General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCalifornia Faces Huge Budget Surplus
LOS ANGELES After years of grueling battles over state budget deficits and spending cuts, California has a new challenge on its hands: too much money. An unexpected surplus is fueling an argument over how the state should respond to its turn of good fortune.
The amount is a matter of debate, but by any measure significant: between $1.2 billion, projected by Gov. Jerry Brown, and $4.4 billion, the estimate of the Legislatures independent financial analyst. The surplus comes barely three years after the state was facing a deficit of close to $60 billion.
At first glance, the situation should be welcome news in a state overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats, who have spent much of their time slashing programs they support. After last Novembers elections, the party has two-thirds majorities in the Assembly and the Senate, relegating Republicans almost completely to the sidelines.
Instead, the surplus has set off a debate about the durability of new revenues, and whether the money should be used to reverse some of the spending cuts or set aside to guard against the inevitable next economic downturn.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/us/californias-new-problem-too-much-money.html?hp&_r=1&
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Fire could use (they will go through extra cash) an infusion right now.
I could go on
Oh and some to a rainy day fund
pinto
(106,886 posts)Now we can discuss allocations not cuts.
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)Why did Cruz Bustamonte stay so silent?
I don't feel this is too off topic. I also don't really remember enough to know what I'm talking about. I just remember the outrage, and perhaps criminal activities which lead up to the replacement of a governor.
Bette Noir
(3,581 posts)He wanted to be Governor, but Schwarzenegger had better name recognition. The State of California owes Gray Davis-- a good man-- a sincere apology and a basket of fruit.
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)How pathetic. But I seem to remember some kind of pending litigation that Bustamonte had against someone, which may have actually been the reason for the recall.
Thanks for that tidbit.
aggiesal
(8,907 posts)the energy companies that bilked Californian's out of $9B.
The Federal Election Regulatory Commission (FERC) agreed that
California's had been scammed out of $9B due to the energy crisis
of 2000, but also said if the energy companies repaid all $9B, they
could go bankrupted, so they recommended California accept a 3%
agreement, which Davis and Bustamante would not accept.
So the energy companies lead by Enron's Kenneth Lay held a meeting
at the Peninsula Hotel in LA, and decided to have Gray Davis recalled
and Ahhhnold replace him has Governator.
After being elected, Ahhhnold announced that he saw no reason to
continue the lawsuit against the energy companies, and 3 days after
being inaugurated as Governator, Ahhhnold signed the 3% agreement
with FERC, thus ending the lawsuit, and legitimizing the scam.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Now we have a Democratic governor and a Democratic legislature. And they have taught the world how to balance a budget -- raise taxes on those who have money AND make cuts.
As for our dilemma -- why not a little of each. Restore some of the budget items and save some. Let's have the banks pay us for a change. We still have a lot of Schwarzenegger bonds to repay.
airplaneman
(1,239 posts)I recall Arnold was going to clean up the 13 Billion deficit mess that Gray Davis was in and in reality he turned it into a 60 billion dollar mess. Republicans consistently make thing worse and it takes a democrat to fix them. I will not forgive California voters for approving the recall. I think the whole idea of a recall is a bad one short of a real felony being committed by the person while in office. I was very unhappy at the time and yes I think we owe Gray Davis a big apology. Just one more thing that has gone wrong in the last 30 years. I still have hope we may turn this whole mess around but the fight is a big one.
-Airplane
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)eom
dkf
(37,305 posts)They haven't yet seen if there will be the impact of an exodus due to the taxes as this was retroactive with no time to prepare.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Funny and strange.
Do you like pizza?
Kingofalldems
(38,425 posts)NBachers
(17,081 posts)CountAllVotes
(20,867 posts)That is what is needed where I live as there is little if any of it to be found.
If you cannot drive any more, you must take a taxi into town and back for ~$85.00.
This situation needs to change as the rural areas of the state are losing residents quickly as there are no jobs and things are indeed in quite a depressed state (always have been here; likely always will be).
Also, Gov. Brown, the roads in this state need lots of work. Too many potholes and too many problems with the infrastructure had you not noticed. I heard the Bay Bridge was a fiasco and perhaps a major problem as well because, it was not built right and it has major risks associated with it.
I could go on and on and on, but I won't.
Lots to be done with this surplus and I rather suspect it could be quickly gone in a *flash* just like we've seen in the past.
Luckily, Gov. Brown is a prudent man and I hope his vision for the environment continues to be a major force in his plans for this state (i.e. public transportation!).
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)have an underwater bridge? And if all of that extra money was spent on jobs to repair roads and bridges, then that will create more paychecks that would have to be taxed which would create a larger surplus! Where would you have this vicious circle stop?
Because I got in trouble with another post for not using it.
Make7
(8,543 posts)There are still over 1,600,000 unemployed workers in the state - do they think the present downturn is over?
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)and all the millionaires would leave the state, leaving behind only the "takers"
How can this be so?
