Aronold took the reigns and CA is a wreck. why is it such a disaster?
i feel terrible for people who are not getting a tax refund; IMO, this is criminal. i bet Arnold is still collecting a paycheck…
You might want to do a little research before pegging this one on Arnold…tough to blame him when most everything he proposed in first term + got rejected by the legislature.
CA’s problems go way beyond the governator.
Actually, that wonderful precedent is making me do my taxes early this year. Thank you California.
ps. Arnie came in with guns a blazin, but was quickly slapped with the reality that he was not able to change squat.
Arnie doesnt accept his gov pay…
what he said.
California was a huge mess way before Arnold took office. In fact, the mess in CA is a large part of why Arnold was able to take office to begin with. Oh, and Arnold has plenty of money. He doesn’t take his CA Gov’s salary if I remeber correctly.
why is it such a disaster?
Well...I think this ridiculous high speed rail that "we" (talking about CA as a whole, not me...since I voted against this) just approved is a good example of why we are where we are.
Seems the population here wants to:
- Save everything (regardless of cost)
- Fix things that aren’t broken (regardless of cost)
But that’s all just my opinion 
.
The game is up in CA.
The state provides more “social services” than any state in the country and that is why it is screwed.
Illegal aliens are costing nearly $9B a year by some conservative estimates.
Arnie has been a disaster.
You can’t continue to tax the shit out of people and expect to revive the economy.
Spending needs to be cut, period.
No individual can fix CA’s problems, they are structural in nature.
Problem
We have a ridiculous system of taxation and fiscal transfer. Local governments raise money that they ship off to Sacramento, and get pennies back on the dollar along with a litany of mandates on how they can spend it. Prop 13 is largely to blame for this mess with prop 98 not far behind.
Solution= reform of the state/local government relationship and more freedom for local government to spend their own money as they see fit.
Problem
Our budget process is ludicrous. We are only one of 3 states in the union that requires a super majority to pass a budget and the other two do actually have super majorities of the same party. The state’s Republicans have signed a “no tax” pledge written by Grover Norquist, thereby handcuffing California from ever raising revenues in times of crisis such as now.
Solution= remove the super majority requirement and implement a 5% spending cap above which the super majority kicks back in. Adopt a two year budget cycle so at least every other year legislators can actually do some work instead of always fighting about the budget.
Problem
Any kook with a few grand to burn can put an initiative on the CA ballot. As a result we have developed a system of legislation via one time measures none of which take into account the overall impact on the state fiscally or otherwise. We voted in 3 strikes and Megans Law because they sounded good, but they are costing the state BILLIONS to implement.
Solution= we raise the bar of qualification for initiatives. Double the number of signatures requrired to qualify an initiative and if your initiative qualifies you also have to identify a funding stream for it. If you vote for 3 strikes you also have to vote for a tax increase to build more prisons.
Problem
We voted for term limits to get rid of Willie Brown. Willie is gone but so is all the institutional knowledge in the Capitol and so is the ability for anyone to make a deal because they are always looking over their shoulder at the next office to run for and they don’t want to be smeared with being a “compromiser”. Freshmen are also chairing important committees and they can’t find the bathrooms. Right now its the lobbyists who ghave been around forever who run the Capitol.
Solution = We need to extend term limits especially for members in positions of leadership.
Problem
There are very few competitive seats in California and the real election for most is the primary. In Republican districts the candidates that sign the Grover Norquist pledge and who get the support of the conservative groups such as the Lincoln Club and the evangelical churches always beat the moderate centerist Republicans. IN Dem districts its the candidate with the backing ove Moveon and labor that won and when they call get to Sacramento they don’t know how to talk to eachother.
Solution = open primaries. The top two candidates in any promary, R or D, compete in the runoff. IN San Francisco that will be two Ds and in Orange County you’ll haver two Rs…only the more moderate candidates on both sides have a much greater chance of winning. We also need a bigger legislature. Our Assembly and Senate sizes were determined at time when the state’s population was a fraction of its current size. We need smaller districts and more members.
You have a state that has been run by liberals for decades. They control the legistature, courts and at times the executive spot.
What the legistature does not control, the public employee unions guard like a fatty guards their stash of Oreos.
They gerrymander the district lines making it very tough for a GOP candidate to win seats.
Although a large portion of the state is geographically red, the population hubs in LA and SF are liberal and run the show. So about 75% of the state is politically disenfranchised.
They spend out of control. Out of control defined as a third over what they take in revenues.
Even with a hopeless shortfall in revenues, the people pass a bullet train proposition that will cost tens of billions.
The typical M.O. around budget time is to cut essential services and withhold payroll to employees to generate outrage. The pork never gets cut.
We are out of water and power but the solution is always to conserve more rather than consider increasing the supply. There is always a newt or grasshopper that would be displaced if you consider building a dam.
