Schwarzenegger declares fiscal emergency in Calif

[/FONT]Schwarzenegger declares fiscal emergency in Calif…

If you wanna see what happens when Dems have total control, look no further then California or NY. Broke, and no place to go, a Dem will always look at increasing taxes (the provided link gives the details on what they wanna do). They entertain no notion of decreasing spending. Wonder why?

I fear this the direction they are gonna take the country.

But isn’t Gov. Schwarzenegger a Republican? And I’m not sure Republicans should be blaming Democrats for increased spending in general. Look at our current national administration and how much they’ve spent in the past 8 years. :shrug:

There are many fundamental things wrong with our system of government. Both parties are at fault and we can’t rely on either to pull us out of the mess.

But isn’t Gov. Schwarzenegger a Republican? And I’m not sure Republicans should be blaming Democrats for increased spending in general. Look at our current national administration and how much they’ve spent in the past 8 years.

There are many fundamental things wrong with our system of government. Both parties are at fault and we can’t rely on either to pull us out of the mess.


Yes, he is, but he is not conservative. And I agree the GOP failed nationally in many areas. But in California conservatives are so vastly outnumbered they virtually have no say, in how the govt is run. That rests entirely at the feet of liberal democrats. High taxes, and regulation have chased out many of the state’s industries. I’d like to know how many living in Boise, came from California? And that is why revenue is falling every year out there.

Um… Did we not have a government surplus coming into 2001 but now have record deficits (even up to 2006)?

Um… Did not the Republican’s have majority in both Houses and the had the White House?

Um. … in Texas where Republicans have the majority. They have a budget deficit.

Yes to all the above, and the repubs failed to govern as conservatives and you see the result. They paid for it. You illustrated my point.

And I predict it will be worse at the end of the next 4 year run with the money Obama wants to spend. He has a program for everything.

Um. … in Texas where Republicans have the majority. They have a budget deficit.

Maybe so, but in Texas you don’t hear them talking about jacking up the taxes, they’re gonna cut spending. You’ll never hear that kind of tawk in California. When dems are the majority, they’ve never reduced govt.

The surpluse you mentioned under Clinton came becaue the GOP controlled congress and the purse strings, but lost their way under Bush. Bring back Newt.

Sadly what will probably get cut is programs that aid the poor and education. Not to mention work to improve the infrustructure.

I forgot to mention that during the Clinton Presidency was a classic example how a President should lead from the center and the Republicans in congress worked with the President. Perhaps initially fighting each other but working through it to come up with a solution and then move forward.

But over time the Republicans got control of all three houses and then said it was their way or the highway. No negotiating thus those getting affected were the middle class and the poor. You think Bush would of learned from his father. It is one of the Bush Sr. lost was he was very much a non negotionable guy. Politics is how things get done and that is through negotiation and then action.

I don’t see how Republicans in Congress caused overspending in California.

In my state, where Republicans have the majority, we have a budget surplus. Every now and then the state has to give a rebate to the taxpayers because it is forbidden by the constitution of the state from hoarding tax surpluses. Tax increases have to be submitted to a vote of the people. Sometimes the people approve them, usually for specific purposes. Mostly, we don’t.

What state is that?

I did not say Republicans caused the fiscal problems in California but was saying it was not Schwarzenegger either. It is both parties and the current economic situation and shortage of federal funds coming in.

Missouri. The constitution of the state prohibits deficit spending and, as far as I know, always has. As to the refunds and the voting required for tax increases, that’s a bit more recent. You can google “Hancock Amendment” and probably find it and the later “Hancock II” amendment.

It also prohibits tax revenues (not just rates) from rising naturally by a percentage greater than simultaneous increase in the average family household income, unless specifically approved by the voters. That can also trigger refunds, and has. It also prohibits local governments from incurring debt greater than one year’s income, and local tax increases must also be approved by the voters.

Needless to say, it gives legislators a lot to argue over, and they do. I won’t say there is no waste, but it does make them sharpen their pencils to a pretty keen point.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.