Washington 'fires back' at Schwarzenegger (LA Times Art.)

[KC6ZLV]

Originally Posted by user_id

Californians budget problems are the result of years of fiscal mismanagement in California and Arnie is really just displacing blame.

At the same time, he brings up important issues. Federal spending should be more level, spending less in California forces higher tax rates on Californians to fund the same programs that a state that is receiving more federal dollars.

Its nice to see Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer support California though.... What Turkeys.....wait can't Arnie run for senate?

The rest of the country does a lot of finger-pointing at California over the fiscal issues, often citing "successful" states that receive significantly more Federal money than they pay the IRS. These states also aren't supporting health care for illegal aliens, and other mandatory programs.

Boxer and Feinstein made their remarks for no other reason than they are Democrats and Arnold is a Republican. They are in office to represent the voters in California and should be doing what it takes to assist the Governor balance the budget. Instead, they have decided to represent the Democratic Party. This is just another example of bipartisan politics used to make the other party look bad.

[mdvaden]

Originally Posted by bhcompy

And it's no secret that we've been without a west coast President since Reagan, and California got a lot better treatment under Reagan. Pity there aren't (m)any West Coast politicians that can win in a Presidential race. East Coast/Midwest blue bloods and Southerners don't give a crap about West Coast issues

Sometimes it seems like you have a west coast President in Pelosi.

Don't you feel sometimes that she is running the show back there?

[KC6ZLV]

Originally Posted by mdvaden

Sometimes it seems like you have a west coast President in Pelosi.

Don't you feel sometimes that she is running the show back there?

Not really. She has a big mouth and a lot of influence, but she isn't representing California either. She may be representing San Francisco in some respects, but she isn't improving anything for California.

[Ludachris]

Originally Posted by Capt. Dan

Maybe if Californians stopped passing so many silly propositions, which cost money to enforce, you could save a few bucks. You know, like making sure chickens are nice and comfy!

That's an obvious problem, and I still say a bill should be proposed that prevents voters from passing bills that go beyond what the state budget can pay for, essentially capping spending on programs that the budget can't pay for.

But that said, you can't ignore what others have said about the federal tax dollars that come from CA annually which don't get invested back in CA by the feds. If just a small percentage of that issue was adjusted, CA wouldn't be in nearly the position it is now financially. There are several states out there that benefit greatly from the tax dollars paid to the federal government from CA. That's what Arnold has been fighting for the past few years. When you start looking up what he's talking about, you realize he has a good point.

What's ironic is that Arnold is basically pointing out how the feds choose to spread the wealth (the tax dollars coming in from the states), giving some states more money than they pay in taxes while CA receives less than what they pay annually. Just seems funny that the most liberal state is the one receiving the least from the feds in return for the massive taxes coming in from that state.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I applaud the Governor for reminding those jackals in DC California is not simply their ATM.

Furthermore I would like for the Governor to let them know that California's deficit would be instantly wiped out if the $50 BILLION in California federal tax money ANNUALLY spent in other states was actually spent in California.

Furthermore, during Dubya's administration, the federal government took $55 Billion in annual spending out of the states and poured that directly into the DC Metro Area. California bore the brunt of those lost govt contracts.

And has anyone forgotten Bush Sr and all those military closures that he presided over--California lost by far the most.

Relationships are give and take, but the relationship between CA and DC is totally one-sided. they take and take and take and give us nothing in return, except grief.

How did I miss this thread? You're exactly right montclair and this is something that has made me furious for years! The federal government treats Ca. like we're some colony of the US government. Then they put the blame solely on us. Yes we do have our issues but so do have the other states so this isn't the reason why Ca. is doing so well economically. That 50 billion dollars you mentioned that is never returned to the state has to be made up for. The way they do this is to tax us more in an attempt to offset the money we lose each year to subsidize other states and the federal gvmt.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees this.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by bhcompy

And it's no secret that we've been without a west coast President since Reagan, and California got a lot better treatment under Reagan. Pity there aren't (m)any West Coast politicians that can win in a Presidential race. East Coast/Midwest blue bloods and Southerners don't give a crap about West Coast issues

Good point, I know people in Washington state share that sentiment.

[OC Investor2]

California gets no attention from the feds because it is such a reliabley Blue state now. The last 4 presidental elections have been uncontested here. Its the swing states that get attention from the executive branch.

As for congress, most of the Reps. are in "comfortable seats" and under no real pressure to preform for the folks back home. The same could be said for the 2 senators ( although Boxer may be feeling some heat now) Exhibit A is Madame Speaker who is too busy passing cap and trade to notice the snail darter & ESA are killing Ag in vast swaths of the northern central valley.

But in the end - What is going on here that CA voters have not asked for? Bay area Liberals don't like the military, so Buh-bye go the bases. People here support higher taxes on the rich and progressive taxation & we are a state with above average incomes - Voila! We pay more in taxes. Californians support conservation and emissions reductions and now have to live with the business (and job) killing enviromental regs that are needed to achieve these objectives. Every policy has consequences.

CA voters always like the feel good policy but whine when the bill comes due in the form of consequences or payments. They need to take responsibility for their political actions. Either change the politics or shut up and pay.

[Ultrarunner]

Originally Posted by OC Investor2

California gets no attention from the feds because it is such a reliabley Blue state now. The last 4 presidental elections have been uncontested here. Its the swing states that get attention from the executive branch.

As for congress, most of the Reps. are in "comfortable seats" and under no real pressure to preform for the folks back home. The same could be said for the 2 senators ( although Boxer may be feeling some heat now) Exhibit A is Madame Speaker who is too busy passing cap and trade to notice the snail darter & ESA are killing Ag in vast swaths of the northern central valley.

But in the end - What is going on here that CA voters have not asked for? Bay area Liberals don't like the military, so Buh-bye go the bases. People here support higher taxes on the rich and progressive taxation & we are a state with above average incomes - Voila! We pay more in taxes. Californians support conservation and emissions reductions and now have to live with the business (and job) killing enviromental regs that are needed to achieve these objectives. Every policy has consequences.

CA voters always like the feel good policy but whine when the bill comes due in the form of consequences or payments. They need to take responsibility for their political actions. Either change the politics or shut up and pay.

Excellent points and so simple at that

The Bay Area was a Hub for the military... 20% of the students in my school had parents either in the military or working for the military...

It's all gone now and many could not be happier it is... no matter the local consequences...

[KC6ZLV]

Many of those propositions the politicians complain about were passed by the voters due to the fact the politicians aren't interested in allocating financial resources responsibly. We had a problem with money taken from the transportation funds, which were funded by fuel taxes. People got tired of transportation projects being put aside due to lack of funds as a result of using the transportation funds as a piggy-bank, so Prop 98 was passed to guarantee a portion be allocated to transportation, as well as education. Now they want to get rid of the sales tax portion and increase the excise tax to work around the legal requirements of Prop 98.

If the tax is for transportation, all money from that tax should be allocated to transportation. If one State service or department is consistently unable to work within their budget the correct thing to do is find out why, not take money out of the education or transportation funds.