Edit: Forgot one - We have a Big 3 situation. Public employees can retire in their 50’s with most getting 90% of their highest salaries and full medical. There will be millions of these to take care of.
You worry too much. Just this morning the Superintendent of Schools explained that the key to the school funding crisis is really quite simple. Just vote to lower the threshold for increasing parcel taxes from 67% to 55%, cuz them greedy property owners just won’t give it up themselves. After all, how can the schools be expected to get by on a mere $48 Billion a year?
So how does something like that effect your 1% property tax cap? Are schools allowed to push you over the 1% cap?
The reason I ask is that Indiana is moving towards a system similar to California. I’m paying 3.5% of assessed value right now, but they are supposedly going to 1% within a few years. This is already creating massive budget shortfalls. The only way they are going to get to 1% is to cut virtually every goverment service, or drastically jack up the income tax rate (which already went up last year) or sales tax. Our sales tax is as high as CA already, but the income tax is only 3.5% state and 1% local for a total of around 4.5% (I understand CA is around 9%).
We are 48th in the nation in per student spending and the republicans in sacramento won’t allow any new revenues, so where else are our schools to get money from if not from their own towns and communities who vote for it.
How about trying what any other person or entity does when confronting shortfalls? Cut waste. Then when you convince people that you are trustworthy, see what needs to be added, if anything.
cut waste cut waste cut waste.
We are 48th in per student SPENDING. Should we keep cutting until we are 50th?
School and other bonds can be added to the 1% tax rate. For example, our rate is about 1.1%. I have seen it as high as about 1.35%.
Maybe there are too many students.
The idea of being efficient with funding is truly alien to you isn’t it? If we doubled SPENDING and wasted every nickle of it, how is that an improvment to the students? On the other hand, if waste accounts for 25% and was applied to students, BAM! California jumps from 47th to 25th in effective spending. Why is it too much to ask that the taxpayer get value for tax dollars?
Every year the LA school districts tells usthey need more money to combat the drop out rate, every year we give them more, but the drop out continues to to increase.
I say get rid of the kids that dont belong (illegals) out and you will fix the over crowding, then you will not need more money. And I bet the dropout rate will decrease!
I am not sure how much of that money goes to the student…but if remember correctly, it isnt much. most of it goes to admin and pay. For instance, my daughters middle school has 2 principles and 7 vice principles…seems like a scam to me, move the tenured peeps up to the vice position, give them more pay then hire more teachers…SCAM SCAM…
Oh, and dont forget our favorite mom that just gave birth to 8 babies on the gov dime. yes, she does get free gov health care, lives on gov income. They will allow invitro on gov health care but they will not pay for tying those damn tubes… 14 babies the tax payers of Ca will pay for for many years to come…
Matt,
CA is actually 23rd per student, so you were just a little off (48th?) But hey, don’t let the facts get in the way of a good argument.
PUBLIC SCHOOL SPENDING
The District of Columbia spent more money per student ($13,187) than any state in the country in 2001-2002, according to a June 2004 report by the U.S. Census Bureau. Near the top of the list were New York ($11,546), New Jersey ($11,436), Connecticut ($10,001) and Massachusetts ($9,856).
The following list shows spending by state, and the nationwide ranking among states:
**State** **Per-pupil spending ($)** **Rank** Alabama 6,115 44 Alaska 9,586 7 Arizona 5,524 49 Arkansas 6,119 43 California 7,511 23 Colorado 6,884 34 Connecticut 10,001 4 Delaware 9,271 8 District of Columbia 13,187 1 Florida 6,056 45 Georgia 7,340 26 Hawaii 7,253 28 Idaho 5,923 48 Illinois 8,022 17 Indiana 7,580 22 Iowa 7,305 27 Kansas 7,052 29 Kentucky 6,493 40 Louisiana 6,519 38 Maine 8,351 15 Maryland 8,507 13 Massachusetts 9,856 5 Michigan 8,489 14 Minnesota 7,691 20 Mississippi 5,382 50 Missouri 7,018 31 Montana 7,027 30 Nebraska 7,418 25 Nevada 6,034 46 New Hampshire 7,750 18 New Jersey 11,436 3 New Mexico 6,606 37 New York 11,546 2 North Carolina 6,511 39 North Dakota 6,728 36 Ohio 8,100 16 Oklahoma 6,256 42 Oregon 7,621 21 Pennsylvania 8,841 10 Rhode Island 9,178 9 South Carolina 6,984 32 South Dakota 6,319 41 Tennessee 5,984 47 Texas 6,746 35 Utah 4,890 51 Vermont 9,678 6 Virginia 7,501 24 Washington 6,894 33 West Virginia 7,748 19 Wisconsin 8,574 12 Wyoming 8,667 11