Igel
(35,274 posts)In 2001 the federal "surplus" vanished because of tax cuts, increased spending, and decreased revenue. In about equal proportions.
In California the surplus is because of tax increases (when revenue growth curves were pointing up anyway), decreased spending, and increasing salaries that could be taxed.
In 2001 everybody picked the one cause they favored as the explanation for everything, when any one would do but all 3 were in effect.
So now I expect people to do the same. Those who like growing their way out of a deficit will point to increased earnings and taxable income. Those who like taxing people out of a deficit will point to increased tax rates. And people who like austerity will point to budget cuts.
After all, we're Americans and can only keep one thing in mind at a time. The idea of 3 simultaneous causes has got to be Nazi or French or something else dastardly.
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)If we legalize Marijuana. The tourist money alone would be staggering.
mercuryblues
(14,522 posts)split it. 1/2 billion to allocate to programs that have been cut. 1/2 billion for a rainy day fund not to be touched. Don't count on it being 4.4 billion until they actually see it.
calimary
(81,125 posts)programs that suffered cuts - which means more jobs - they ought to engage in this:
START PROMOTING THIS!!! Buy ads in other states that demonstrate what happens when you vote republi-CONS OUT and put Dems in, in unstoppable majorities. It means NO DEFICIT! Wanna get rid of the deficit? REALLY??? Then get rid of the GOP!!!THEY'RE the only ones stopping everything.
former9thward
(31,941 posts)Look at Illinois where Ds control the governorship and state legislature and have for many years. They are in the worst fiscal shape of any state in the country.
Trajan
(19,089 posts)Now it is not .... Go figure ....
So ... according to your thesis: ALL states that are controlled by Democratic governors and Democratic State Legislatures are doomed to be in the horrible fiscal shape ?
Is this your philosophy ? ... Deny Democrats control of government in order to achieve fiscal success ?
Remind me again: Why are you here at DU ?
former9thward
(31,941 posts)The poster I was replying to said ALL states who have D governors and D legislatures will have good fiscal health. I pointed out one that does not fit that theory.
Remind me again: Why are you here at DU ?
Trajan
(19,089 posts)That is why I am here ....
I also don't brook RW interlopers in our midst ....
Perhaps Illinois has not quite reached the stage that California has reached, and will get there soon enough ??? ....
You want to criticize Democratic government control ? ... We will have more to discuss .....
EDIT: I reread the previous poster, and I do NOT see any reference to any other Democratic controlled states there ... Just a claim that when republicans are removed from power and their essential philosophies are denied, states somehow revive ...
You did not like that the poster wanted to remove the GOP from governance ?
former9thward
(31,941 posts)As you know I did not criticize Democratic control. I pointed out that by itself is not always the answer as Illinois demonstrates.
This is what the poster said: START PROMOTING THIS!!! Buy ads in other states that demonstrate what happens when you vote republi-CONS OUT and put Dems in, in unstoppable majorities. It means NO DEFICIT! Wanna get rid of the deficit? REALLY??? Then get rid of the GOP!!!THEY'RE the only ones stopping everything.
The poster said get rid of the GOP and the deficit will disappear. Is that automatically correct in all cases? How do you explain IL?
Now continue on your mission.
2ndAmForComputers
(3,527 posts)And Trajan's right.
former9thward
(31,941 posts)And I am happy Trajan has an ally.
2ndAmForComputers
(3,527 posts)You know, people for which the news in the OP is happy news. THOSE people.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)Since you asked that question of the other poster because they dared defend Democrats in California, you are getting asked the same question.
And the answer doesn't look very good.
former9thward
(31,941 posts)I don't really care what you think.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Is talking about a truth.
Illinois is currently in terrible shape. I imagine that had it saved for a rainy day, it might not be in such terrible shape. i don't know the particulars - I live out here in the West Coast.
California is in terrible shape also - we have "on paper" a surplus - but many counties are hurting. The county I live in has watched as teachers are pink slipped, and libraries are having to worry. My county was spending some 17 millions of dollars a year on education, and now is attempting to make ends meet with between 9 and ten million.
That is a huge cut. If all the cuts to all necessary programs are made up, I am betting we won't see much of a surplus.
The problem with a surplus is that often it gets spent on ridiculous items, and then once another economic downturn hits, there is no back up. I watched how California had so much money it didn't know what to do with that money back in the late 1990's. Then the dot com collapse hit the state hard, and we were back to square one.
The idea of saving for a rainy day is not a bad idea. I think it should not be seen as an attack on whichever party is in office, but simply as the right thing to do. If every partisan voice says, "No, no way! -- the idea of saving a surplus is bad, as it is an attack on MY party," then we will never arrive at a sensible way of handling a state budget.
2ndAmForComputers
(3,527 posts)former9thward
(31,941 posts)Sorry I only read English and I don't understand "port 10".
2ndAmForComputers
(3,527 posts)By the way, thanks for showing up in this particular thread so us Democrats could have somebody to feel schadenfreude about.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)of course.
former9thward
(31,941 posts)Catch2.2
(629 posts)They are hurting bigtime for staffing.
