"Our Children Will Hate Us" Act

[Haggis@wk]

Collins, Snowe and Specter voted yes. Every other Republican voted no. Right now the Democrats are at 59 and holding the vote open for Sherrod Brown, who is flying back from his mother's wake to cast the deciding vote. So it's pretty much a done deal — America, prepare to be stimulated.

[Shapley]

An interesting bit of information about the 'stimulus' bill. The House-Passed Version of the bill had no provision for high-speed rail, the Senate-Passed version of the bill had $2 billion for a rail line from Los Angeles to Las Vegas. When the 'compromise' was reached, the final bill had $8 billion for the LA-LV high-speed rail line. This is a compromise?

[Haggis@wk]

An interesting bit of information about the 'stimulus' bill. The House-Passed Version of the bill had no provision for high-speed rail, the Senate-Passed version of the bill had $2 billion for a rail line from Los Angeles to Las Vegas. When the 'compromise' was reached, the final bill had $8 billion for the LA-LV high-speed rail line. This is a compromise?

No one read the bill; no one. Every member of Congress, the senate and the president all admitted that no one read it. Incredible

[Shapley]

According to the reports, it was impossible for them to do so. It was not made available until 8 hours before the vote. At 1100 pages, it is not possible to read the entire document in 8 hours.

This, of course, after they promised to make it available for a public 48-hour review period before a vote would be taken.

[Haggis@wk]

Unfair headline
Following Congressional passage of the economic stimulus bill, consumer confidence has fallen to another record low.

People don't even know what's in the damned thing. What they do know is that instead of offering up inspiration, Obama has been spouting the most pessimistic rhetoric on the economy they've ever heard from an American president.

I may not agree with Obama on policy, but I am not going to deprive him of the credit he deserves.

[Shapley]

President Obama seems intent on talking us from a recession to a depression. I am reminded of Ex-President Carter telling us "Things would get worse before they got better". A little optimism would go a long way to rebuilding confidence. I'm not saying he should lie, I'm saying he could accentuate the positive - and there is positive news out there if you know where to look.

Of course, as long as he can get by talking about this 'economic situation we inherited', he'll keep giving us the downers. Once he's actually forced to take ownership of the situation, I suspect he'll be more upbeat in his assessment.

[Haggis@wk]

Great news: Geithner’s rescue plan was slapped together at the last minute

[jamiebk]

President Obama seems intent on talking us from a recession to a depression. I am reminded of Ex-President Carter telling us "Things would get worse before they got better". A little optimism would go a long way to rebuilding confidence. I'm not saying he should lie, I'm saying he could accentuate the positive - and there is positive news out there if you know where to look.

Of course, as long as he can get by talking about this 'economic situation we inherited', he'll keep giving us the downers. Once he's actually forced to take ownership of the situation, I suspect he'll be more upbeat in his assessment.

What a bunch of crap and you know it....Take a look at the world market. This is what is affecting us so severely. What positive news do you see? Japan is off big time, as are other world markets. Our market is retreating to lows not seen since the big slide. You can argue about whether the stimulus is going to be effective or not, but to suggest that Obama is intent on sliding the US into a depression is nonsense. Seems like many of the Republican governors like the package while their congressional associates continue to criticize it. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29230543/

[Shapley]

What a bunch of crap and you know it....Take a look at the world market. This is what is affecting us so severely. What positive news do you see? Japan is off big time, as are other world markets. Our market is retreating to lows not seen since the big slide. You can argue about whether the stimulus is going to be effective or not, but to suggest that Obama is intent on sliding the US into a depression is nonsense. Seems like many of the Republican governors like the package while their congressional associates continue to criticize it. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29230543/

There is money being made out there. Unemployment, while higher than desirable, still lower than during the past two recessions. There are positive indicators if you know where to look.

The President has the power to affect the national mood. If we begin to recover, the world will follow.

As I pointed out, government spending under President Bush grew at an alarming pace, so government spending isn't the answer. People need some assurance that their investments will grow, or they won't invest. The President is not giving that assurance. If the President sells doom and gloom, that's what the public will buy. The President has some power to set the public mood, and I'm sure you know that.

[jamiebk]

The CA unemployment rate is 9.5% and heading higher. Our state economy is in the dumper until the Republicans get off their high horse and relaize that we can't cut taxes when we have a $42 billion defict...it will take a combination fo cuts, higher taxes, and borrowing to right this. Sorry Shap, but its alittle more than have one's dobber down that is causing this mess. "Feeling good" about things isn't going to change it when the financial markets are in gridlock. As to spending it's not just spending that counts....it's spending on the right stuff that will generate jobs and industries. Spending a trillion dollars in Iraq didn't help!

