Is there something special about the figure $9 billion, other than it is a huge amount of money?
Well, it has been a popular figure this week — and a potentially expensive one for Californians.
Earlier in the week, the liberal Democrats who dominate the California legislature held a press conference and announced that in order for California to be a state worth living in (or words to that effect), we all need to embrace $9 billion in new taxes. Seriously.
I was proud that the immediate and strong response from legislative Republicans was that this proposal was dead on arrival (fortunately for taxpayers, the State Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of each legislative chamber to raise taxes — how prescient).
Actually, I mused to one legislator friend that Republicans should match the call by Democrats for billions in new taxes with a call for an equal amount in tax cuts. Somebody somewhere is going to start saying "let’s compromise" and I say the GOP position should be such that the "middle" represents no additional taxation on Californians.
I thought to myself that one "silver lining" to this overspending-caused rain cloud was the opportunity to present to the public a clear contrast between the two political parties — with Democrats rather boldly proclaiming themselves to be the party of bigger government and higher taxes, and Republicans staking out the position of a more limited government along with individual freedom and responsibility, and opposition to any more taxes.
After all, when you are the minority party, you need to be able to show how you would govern differently if placed into the majority by the voters.
Well, my idyllic picture of contrast got mucked up yesterday when our "Republican" Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, in the midst of what promises to be the most prolific budget battle in memory, literally comes out of left field, with Senator Dianne Feinstein in tow, advocating another plan to grow state government by $9 billion.
The Schwarzenegger/Feinstein proposal is a massive bond measure, that they want to see on the November ballot, to deal with California’s water crisis.
Let me say, for the record, we absolutely have a crisis in terms of water conveyance and storage infrastructure. California is a big state, and much of it is arid, and there is a need to be able to move water from one part to another, and to store water in times of plenty to rely upon in times of drought.
That said, I will make a specific observation about the $9 billion in proposed borrowing — the vast majority of it does not go do dealing with the actual problem of water conveyance and storage, only a fraction actually does. Most of it is the sausage of a political process, where the liberals who run the legislature (the same ones who have made huge "investments" of our tax dollars in social-engineering programs instead of into needed infrastructure, in fact creating our current water crisis) will not even put a "water fix" on the ballot that isn’t filled with all kinds of "Sierra Club wish list" items costing billions of dollars.
So, now we have a much muddier picture out there than the clear contrast between Democrats who want $9 billion in taxes, and Republicans who don’t. Now we have the proposed $9 billion in borrowing, most of it with no direct impact on solving our water crisis.
It seems to be that the injection of the politics of a water bond as an overlay to the resolving of the state’s overdue budget is a bad idea. You almost have to wonder if the Governor, uncomfortable at the clear differences between the partisan legislative caucuses on the budget, just wants to "change the subject" to something else.
I seldom agree with State Senate President Don Perata on anything. But I read comments from him in the newspaper where he said, in essence, that we need to resolve the budget before we deal with the water issue. He is absolutely right.
While I would never encourage conservatives in the Capitol to rally around Don Perata for anything (especially since you might have to trip over Federal investigators if you get too close), I think that Republicans should make a clear statement, short and sweet, to both the Governor and to Senator Feinstein, "Thank you for YOUR $9 billion borrowing proposal. We’ve placed it in the queue right behind the Perata-Bass $9 billion tax increase proposal, and we’ll take them up in order."
Care to read comments, or make your own about today’s Daily Commentary?
Just click here to go to the FR Weblog, where this Commentary has its own blog post, and where you can read and make comments.