,” he said. “If we continue spending and don’t make cuts, California will be bankrupt.”

The centerpiece of the relatively brief address was probably Schwarzenegger’s call for “radical” ideas to overhaul state government. He said he would appoint a commission to oversee a team of civil servants to conduct a top-to-bottom review of the government, examining every program to determine if it is still needed and, if so, whether it can be managed more effectively.

“Every governor proposes moving boxes around to reorganize government,” Schwarzenegger said. “I don’t want to move the boxes around. I want to blow them up.”

Calling the executive branch a “mastodon frozen in time” and “about as responsive,” the governor said he wants to consolidate departments with overlapping responsibilities, abolish boards and commissions that serve no pressing need and modernize a state purchasing system that he called archaic and expensive. “I plan a total review of government – its performance, its practices, its cost.”

“I want your ideas,” he told lawmakers, “and the more radical the better.” He extended the same pitch to state employees, saying he wanted to give them freedom to do their jobs in “creative ways.”

Schwarzenegger reiterated his plan to free local school districts to spend more of their budgets as they please, and his staff said he will propose cutting the strings on 22 “categorical programs” and giving local districts control over $2 billion in money that has been directed from Sacramento. On energy, he called for a consolidation of 13 state agencies with a stake in the issue, complaining that it is easier in California “to create energy agencies than power plants.” He also renewed his pledge to encourage construction of a “hydrogen highway,” called for an expansion of solar power and a new state bank to encourage energy efficient retrofits of older buildings.

On the economy, Schwarzenegger called himself a “salesman by nature” and said he was eager to sell California to the world as a place to do business.

“I’m going to say, ‘Come to California. Come do business here. Buy our fantastic products. Visit our special attractions. Hire our workers, who are the most productive in the world.”

But Schwarzenegger also said he and lawmakers needed to fix the state’s business climate before he could make that pitch wholeheartedly. The core of that effort, he said, would be his proposal to bring California’s workers compensation costs in line with the rest of the nation – by March 1.

“Modest reform,” Schwarzenegger said, “is not enough. If modest reform is all that lands on my desk, I am prepared to take my workers comp solution directly to the people, and I will put it on the ballot in November.”

Schwarzenegger ended his speech on an optimistic note.

“I remain a great believer in the future of this state,” he said. “I did not seek this job to cut, but to build. I did not seek this job to preside over the decline of a dream but to renew it. President Reagan said that empires were once defined by land mass, subjugated peoples and military might. But America, he said, is an ‘empire of ideals.’ California, I believe is an empire of hope and aspirations.”

Schwarzenegger’s speech was bracketed with appeals by Democrats for tax increases. First Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante (in what was supposed to be an introduction of the governor) and then legislative leaders, in their official response, said the cuts Schwarzenegger will unveil Friday could be softened by taxing the most affluent Californians or by raising taxes on alcohol or tobacco. Senate Leader John Burton said it makes no “moral sense, no political sense” and little fiscal sense to cut taxes on the wealthy while cutting services to the poorest of the poor. But that call seemed unlikely to win many fans in the wake of Schwarzenegger’s can-do but mostly pain-free address Tuesday. A more substantive ideological battle on the fiscal front will kick off Friday when legislators, and voters, get their first detailed look at the cuts Schwarzenegger has in mind for the programs they value and depend upon.

sacbee.com



To: FaultLine who wrote (22985)1/9/2004 2:56:06 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793706
 
California Insider
A Weblog by
Sacramento Bee Columnist Daniel Weintraub
January 08, 2004
The $2 billion deal
Gov. Schwarzenegger, using a Sacramento middle school as his backdrop, today officially unveiled his proposal – supported by the education lobby – to give schools $2 billion less in the next fiscal year than they would have been entitled to by a strict reading of Proposition 98. The schools will still get more next year per pupil than they got this year, enough to cover enrollment growth and cost-of-living increases. And the $2 billion they will forgo remains part of the base upon which their future budgets are determined. But Schwarzenegger saves that money this year and can use it for other programs. The deal has two advantages for Schwarzenegger. The first is mathematical: it gives him $2 billion he can use to help close the budget gap. The other is political. By taking education funding off the table, he makes it much tougher for Democrats in the Legislature to argue for a tax increase. They cannot say they need the money for schools, the most popular program provided by state government. Instead, they’ll have to argue for higher taxes to fund health and welfare programs for the poor. Fair or not, that’s simply a tougher sell with the voters.