Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    22,153
    vCash
    500

    Jerry Brown: California deficit is gone

    (01-10) 12:03 PST Sacramento --

    For the first time in five years, California is not facing a deficit as Gov. Jerry Brown and lawmakers work to put together a spending plan for the next fiscal year.

    Brown released his budget Thursday morning for the 2013-2014 fiscal year, proposing a $97.7 billion plan that is 5 percent higher than the current year's spending.

    "California today is poised to achieve something that has eluded us for more than a decade - a budget that lives within its means, now and for many years to come," the governor wrote in his budget message to the Legislature, saying voters made this possible by approving Proposition 30.

    The plan increases funds for K-12 schools, and districts "serving those students who have the greatest challenges will receive more generous increases - so that all students in California have the opportunity to succeed," the governor wrote.

    The governor also proposed spending increases for the University of California and California State University systems. Both were guaranteed $125 million because of the passage of Prop. 30 and a deal struck last year to avoid tuition increases in the current school year if the measure was approved.

    In addition to those funds, Brown proposed giving each university system $125 million. Both systems had requested increases above the guaranteed Prop. 30 money of several hundred million dollars, with CSU officials wanting $372 million more and UC asking for $292 million more. UC officials have said that tuition and fees will increase if they don't get about $127 million of what they requested.

    Even though the state no longer faces a deficit, it still owes nearly $29 billion to schools and local governments - and other groups - due to a past pattern of deferring payments. Brown proposes to begin paying that so-called "wall of debt" back by more than $4 billion a year each year beginning in 2013-14.

    Brown's budget proposal could have been starkly different had voters rejected Prop. 30. He would likely have had to rely on large spending cuts to close a gap that would have been created without those new taxes.

    Instead, as much as $6 billion per year through an increase in income tax on high earners and the sales tax on everyone is available to balance the budget.

    The budget represents a massive change for California's finances, which at their worst in February 2009 faced a $42 billion deficit. That resulted in emergency action on the budget as the state treasurer was unable to sell short term bonds, construction projects came to a halt and the controller was forced to send out IOUs instead of tax return checks.

    While that is in the past, the state's finances are still recovering and Brown already declared 2013 "the year of fiscal discipline and living within our means."

    That's not likely to please advocates of various state programs, who have been seeking restoration of budget cuts from previous years. Health and human services advocates are planning rallies around the state Thursday in response to the proposal.

    The spending plan now moves to the Legislature, with budget committees in the Senate and Assembly likely holding initial hearings later this month. Subcommittees will get into line-by-line examination until the governor releases a revised proposal in May.

    That proposal will reflect any change in the outlook for California's finances. The Legislature faces a June 15 constitutional deadline to pass a budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1. If they fail to do so, lawmakers lose their pay until it is passed.

    Budget deficits projected in the January spending proposal the past few years include:

    -- Jan. 2008, $14.5 billion

    -- Jan. 2009, $41.6 billion

    -- Jan. 2010, $18.9 billion

    -- Jan. 2011, $25.4 billion

    -- Jan. 2012, $9.2 billion

    -- Jan. 2013, none
    http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/articl...ne-4183371.php

    hmmm

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    359
    vCash
    1500
    Something tells me this won't be covered by sean hannity

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,031
    vCash
    1500
    In a completely non partisan moment, following the stimulus, looking at the economic indicators, I stated that the economy was turning around, and, irrespective who the President is, the economy was headed in the right direction. California suffered more than most from the downturn, and was a leading indicator of what was going to happen. It is still a leading indicator. The recovery is taking hold, so revenues are increasing.

    Second and apart, when Jerry Brown was campaigning, he said he would not raise taxes without the public voting for them. California voted to raise its taxes.

    The two things together have righted California's deficit. It is now headed in a direction to pay of it's debt, and once again, will be an attractive state for business, which in turn, will help it's economy.

    It was entirely predictable.
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    6,031
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Lancelot View Post
    Something tells me this won't be covered by sean hannity
    Just because it happened with a Democratic Governor, and now super majorities of Democrats in both houses of its legislature?
    Here is the question of the day, does anyone think that wealthy people should pay a lower percentage of their income to taxes than middle class people? Don't argue tax brackets, just a simple question. Do you think someone earning 46 million dollars should pay a lower percentage of their income than say someone earning sixty thousand?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,933
    vCash
    1500
    just wait until we start building the high speed rail program, and legalize pot.
    Hilarious that just a couple of months back we had that other thread that sought to paint CA as a nightmare of Democratic failure,its amazing what can be done when you put the power back into the hands of the people of the state,not the corporations.
    STORK WAS RIGHT!
    Mcfadden is useless

