.
.
.
Just popped into the Orange Juice inbox (we ain’t got no “transom”) :
Dear Vern,
When I became Governor again — 28 years after my last term ended in 1983 — California was facing a $26.6 billion budget deficit. It was the result of years of failing to match spending with tax revenues as budget gimmicks instead of honest budgeting became the norm.
In January, I proposed a budget that combined deep cuts with a temporary extension of some existing taxes. It was a balanced approach that would have finally closed our budget gap.
I asked the legislature to enact this plan and to allow you, the people of California, to vote on it. I believed that you had the right to weigh in on this important choice: should we decently fund our schools or lower our taxes? I don’t know how you would have voted, but we will never know. The Republicans refused to provide the four votes needed to put this measure on the ballot.
Forced to act alone, Democrats went ahead and enacted massive cuts and the first honest on-time budget in a decade. But without the tax extensions, it was simply not possible to eliminate the state’s structural deficit.
The good news is that our financial condition is much better than a year ago. We cut the ongoing budget deficit by more than half, reduced the state’s workforce by about 5500 positions and cut unnecessary expenses like cell phones and state cars. We actually cut state expenses by over $10 billion. Spending is now at levels not seen since the seventies. Our state’s credit rating has moved from “negative” to “stable,” laying the foundation for job creation and a stronger economic recovery.
Unfortunately, the deep cuts we made came at a huge cost. Schools have been hurt and state funding for our universities has been reduced by 25%. Support for the elderly and the disabled has fallen to where it was in 1983. Our courts suffered debilitating reductions.
The stark truth is that without new tax revenues, we will have no other choice but to make deeper and more damaging cuts to schools, universities, public safety and our courts.
That is why I am filing today an initiative with the Attorney General’s office that would generate nearly $7 billion in dedicated funding to protect education and public safety. I am going directly to the voters because I don’t want to get bogged down in partisan gridlock as happened this year. The stakes are too high.
My proposal is straightforward and fair. It proposes a temporary tax increase on the wealthy, a modest and temporary increase in the sales tax, and guarantees that the new revenues be spent only on education. Here are the details:
- Millionaires and high-income earners will pay up to 2% higher income taxes for five years. No family making less than $500,000 a year will see their income taxes rise. In fact, fewer than 2% of California taxpayers will be affected by this increase.
- There will be a temporary ½ cent increase in the sales tax. Even with this temporary increase, sales taxes will still be lower than what they were less than six months ago.
- This initiative dedicates funding only to education and public safety–not on other programs that we simply cannot afford.
This initiative will not solve all of our fiscal problems. But it will stop further cuts to education and public safety.
I ask you to join with me to get our state back on track.
You have received this email through your subscription to this campaign’s email list. If you did not subscribe, or would no longer like to receive email updates unsubscribe here
Authorized by Jerry Brown
All right Vern, you are in the “IN” group with the Governor!
Vern, I support Investments in Education, and dealing with our Structural Deficits.
But I know that the approximate 21 significant issues/deficiencies that have been identified within the CA dept of Education, and which also put AT-RISK THE BILLIONS in FEDERAL Education assistance because of this non-compliance, and other inefficiencies MUST BE ADDRESSED AND SOLVED.
Two of these most significant deficiencies HAVE EXISTED for about EIGHT to TEN YEARS.
The RECURRING Issue: “Education [California] does NOT have an adequate process in place for assessing the cash needs of its subrecipients.”
So, without this adequate process in place to address, monitor and control the cash needs within education, hardworking taxpaying Californians may be asked to fork over more money – $7 Billion more.
Should we do so without current proper controls over this cash?
If California can’t monitor and control the current and future cash flows and cash needs, and has not been able to asses this for several years, what makes us confident that it will now be able to properly manage $7 BILLION more, without these controls????
Would you deposit your hard-earned money with your local bank if they could not control or account for the cash?
And he’s trying to FIX this problem? SCANDAL!!!
Except that he is lying like the rest of the governors and legislators. The only reason it was on time is to protect the legislators precious paychecks. And it wasn’t honest; it had the same accounting gimmicks as past budgets as evidenced by the huge deficit we face today. And now I get to look forward to months of union-financed commercials with teachers, firefighters, and police officers telling me that if we don’t pass the many tax-raising initiatives coming to a ballot near you, then people will die, kids will suffer, cats and dogs will be living together, etc. Fortunately, Californians have seen through this before and I am confident they will do so again.
I’m sorry, Newbie, but I feel the call to grind you down to a nub over this:
To make this assertion, you must have in mind your understanding of (1) the accounting gimmicks used in past budgets and (2) the “accounting gimmicks” used in this budget. I have my own understanding of this, in which some optimistic projections were made but they would in no way be considered to be “the same” sort of gimmicks as have been used in previous years.
So, I double-dog dare ya, explain your understanding of the previous gimmicks versus the ones you allege were used here. I think that you’re trying to hoodwink people here with a plausible assertion that won’t hold water. Ball’s in your court.
Dear Jerry,
I your Democratic friends that have been running this state for over 30 years had not of spent all that money we would not have this problem. Why don’t you address the union pension problem that costing us billions.
All the rest of us Californian’s don’t receive giant pensions. Why do you keep taking our money away to pay for all of your campaign donations that your party sucks up.
You have been chasing away the supposed rich job creators for years with taxes and crazy legislation. Now you want to take another 1/2 cent from everyone including the poor.
Maybe it is time for you to quit lying to the people and do the right thing for the first time in your life.
Eight years of Deukmejoan. Eight years of Wilson. Five or so years of Davis. Seven or so years of Schwarzenegger. Not quite a year of Brown.
Who’s benn “running this state for over 30 years”? Who’s been able to veto any budget that didn’t meet their pleasure? And which of the above tried to solve the deficit crisis, with the increase in tag fees that would have completely eliminated the deficit, and got recalled from office as a result (after desperately trying to reverse course on the way out)?
Do you think that people here are stupid or something?
Yes I do think people here are stupid. The legislature has been controlled by democrats for all but 2 years in the last 30 or so. Legislature passes the bills and the governor signs them. Anyone that thinks the governor has any control is stupid.
Democrats passed all the bills giving all those wonderful benefits to the prison guards and all the other unions.
Please take a civics class. Take it twice, most likely. Meanwhile, look up “veto” and “supermajority.”
Vern- a question,
I am not cool enough to be on a first name basis with old moonbeam, but I have a question, maybe you know the answer…
Is this a 2% increase from 9% to 11% (or what ever it is) or is it a 2% increase from 9% to 9.18%? Because the first is more like a 20% state tax increase, as oppose to the second option….
This is just more snake oil from Jerry Brown, one of the most right-wing, anti-labor Democratic Governors that California has ever had. I guess the big business interests who finance the Democratic Party are becoming concerned about polls which show a majority of Californians support taxing the hell out of the rich.
What Brown is trying to do is derail a more radical initiative the California Federation of Teachers is planning to put on the ballot. The CFT initiative not only raises taxes on the state’s wealthiest residents, but makes them wholly permanent; and unlike Brown’s initiative, it doesn’t increase highly regressive sales taxes.
That public employee unions are backing Brown’s initiative shows how incredibly dumb they are. They’ve just opened the door for Republicans to further demonize public employee unions for their support of highly regressive sales taxes on non-union workers; that will just give Brown excuses to attack their pensions.
It has been widely reported that the current State budget was cobbled together by the Governor agreeing to do what he said he would not do – applying “tricks” to the budget. In this case the trick was jacking up the revenue assumptions by about $ 4 billion when no one believed that would happen. And, sure enough, revenue is running well below estimate as has been reported on this blog. So, to call the current budget “honest” is simply not true.
