What? No, more of one than usual, actually: the state is in the hole for 16 billion, not the mere 9.2 billion that they were expecting to be in the hole for. So, they can either ‘cut schools, cops, and firefighters’ – put in scare quotes because the trick of cutting the popular stuff first is an old, old trick – or the taxpayers can vote in more taxes via referendum. You see, the GOP has just enough of a presence in the state legislature to prevent legislation hiking taxes; and it turns out that one side-effect of Democratic dominance of the California political process is that the Republican legislators that survive said process tend to be, ah, somewhat hardcore.
This says it all, really:
The Democratic governor said the shortfall grew from $9.2 billion in January in part because tax collections have not come in as high as expected and the economy isn’t growing as fast as hoped for. The deficit has also risen because lawsuits and federal requirements have blocked billions of dollars in state cuts.
Except, of course, for me repeating the title: FLEE.
To summarize: $92.6 billion in spending (7% increase over last year’s); $9.2 billion deficit over eighteen months (half in the first six months, the other half in the next twelve). Brown is requesting $7 billion in new taxes, mostly from raising the sales tax again (to 7.75%) but with a faux-populist-friendly soak-the-rich* (actually, soak-the-small-business-owner) increase to 10.3%. Or the state can ‘cut’ an additional $4.8 billion in educational aid (he’s already planning to reduce poverty assistance by $4.2 billion): the most increased spending appears to be in tax relief/local government**… and education. In other words, that cut would actually be mostly in a projected increase in education spending, which means that it’s not really a cut at all.
Or, to summarize the summary: Brown’s bailing out the municipalities; and he’s trying to blackmail the Californian populace into a tax hike to pay for it by threatening to wipe out an increase in K-12 education funds if they don’t vote said hike in. See how that works? Increase spending in a line-item; then call the threat to remove that increase a ‘budget cut’ and use it to justify a ‘temporary’ tax. It’s a great scam; or, rather, it was a great scam twenty years ago, when there was more give in the system. Today, it’s just kind of alarming. Continue reading Gov. Jerry Brown’s (D, CA) new budget: more spending and higher taxes!
The measure, aimed at an increasingly popular tactic used by 2nd Amendment activists, would make California the first state since 1987 to outlaw the controversial practice of publicly displaying a weapon.
The governor — a gun owner — has not taken an official position on the bill, passed by the Legislature last week. He has argued both sides of gun control issues in the past.
…because he’s going to have to make a choice now. California law currently permits the open wearing of unloaded firearms; this bill would eliminate such practices, despite the fact that an unloaded gun is pretty much by definition not a threat to anybody. But it does serve notice that there is someone out there who is prepared to respond to a threat, if necessary… and if people are worried that carrying guns might lead to gun violence: oddly enough, violent crime has gone down as firearms carry generally has gone up. Which should surprise nobody, but apparently still does. That’d be mostly people for whom guns are some sort of scary evil magical item, mind you. Continue reading California gun-grabber bill on Jerry Brown’s (D, CA) desk.
Apparently in 1995 Brown took a firm stand against… mammograms.
But that was 1995, right? Well, when asked about it now…
Asked if he believes in mammography, [Brown spokesman Clifford] Clifford said, “He believes in people not getting cancer, has not followed developments in the effectiveness of various specific cancer screenings.”
Legal Insurrection noted this little detail from Brown’s Whore Incident, and it’s well worth noting: Brown doesn’t like him the police departments very much.
Beginning at 3:10 of the audio, Brown and his aides begin a discussion of Whitman’s proposed budget cuts. A female voice says “Yeah, Jerry, we’ve got to focus on the police chiefs, we got to get them [inaudible].” Another female voice in the background says “[Inaudible] I just want to make sure we talk about this.” Brown then says (at 3:20):
“I’m going to hit that out of the park, not that they read.”
Charming guy, huh? And by ‘charming’ I mean ‘sneering elitist who probably looks down on any person who voluntarily agrees to risk taking a bullet in the pursuit of protecting society.’ Hey, I like to pack a lot of meaning into my words…
I can’t read the linked article, but California Watch (H/T Chaos Party) can – and they report that Allred was involved with Jerry Brown’s first gubernatorial bid, too. CW also reports that Allred has a history of relatively small but consistent contributions to Brown and other Democratic candidates over the years. Judging from the Whitman thing, I suppose that means that Allred prefers to donate time and labor instead of money.
A quote from the video: “Meg Whitman. She stops at nothing. She’s even got Clinton lying about me. That’s right.” Note the tense, there… and, yes, that’s what Brown really said. And a little while later he went on to mock Bill Clinton by saying “I did not have taxes with that state.”
That’s with leaners (51/43): without leaners Meg Whitman’s ‘only’ up 48/40 over Moonbeam Brown. Which is itself a switch from an earlier 43/41Brown lead from a Rasmussen poll from a couple of weeks ago. Whitman is benefiting from strong Republican support, weak Democratic support of Brown, and winning independents… not to mention not being Moonbeam Brown.