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,941
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by cabernetluver View Post
    Just because it happened with a Democratic Governor, and now super majorities of Democrats in both houses of its legislature?
    yes, because Dems are not suppose to balance budget and have surpluses. Just, like Dems are weak in national security and all the other crap conservatives lie about. Facts dont lie. Surplus under Clinton. Deficit under Bush. 9-11 under Bush, no attacks under Obama.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NOR CAL
    Posts
    8,558
    vCash
    1500
    Projections
    Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government, owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.-Theodore Roosevelt


    There's no country on Earth that would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.
    -Barack "drone" Obama, 11/18/2012

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    4,911
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by lamar2006 View Post
    yes, because Dems are not suppose to balance budget and have surpluses. Just, like Dems are weak in national security and all the other crap conservatives lie about. Facts dont lie. Surplus under Clinton. Deficit under Bush. 9-11 under Bush, no attacks under Obama.
    LOL

    you forget the deficit under obama?

    and how the hell can you blame 911 on bush?
    [

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,941
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jmoney85 View Post
    LOL

    you forget the deficit under obama?

    and how the hell can you blame 911 on bush?
    Oh, right Clinton was president when 9-11 happened. my apologies.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    38,772
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jmoney85:25052337
    Quote Originally Posted by lamar2006 View Post
    yes, because Dems are not suppose to balance budget and have surpluses. Just, like Dems are weak in national security and all the other crap conservatives lie about. Facts dont lie. Surplus under Clinton. Deficit under Bush. 9-11 under Bush, no attacks under Obama.
    LOL

    you forget the deficit under obama?

    and how the hell can you blame 911 on bush?
    I am far, far from a conspiracy theorist. Anyone here will tell you that.

    I begin with that because, while I would not necessarily say Bush is to blame for 9-11, it's not as if there weren't warning signs before it happened.
    Visit my Blog.



    "Glad the GOP finally came out with an Obamacare alternative. Can't wait to see their alternative to the Iraq War." - @LOLGOP

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,434
    vCash
    1500
    Jerry Brown is a leader and should be applauded for doing what was right even when it was at times unpopular in his own party.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Baltimore now, but born and raised on the south side of Chicago.
    Posts
    6,472
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by jmoney85 View Post
    LOL

    you forget the deficit under obama?

    and how the hell can you blame 911 on bush?
    his point is not that there is not deficits under democrats. It is that there is a load of facts that runs counter to the conservative narrative, because the last federally balanced budget was under a democrat. And there is a trend for democratic states pay more into the federal government than they take out, while the conservative ones tend to do the opposite. This is not to say that Liberals don't like to spend, but it is curious given the narrative we are supposed to believe.

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPoon
    man with hair like fire can destroy souls with a twitch of his thighs.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    39,986
    vCash
    1500
    Well at least California voted on the tax increases. Good for them. Hopefully this proposal passes so California can have a balanced budget, and as the economy improves and the high unemployment comes down they keep it this way and get a surplus and pay down their debt. It'd be a good thing. Good job California.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,933
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by GasMan View Post
    Jerry Brown is a leader and should be applauded for doing what was right even when it was at times unpopular in his own party.
    he is a great leader GM, he has done well for CA more then once.

    anyone who doesnt know who he is :
    http://www.google.com/url?q=http://e...kBMibeOMS7AM9w

    this is a guy who refused limo service and a Governors mansion, prefering to come to work in a plymouth satelite and renting an apt. close to the capital.

    not a big deal when politicians are being watched so closely?
    this was in 1978.

    hes a liitle on the roughside ala Christie/biden, but hes a straight shooter,and doesnt sugar coat or pull the bandaide off slowly.

    Rs would love this guy, if he wasnt a D.
    STORK WAS RIGHT!
    Mcfadden is useless

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,434
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by stephkyle7 View Post
    he is a great leader GM, he has done well for CA more then once.

    anyone who doesnt know who he is :
    http://www.google.com/url?q=http://e...kBMibeOMS7AM9w

    this is a guy who refused limo service and a Governors mansion, prefering to come to work in a plymouth satelite and renting an apt. close to the capital.

    not a big deal when politicians are being watched so closely?
    this was in 1978.

    hes a liitle on the roughside ala Christie/biden, but hes a straight shooter,and doesnt sugar coat or pull the bandaide off slowly.

    Rs would love this guy, if he wasnt a D.
    It's funny that leadership/competent governance is so uncommon that its worthy of special attention. I'm not sure what all is in the CA budget and I'm sure there is plenty to not like and plenty to like, but at least it's addressing the problem like an adult. And once again party affiliation will single-handedly dictate people's opinion of legislation.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •