The Governor has apparently realized that increased emissions mandates may have an impact on businesses and the economy. Until next time.

Read the Cap Weekly story.

So, perhaps my local indy gas station will still be open on Wednesday, so I can fill ‘er up and pay the higher taxes.… Read More

Former MSM big wheels Jerry Roberts and Phil Trounstine (pictured to the right) have jumped into the world of blogging — setting up their own new website on California politics (& beyond) – CalBuzz.com. We’ve added it to our blog roll (above) and will soon have it on our Blog Scan feature. It’s worth checking out. Roberts and Trounstine are accomplished ex-reporters in their own right — but they also have been reaching out and tapping various individuals, right and left, with insights on politics to be guest "calbuzzers" — so you never know who will show up on the site!

For example, today longtime FR friend (and frequent contributor) Dan Schnur has a column on their site, Dan Schnur: Calbuzzer Tells Secret To Passing 1A, where Dan lays out one plan for passing the measure. My favorite part is at the end, where he suggest that the… Read More

There is a great debate taking place over the provisions of Proposition 1A on the May 19th ballot. Will the proposed spending cap actually restrain spending at times when revenues are available to spend more? In future tough times, how easy or tough would it be for a Governor to tap the reserve account to prevent cuts in spending? I am still trying to figure these out for myself, and I appreciate all the input I am getting from experts reading the language of the measure and from those who helped write that language. What I am after is actual projected scenarios. Let’s take four options for the state’s future: low growth in revenue, mid-range growth in revenue, high growth in revenue, and a mixture of these over the next 10 years. What would those budgets look like? Would they be way under the spending cap, bumping up against the cap, or forcing reductions to get below the cap? When, if ever, might the reserve be filled to its limit so that the state could chose to pay down debt, build projects, or reduce taxes? Those are my questions. But it seems to me that this great debate and good discussion should have taken place in… Read More

[Cross-posted from Red County]

LA Times Columnist George "Just Tax The Ingrates" Skelton column today is his millionth screed proclaiming higher taxes as the only responsible solution to budget deficits. It’s always the same column, just re-written to suit the day’s news.

In this case, it’s not even new news, but a paean to Sen. Dave Cogdill, who was dumped as Senate Republican Leader more than a month ago. Cogdill, of course, is aces in Skelton’s book because he helped negotiate a massive tax increase as a deficit cutting measure. Skelton wasn’t able to find room in the column to mention the deficit has grown by $8 billion anyway. Someone apparently forgot to tell the deficit that tax hikes are supposed to make it go away. Note to Republican politicians: if you want to receive newsprint Valentine from Skelton, all you have to do is vote for transferring … Read More

It’sone of our basic tenets. The candidate or cause of your choice. Your hard-earned money. Your decision. No one to tell you differently.

Yes, the freedom to express oneself by means of personal political contributions is an undeniable right. Unless, that is, one prefers to be private about it.

Somewhere near the vortex of such issues as First Amendment rights, the public’s need to know, and an individual’s privacy is a document called the California Political Reform Act. Now, throw into the mix the question of harassment and personal safety concerns.

Since the mid-1970s, the Political Reform Act has stood as California’s campaign finance and disclosure requirement bible. It is viewed with deadline-imposed disdain by many required to report all their campaign finance activity and extolled by those wanting to access the same details, whether or not any average members of the public (read: non-political hacks) ever once take a gander at the information.

Accommodating changing times and both public and legal sentiments, the Act has been revised and massaged over the years to… Read More

It’sone of our basic tenets. The candidate or cause of your choice. Your hard-earned money. Your decision. No one to tell you differently.

Yes, the freedom to express oneself by means of personal political contributions is an undeniable right. Unless, that is, one prefers to be private about it.

Somewhere near the vortex of such issues as First Amendment rights, the public’s need to know, and an individual’s privacy is a document called the California Political Reform Act. Now, throw into the mix the question of harassment and personal safety concerns.

**There is more – click the link**

View Full Commentary… Read More

Ok, so…….where exactly are the cuts in this new budget?

I only asked because I am a little confused. If you read the LAO’s analysis in the voter pamphlet about the "budget solutions" that are leading to the need for the May election, it says that the budget solutions included (1) $15 billion in spending reductions; (2) $12.5 billion in tax increases; (3) $8 billion in federal funds; and (4) $5 billion in borrowing from the lottery. We also know that another $1 billion is coming from redirecting funds from health programs and the First Five program, all to solve an approximately $40 billion difference between the baseline spending (what the state wanted to spend) and projected revenue (what the state expected to collect in taxes).

Now, we know that tax increases, borrowing, redirecting money from other accounts and federal funds are all designed to avoid having to cut the base of any program. These are "revenue enhancements" specifically designed to avoid "deep and painful cuts in essential state services," like free health care and education to illegals and free abortions to teenagers, and six figure salaries… Read More

Yesterday the Assembly passed out some legislation that in some technical manner facilities all of the big-spending in Barack Obama’s infamous "porkulus" package here in California. It’s not entirely clear to me exactly what the legislation said, and what it did, but my brief summary probably suffices. That said, I was a bit — underwhelmed — with the statement that the good guys (Republicans) put out in the matter. I say that because, being in the minority party in Sacramento, rhetoric is our most effective weapon (other than wielding a strong sword on issues requiring a two-thirds vote, something that has been challenging for our party as of late).

Here is the statement that was put out by Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines after the passage of the legislation.

This is closer to what I wish we had put out today… I especially like "my" version because of the unified message that it carries, in terms of U.S. House Republicans… Read More