Advertise Here

Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.

Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.

Learn more about ads.

About Us

David Greenwald, Editor. (Contact David.)
CFC Education Foundation, Publisher. (Contact us.)

Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column?
Contact David here.

About California Progress Report.

Founded by Frank D. Russo (Publisher and Editor, 2006-08).

Sponsors

Books

Deal Time in Sacramento?

dday.gif By David Dayen
d-day

Deadlines involving getting measures on the state ballot (which may be necessary for finishing the budget) are leading to speculation about a budget deal in Sacramento. Of course, I'll believe it when I see it. But here's the latest:

"Expectations are that there will be a temporary sales tax, some kind of spending cap perhaps like the one recommended by the Legislative Analyst's Office, and that local governments will take a hit, possibly those permitted under Proposition 1A that allows local property taxes to be borrowed and requires repayment within two years.

"Since at least some of these actions require a ballot item on the November ballot, the calendar requires action this week. This Saturday, August 16, is the drop dead date that Secretary of State Debra Bowen has written the legislature that ballot measures need to passed, even with a legislative passed exemption from deadlines that are in current law. The time is needed in order to print ballots and a supplemental pamphlet in time to get these to the voters.

"Indeed, time is also running out on Prop 1, the high speed rail bond, and efforts to amend and strengthen it. There may be a deal which would place a separate measure, Prop 1A on the ballot that has these changes."

Dan Walters is hearing the same thing. Sounds like a Sacramento compromise where the conservatives that dug in feel no pain for their intransigence, all the solutions are temporary, nothing structural is addressed, the GOP extracts a MAJOR concession in a spending cap, and local governments get robbed. Considering that Schwarzenegger can blue-pencil out anything he wants after the fact, and the final deal may give him MORE authority to cut spending, giving up the Orwellian-titled "budget reform" without structural and not temporary revenue reform would be a mistake, especially if it bears a strong resemblance to the budget reform proposition that was soundly defeated by voters in 2005. But we don't have all the details yet.

I'm not seeing much of a strategy here to campaign on the budget, aside from a few outside groups. The 2/3 requirement is the only way out of this vicious cycle. We can talk about "more leadership" but really the answer is to make Republicans pay.

UPDATE: And as if on cue, a new email from the CDP:

“The ultimate budget solution

“As California faces a massive structural budget problem this summer, the ultimate solution to our budget woes is within our grasp. We need to pick up more Democratic seats in the state legislature.

“With Barack Obama at the top of the ticket and an energized and enthusiastic volunteer base, Democrats are poised to change the political map in California this year. We have an unprecedented opportunity to elect Democrats up and down the ballot everywhere in the state, even in traditionally Republican areas. Help make this happen.”

They're asking for low-dollar contributions. What's interesting here is that they specifically cite winnable seats:

Alyson Huber, Assembly District 10
Joan Buchanan, Assembly District 15
John Eisenhut, Assembly District 26
Marty Block, Assembly District 78
Manuel Perez, Assembly District 80
Hannah-Beth Jackson, Senate District 19

John Eisenhut, a farmer from Stanislaus County, is an interesting case. What I like here is that the CDP is actually making some target decisions. (I hear AD-36 and AD-59 are interesting cases as well. 2/3 in the Assembly is reachable in a wave election)

Dave is a writer, comedian and TV/film editor based in Santa Monica. He is an elected member of the Democratic State Central Committee from the 41st Assembly District. He blogs on state and national politics at http://d-day.blogspot.com/

Posted on August 13, 2008

Comments

I don't know about other cities, but this morning neighborhood associations in San Rafael were forwarded an email from the League of California Cities that includes a PDF attachment with the estimated maximum impacts for each city in the North Bay if the legislature opts to shift the local share of property tax, Prop. 42 revenue and/or RDA tax increment. These estimates can also be found online at http://www.californiacityfinance.com/Prop1A42RDAimp080808.pdf.

Of course folks were encouraged to contact their Assembly and State Senate representatives - both Democrats. How do Democrats think that this kind of "compromise" will solve any of the structural problems in state financing? They will be the target of citizens' wrath when libraries close, pools and community centers close, and police and firefighters get laid off, not the Republicans. Great job! Good thinking!

Posted by: Sean Prendiville at August 13, 2008 11:35 AM

Sorry, comments are temporarily disabled. We're doing a bit of server maintenance on the commenting area. We'll be back up and running shortly. Thank you for your patience.

Get email updates!

Get Email Updates

Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.



© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.

RSS

Stat tracker