The Governor’s plea for voters to act on proposed revenue enhancements is cheapened by the claim that we have an honest budget. He should say something like “after being stymied by Republicans in the Legislature who refused to compromise, I was forced to do the unthinkable – adopt a budget trick of inflated revenue estimates in order to get something through and keep the State running. But, we can’t go on like this. I need your support to —–‘.
Mr. Brown has an almost impossible job, making me think that by losing the election Meg Whitman really won!
BIG MARK your right these rat bastards will spin it that way and tell the people the opposite your right its more of a 20% tax hike along with all the other 5 other tax increases they want on the ballot . no wonder every one is leaving this state .. they cant take this anynore . tx. tx and more taxes . all the feed the big fat pensions of the unions .. this got smoked last time and i hope the folks are bright enough to see that . but its california with their zombie voters so anything is possibel ..
Greatoni, I would like you, right now, to explain your understanding of the concept of “marginal tax rates.”
I won’t ask you to explain the concept of “everyone”; you already clearly failed that test.
“I won’t ask you to explain the concept of ‘everyone’; you already clearly failed that test.”
Kind of like you on the concept of “we” when it comes to Occupiers, Diamond.
The concept of “we” when it comes to Occupiers is very complicated, Newbie. I’m not sure that I always understand it myself.
I do admit to this error, though: Gratoni actually said “no wonder every one is leaving this state,” so it was wrong to ask him to explain the compound word “everyone.” I assume that he means that others like him in the One family are leaving the state, including No One, Some One, Any One, Buy One, Gimme One, Hard One, Suspicious One and Papa Cold One. My apologies to Great and the rest of the One family for doubting them.
your vision of marginal tax rates are not normal . dems love big tax hikes . just like when the city of s.a said no to ocupy . you as you always do twisteted around with well thats not what they really said .. i think most of californians are on the side of ENOUGH . IT LOST LASTYEAR .. IT WILL LOSE AGAIN .. no more tax increases ..
I said: “I would like you, right now, to explain your understanding of the concept of ‘marginal tax rates.'”
Your retort is that my “vision of marginal tax rates are not normal.”
I really, really don’t want to call you a dunce but: what do you think is my “vision of marginal tax rates”? I just want to see whether you even understand the concept of them, which it is not clear you do. It’s not a matter of “vision.” So, I ask again: what, as you understand it, is a “marginal tax rate”?
This is not only an open-book test, but an open-Internet test, for God’s sake.
Eliminate COLA’s, automatic pay increases, let the government employee earn their raise like everyone else.
Add an excise tax on excessive pension pay outs. What is the present value of a public employees pension?
I would guess the amount for the top brass is in the ten million range, pretty dam good for a civil service job, instant millionaire.
Even tho the current average pension are not huge, they are weighted down with many normal pension of past employees who do not get the 100,000 dollar plus payouts with COLA’s for life.
So an excise tax would help a lot in getting some of the gamed pension dollars back.
If those two items do not make up the budget difference, then a tiered wage cut from the top down to fill in the balance.
Hey, if you’re talking excise taxes, I have something else that could use one. It rhymes with “boil,” “soil,” “toil,” and “zoil” (or it would if “zoil” were a word.)
California should excise tax its oil just like Texas and Alsaka and others do.
Also one of California’s chief worldwide exports, excise tax the movies and TV shows.
P.S this new format sucks i wish you guys would post on here the order it came in .. it jumps all over the place
The problem isn’t threads, but problem is that what is supposed to be threaded sometimes isn’t. I don’t know the solution; maybe Vern does.
thank you mr diamond hope u guys can fix it ..
instead of tax hikes diamond how about a tax cut . or even the flat tax or take away the taxes and just have a tax on things you buy .. its the combonation of all these taxes that is driving everyone from here .
I agree with Governor Brown. We are in the hole so much we can’t rely on just spending less. The state needs to reduce spending AND increase revenue. Otherwise, California will have this debt for a very long time. It’s disheartening to pay so much in interest.