NV Whino
(20,886 posts)I'm not greedy. Maybe just cover all the money I've lost since Bush moved into the White House.
dogknob
(2,431 posts)Republicans manage to buy, cheat, rig, create-a-crisis-with-out-of-state-corporate-backing (Enron), or kill their way back into power, wreck everything again, then make sure it stays wrecked because their entire agenda depends on crisis and distraction.
That rainy day?
Now that the Republicans have been marginalized here, we need to work on getting rid of them completely so they never come back... like bedbugs. You gotta get the eggs, too.
DFW
(54,302 posts)We're nothing but a bunch of tax-and-spend libbruls who only produce deficits that will mire our great-grandchildren in debt for the next fourteen generations, just like Bill Clinton did.
Er, that is, I mean, ummmmm.....
Never mind.
Bette Noir
(3,581 posts)And maybe installing sewers in the unserved portions of Los Angeles. That septic tank was one of the reasons I moved.
adieu
(1,009 posts)Back in the 80s, there were nine UC campuses, one being primarily a graduate medical school. Back then, there were probably around 20 million people living in the state. Now, we have close to double that number of people, and we have... ten UC campuses. You add an additional 2 million people of college age and add just one campus, it doesn't compute.
SCVDem
(5,103 posts)Extended and more extended unemployment.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)JeffHead
(1,186 posts)Use that money to capitalize a state run bank and insulate the states economy from wall street. When wall street crashes the national economy, which it inevitably will, the effects on California's economy will be much less. It works well in North Dakota.
SwankyXomb
(2,030 posts)If nothing else, you could let the marijuana dispensaries finally stop using all cash.
NBachers
(17,081 posts)kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)Maybe they can find a way to repave our major city thoroughfares that are falling apart now. And run a few more buses on existing routes (that got slashed a few years ago).
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)$1.2 or $4.4 billion won't go very far towards plugging the unfunded pension hole.
Igel
(35,274 posts)Nimajneb Nilknarf
(319 posts)"Harshing someone's mellow," I believe.
SomeGuyInEagan
(1,515 posts)Of course, I guess they could pretend they don't owe the pension fund - that's how the big boys in Corporate America work.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)So in another three years we should have a $68 billion surplus. HELL YES! Free tuition for all! Free medical care for all! Nobody has to work!
B Calm
(28,762 posts)madville
(7,404 posts)They ever think of just paying some of that off? 500 billion of it is unfunded retiree pension and healthcare obligations, maybe invest the surplus in their funds so they can receive the retirement benefits they have earned.
Nanjing to Seoul
(2,088 posts)surplus!
But CA right back into deficit, where all Republicans wants us to be.
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)there is a republican funded consortium champing at the bit to swoop in and take it ....again..
It's just what they do.
They are the party of grifters. In times of plenty, they use their fast-talking/skewed nonsense to weasel their way into offices where they can start the siphoning off of public funds. Once they have bankrupted the state, they slink off & let a clean-up crew of democrats come in & restore the balance, amass another surplus, and then the grifters come around again..We need a massive state-wide push for public transportation, wildfire fighting enhancements, education funding assistance to students who now cannot afford college. As someone who pays a fair share of taxes, I do NOT want a tax cut.. I want better services for ALL...
toby jo
(1,269 posts)Alot of good ideas here.
on point
(2,506 posts)Botany
(70,447 posts)I think it needs a 'roid needle sticking out of Arnold's butt.
tclambert
(11,084 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)...that's what happens.
cstanleytech
(26,236 posts)Left Coast2020
(2,397 posts)But the story that ran a couple-three weeks ago about this surplus, the Governor was quoted as being "cautious" about it staying that way--for awhile.
allinthegame
(132 posts)This is not a huge surplus. We put ourselves in a $26 billion dollar hole because we spent every dime we took in last time.
Instead of giving free dental care to the needy (an actual proposal) we should save it until we determine if this largesse is going to continue and if it is infrastructure projects should be first and front.
ElizabethWarren2016
(18 posts)alarimer
(16,245 posts)They are morally bankrupt but also fiscally irresponsible. With this money, I would immediately lower tuition at state universities and shore up their budgets.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)Kablooie
(18,612 posts)Kablooie
(18,612 posts)They could buy enough to guarantee that they win.
W T F
(1,146 posts)Surplus "destroyed the economy" I wonder how They're going to spin this one. I don't know about the rest of you, but when ever I had money left over after paying bills, It seemed to improve my finances.
mick063
(2,424 posts)I have read that the wheels have fallen off the cart with respect to Republican infrastructure in California. This explains the huge turnaround in their state coffers.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)aggiesal
(8,907 posts)There is no reason to continue paying the BIG BANKS interest on our money.
If we had our own state bank, where all the states business would have to
operate from, the interest alone would be around $20B (based on conservative
estimates).
But we all know that the BIG BANKS are not going to let that happen.
They have waaaaay tooooo much skin in the game.