[Shapley]

Nowhere did I say we can talk our way out of it, but we can talk our way into a worse situation. There is money out there, and the investment of that money is needed to get the ball rolling. Investors are not going to put it into the economy if all they hear is doom and gloom. It will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Right now, potential investors are looking for a secure place to sock it away until the worst passes, since we are being assured daily that worse is coming.

[Shapley]

Our state economy is in the dumper until the Republicans get off their high horse and relaize that we can't cut taxes when we have a $42 billion defict...it will take a combination fo cuts, higher taxes, and borrowing to right this.

Actually, you can cut taxes and improve the situation, you just have make government cut its' excesses, as it is expecting everyone else to do. Someone has to take a cut, either the taxpayer in the form of higher taxation on his earnings, or the government in the form of lower revenues from their taxation. Personally, I think the government can get by with less a lot easier than the taxpayer.

Back when the revenue was flowing freely, there was great debate as to whether it should be spent or given back to the taxpayers. Spending it pretty much won the day. The problem is, much of the spending was for long-term obligations, which meant that they had to keep paying the tab even when the free flow of monies slowed down. Bad idea when you know your revenue is not fixed.

[jamiebk]

Our state economy is in the dumper until the Republicans get off their high horse and relaize that we can't cut taxes when we have a $42 billion defict...it will take a combination fo cuts, higher taxes, and borrowing to right this.

Actually, you can cut taxes and improve the situation, you just have make government cut its' excesses, as it is expecting everyone else to do. Someone has to take a cut, either the taxpayer in the form of higher taxation on his earnings, or the government in the form of lower revenues from their taxation. Personally, I think the government can get by with less a lot easier than the taxpayer.

Back when the revenue was flowing freely, there was great debate as to whether it should be spent or given back to the taxpayers. Spending it pretty much won the day. The problem is, much of the spending was for long-term obligations, which meant that they had to keep paying the tab even when the free flow of monies slowed down. Bad idea when you know your revenue is not fixed.

Your lack of knowledge/understanding of the CA budget is showing. Unfortunately, most of the spending is mandated and in the form of propositions passed by voters. I have heard it said that there is less than 10-12% of the budget to "play" with. What it needs is reform. We have a 2/3's rule to pass any budget and we are one of only 3 states to have such a rule. Getting a 2/3's majority is not easy. I wish you could have heard the interview with one of the Republican swing voters on the budget...every statement was "I want", "I need to see", I won't agree to...". Well I guess he doesn't get the fact that "I" has NOTHING to do with it...He is an elected official hired to represent constituents and voters. In fact, sweeping cuts are being made...Gov. Schwarzenegger and the four legislative leaders finally agreed last week on a package of $15.1 billion in spending reductions, $14.4 billion in tax increases and $11.4 billion in borrowing. Unfortunately, (once again) Republican ideology got in the way of a final agreement. How many states have reduced spending by $15 billion...or had to? How many have deficits to this degree? So far we have hit our state workers pretty hard...Prisons, (a pet project of the Republicans) DMV, Schools....there are 225,000 employed by the state. Could it be cut? Yes...and is is being cut. There are massive layoffs coming and already workers's have been docked 10% of pay through the involuntary furlow program. It's unprecidented. Do you think these cuts are health for an economy that depends 70% upon consumer spending?? Who is going to have any money if they are not working? And for those of us still employed....how can we not be affected by such a slowdown? It is a domino effect.
Personally, I will not be voting for "yes" to anyone seeking re-election in this State.

[Haggis@wk]

Let the recriminations begin. Governor Schwarzenegger says that he will lay off 10,000 workers starting today and end the few remaining public-works projects still in progress as the California legislature failed to reach an agreement to hike taxes by over $14 billion in order to close a massive hole in state finances. Republicans refused to go along:

With lawmakers still unable to deliver a budget after three days of intense negotiations, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger prepared to lay off 10,000 government workers and his administration said it would halt the last 275 state-funded public works projects still in operation.

The projects, which cost $3.8 billion and include upgrades to 18 bridges and roads in Los Angeles County to protect them from collapsing in earthquakes, had been allowed to continue as others were suspended because the state was running out of cash. …

Schwarzenegger had delayed sending out pink slips since Friday, hoping that lawmakers would soon approve a budget. But they failed Monday to find a third GOP vote in the state Senate to achieve the two-thirds majority needed to pass a budget — a requirement that essentially gives the minority Republicans veto power. A spokesman for Schwarzenegger said layoff notices would go out today. …

State Sen. Abel Maldonado (R-Santa Maria) was viewed as the most likely candidate to provide the final vote, but by Monday evening legislative leaders had not agreed to his demands. The dominant Democrats need three Republican votes in each house to pass the budget; leaders in the Assembly said the votes were available in the lower house.

In the tax revolt of the 1970s, conservatives managed to amend the state constitution to require supermajorities in each chamber for tax increases. They intended to use that as a tool to force better fiscal discipline on state government — a great idea, but unfortunately ultimately ineffective. California just found other ways to raise money, usually through fee hikes. It also did nothing to control spending; as the state’s enormous $105 billion annual budget proves.

Republicans have almost no power in the state legislature apart from this supermajority requirement, so it’s not surprising that they’re reluctant to pass up a chance to use it to get spending cuts.

Democrats heavily invested in nanny-state policies over the past few decades, though, and refuse to consider large-scale rollbacks of state government programs. Doing so would jeopardize their standing among key constituencies, especially public-sector unions like AFSCME and SEIU. Instead, they want to bulldoze Republicans into jacking up taxes even higher, making the state that much less competitive and forcing business relocation to increase.

However, Republicans did manage some interesting concessions in this package. They claim over $15 billion in cuts to the budget, as well as greater private contracting on public-works projects, a real sore spot for Californians who wait years for state agencies to complete projects that should take months. They also got approval for a referendum to limit the legislature’s ability to raid the treasury during boom times, which might have prevented the crisis they face now had it been in place three or four years ago.

If the Republicans refuse to budge, Democrats will likely play chicken and blame the layoffs of public employees on the GOP, especially given the concessions already made.

[Shapley]

The CA unemployment rate is 9.5% and heading higher. Our state economy is in the dumper until the Republicans get off their high horse and relaize that we can't cut taxes when we have a $42 billion defict...it will take a combination fo cuts, higher taxes, and borrowing to right this.

Which is California's problem, not the problem of everyone else. North Dakot has a budget surplus. Indiana has a budget surplus, and money in its' rainy day fund.

As to spending it's not just spending that counts....it's spending on the right stuff that will generate jobs and industries. Spending a trillion dollars in Iraq didn't help!

Are you suggesting that the stimulus bill is being spent on the right stuff?

Also, the price tag on Iraq is estimated at about $600 billion, less than the inflation-adjusted cost of the Vietnam War. Military spending does help, BTW, since most military hardware is made in the USA, and it puts people to work. As has been pointed out numerous times, it was World War II, not FDR's spending, that finally pulled us out of the Great Depression.

[Shapley]

The CA unemployment rate is 9.5% and heading higher. Our state economy is in the dumper until the Republicans get off their high horse and relaize that we can't cut taxes when we have a $42 billion defict...it will take a combination fo cuts, higher taxes, and borrowing to right this.

Which is California's problem, not the problem of everyone else. North Dakot has a budget surplus. Texas has a budget surplus. Rhode Island has a budget surplus. West Virginia has a budget surplus. Indiana has a budget surplus, and money in its' rainy day fund. Which of these States should surrender their monies to help California out of the hole it has dug for itself?

As to spending it's not just spending that counts....it's spending on the right stuff that will generate jobs and industries. Spending a trillion dollars in Iraq didn't help!

Are you suggesting that the stimulus bill is being spent on the right stuff?

Also, the price tag on Iraq is estimated at about $600 billion, less than the inflation-adjusted cost of the Vietnam War. Military spending does help, BTW, since most military hardware is made in the USA, and it puts people to work. As has been pointed out numerous times, it was World War II, not FDR's spending, that finally pulled us out of the Great Depression.[/quote]

[jamiebk]

Did it ever occur to you that if AIG, GM, BofA, and a myriad of other companies are "too big to fail"....failure of the state of CA would be even more devastating to the country? No...I suppose not. CA and a number of other states are running some serious deficits..enough to jeopardize more than their own residents. Do I expect other states to "chip in"? No. Do I, should I expect some help at the federal level? Considering the accomodations made to private enterprise...yes.

[Shapley]

Do I expect other states to "chip in"? No. Do I, should I expect some help at the federal level?

where do you think the Federal government, which is $10.6 trillion dollars in the hole, gets that money, or will get it to pay it back? From the citizens of the various States. Like Robbing Hood, they take from someone and give to someone else. We may borrow it from the Chinese in the short term, but the States, or rather their citizens and corporations, will be the ones who pay the Chinese back.

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

We need a new state constitution. A short one.

I also still think we need to sell hunting licenses for lawyers and politicians and lobbyists. With a little luck, the Fish & Game department might turn enough of a profit to cover the Highway Patrol salaries.

[Shapley]

No...I suppose not.

You're right, I don't believe in the "too big to fail" concept. Nor do I believe California will 'fail' in the sense you seem to be suggesting. They will have to live within their means. If they have to raise college tuitions, abandon the high-speed rail project, sell assets, raise their own taxes or lower their taxes or whatever works, cut wages, etc.

The problem now is not that they don't have money, it's that they haven't agreed to a budget, so they can't spend what they have. If the 'tyranny of one' is keeping them from passing a budget, then they have to bow to the tyranny, or find another legislator they can win over cheaper. That is the process, and they are the ones that created the process. Besides, having more Federal dollars won't help, if they don't have the budget authority in place to spend it.