California Gov Jerry Brown is Mr. Veto

$1 at a time?

 

I've been giving to the State Board of Equalization (Sales Tax) since January of this year. I re-registered my cars...Now, can we have our money back?

 

Depends on how she looks.

 

Meh... those are CA taxes and stay in your lovely state. Try again Sparky.

 

I left California 20 years ago partially because all the state bureaucrats I came into contact with [a lot unfortunately] were so arrogant --thought they were US Senators or something.

 

Man I hate you.

 

I am a bit confused as to how Gov. Brown is not following his campaign promises. Lets jump into the wayback machine and look at what Gov. Brown has been doing for the past 6 months.

First, the estimated California State Budget Deficit is about $25 Billion.

Next, In January Brown introduced a budget plan that cut $12.5 Billion out of the state budget and proposed the tax payers to vote on about $12 billion in tax increases.
[Link: CNN Money – January 13th, 2011 : California budget: Jerry Brown's $12 billion in painful cuts]

Then in the latter half of February, 2011 Jerry Brown starts presenting that if voters are not able to approve tax increases, that he will push for $25 billion in cuts in the California budget. At this time, the Republican legislators are refusing to approve a ballot measure for Californians to vote on tax increases.
[Link: LA Times – February 25th, 2011 - Gov. Jerry Brown tells legislators he will push for a $25-billion cut in California's budget unless voters OK tax extension]

At the end of March, 2011 Brown started cutting the state budget by $11 Billion. At the same time he continued to try to get the $12 billion in proposed tax increased put on the ballot for the public to vote on.
[Link: LA Times – March 25th, 2011 : In major cuts, Gov. Jerry Brown slashes services for poor, sick and elderly]

Fast forward now to June, where Brown vetoing the budget passed by the Democrats. Gov. Brown is claiming that the budget is filled with gimmicks that have been used in the past to hide the budget deficit.
[Link: CNN Money – June 16th, 2011 : Jerry Brown vetoes California budget]

Looking at this above track record, it seems clear that Jerry Brown is following his pledge to…
1) Reform the budget process.
2) Start the budget negotiations far earlier and involve the entire Legislature.
3) Stop budget “gimmicks” and tell the truth.
4) Adopt a “pay-as-you-go” funding approach
5) Adopt a zero based budgeting approach until State finances are stabilized
6) Put teeth behind legal budget deadlines
7) Rainy day fund
8) Revenue spikes
[Link : Jerry Brown – Budget Plan during 2010 Elections]

Please cite the areas of Gov. Browns budget that is a “sham”.

Also what is the big difference between Gov. Browns election promise on how he would tackle the state budget crisis and the actual actions he has been taking since becoming governor?

Compared to a one sided approach of ONLY budget cuts, that the Republicans use? Brown is trying to give the California voters a choice on how deep to make the budget cuts. To keep the budget cuts from reaching $25 billion, voters need to make the choice to pay more taxes to balance the budget.
It’s obvious now in June 2011 that Gov. Brown is holding to his promise to cut the budget by $25 billion, because the republicans in the legislators resisted giving the state voters a choice to reduce the size of the state budget cuts.
Don’t get me wrong, I see little chance that the state population would have voted for a package of $12 billion in increased revenue. But still they should be allowed to the choice and not have the choice of $25 billion in budget cuts decided by the Republican legislators.

Since the above is your “link”, I will allow you to present why Brown is not a fiscally conservative.

 

Brown's budget is a sham because it includes 9.3 billion in tax increases that have not been approved by the voters and will not be approved by the voters and could not be approved by the voters in time. Do you get that? His budget balances because it contains fantasy dollars.

Brown wants to increase taxes and he's pushing hard. So hard that he is using naked threats to Republicans. During the campaign Brown made it sound like he was going to leave it up to the voters whether or not they wanted to pay higher taxes. He has not been neutral on tax increases at all.

Fiscal conservatives want to reduce the size and scope of government. As well as the overall burden it places on society. Brown has done nothing but increase the size and scope and cost of government during his political career and does not want to trim back government now. That latest budget of his only contained 2.6 billion in spending reductions. Couple that with his 9.3 billion in tax increases.

 

could you cite some supporting data to your claims?

 

I am also curious to know about all the money that Cali sends to other states. I have looked but cant find any mention of that anywhere but here. Can you please clarify?

 

I had a link up awhile ago. I'll see if I can find it.

 

Red States Feed at Federal Trough, Blue States Supply the Feed

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html

http://visualizingeconomics.com/2010/02/17/federal-taxes-paidreceived-for-each-state/


Red-State Moochers: Federal Taxes Favor Those Who Complain the Most About Federal Taxes

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy...se-who-complain-the-most-about-federal-taxes/

 

This isn't too bad, it gives kind of a big picture but leaves out a couple of things.

http://www.thecalifornian.com/artic...n-s-tax-pledge-voters-leads-budget-headaches\

While it proved a powerful campaign message, the pledge is coming back to complicate Brown's attempt to balance the state's budget
The trouble is with his base: the unions.

The Democratic governor wants to extend a series of tax increases approved by the Legislature two years ago for another five years.
He cleverly hid this during his campaign.

Brown is taking another run at trying to get voters to weigh in.
The voters already voted down an extension of these taxes last November

But now his promise for a tax election is more complicated.
He never promises a tax election. Only that taxes would not be raised without voter approval.

The revised budget plan Brown presented this week shows the state with $6.6 billion in unexpected revenue through June 2012. But by the start of the new fiscal year, July 1, all the temporary increases to the sales, personal income and vehicle taxes will have expired.
http://livetradings.com/2011/05/17/10-8-billion-u-s-dollars-in-california-budget-battle/
Again, he never campaigned on tax increases.

So he is asking lawmakers to approve an extension of the sales and vehicles taxes temporarily while agreeing to put the question before voters this fall
So the voters already said no to these taxes. He can't get the legislature to go along with these tax increases. So he proposes to spend the money first, then ask for permission later.

"What else can we do?
Balance the friggin budget with existing revenues.

"If you can't believe him that he's going to put it on the ballot, then how can you believe anything else that he's saying?"
a commentary on Browns idea to spend the money first then ask for permission later.

Some Democrats and the public employee unions that fund their campaigns are urging Brown to abandon the idea of going to the voters.
That's Brown's trouble. His base.

So does Brown feel as if he boxed himself in politically by promising to let voters decide on taxes?

"Not at all," he told reporters Thursday after speaking at the annual capital prayer breakfast.

He's crafty.

Handing the issue over to the electorate may be the only way to break the deadlock in the capital.
Tell me what is so hard about balancing a budget with existing revenues.

Brown wants to maintain a 0.5 percentage point increase in the vehicle license fee and a 1 percentage point increase in the state sales tax for another five years. He also wants to renew a 0.25 percentage point increase in the state income tax rate for four years starting in 2012.

At the same time, he wants to end a corporate tax break by requiring all corporations to pay taxes solely on their share of sales in California.
Again, he never divulged this during the campaign.

State Treasurer Bill Lockyer warned this week that if lawmakers pass a spending plan that relies on a future vote on taxes, California's annual short-term borrowing, which will be $10 billion this year, could be in jeopardy. That's the cash the state relies on to pay bills during the first part of its budget year, when tax collections are slower.
Brown advocates spending the money first then asking for voter approval later. Is this what a fiscal conservative would do?

Legislative Analyst Mac Taylor expressed similar concerns, saying schools, counties and other agencies will be operating under budgets that might be falsely inflated. Their budgeting could be thrown into chaos if voters later reject the tax extensions.
Again, is this the road a fiscal conservative would take?

 

I'm not understanding your question. At the bottom of the graph (http://visualizingeconomics.com/2010/02/17/federal-taxes-paidreceived-for-each-state/) is a list of Federal tax dollars received -vs- paid. New Jersey = .61 at the lowest. So for every dollar they paid in, they got $.61 back.


EDIT:// Yes you are correct. That is federal taxes...not State.

 

Most people I know don't divide up their taxes between Fed/State....It's all just Taxes. If California wasn't paying out so much to the Fed, and helping to support other States with those taxes, it could stay in California to fix what we've got wrong. It's even funnier when I when I hear these Red states complaining about taxes and laughing at California (some laughing is well deserved I will admit), and then to realize that they are getting a huge bump...from what is mostly money collected from blue states.

 

Golly, when I compared the median incomes of the states, the net donors were, for the most part, those with the highest median income per capita. Isn't the Dem platform based on those who can afford it should pay? Welcome to the reality you asked for.

 

I have a tenuous grasp on reality Rick...the same could be said of my grasp of the English language.