California's Most Liberal and Conservative Cities

Prior to an election, the Secretary of State's Office releases a pleathora of voter registration data. With the coming California Special Election on May 19th, the Sacramento Bee has taken the liberty of composing a fun look at which cities are the most politically polarized.

Here's how they broke down the numbers: To figure out the most conservative cities, the Sacramento Bee looked for the places with the lowest percentage of voters registered Democrat; for the most liberal, those with the lowest percentage of Republicans.

To keep small numbers from masquerading as big trends, the Sacramento Bee excluded cities with fewer than 5,000 registered voters.

You can check out the SacBee's slideshow of The most conservative and liberal cities in California here.

California Politics: In Light of Budget Deficit Self Interest Reign Supreme

Standing behind the bully pulpit and preaching political courage, is one thing. Yet truly taking a stand and pushing for reform even when it is against one's self interest is quite another.

Yesterday the Majority party proved yet again it isn't interested or willing to vote against self-interest, even when it would mean helping save the State from fiscal collapse. The California legislature has voted to retain it's pension plan, otherwise known as the Integrated Waste Management Board.

"Faced with a choice of saving between $2 million and $3 million a year, or preserving a potential and lucrative post-legislative retirement haven, Democratic lawmakers in both houses rejected bills today that would have abolished the state's Integrated Waste Management Board ," reports Steve Wiegand in the Bee.

"Senate Bill 44, by Sen. Jeff Denham, R-Merced, was torpedoed by the Senate Environmental Quality Committee, while Assembly Bill 1150, by Assemblyman Ted Gaines, R-Roseville, was scuttled by the Assembly Natural Resources Committee. Neither bill received any votes from Democrats."Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had sponsored the bills. They would have shifted the board's duties to other state agencies – and wiped out $132,178-a-year jobs for three former legislators who were appointed to the board by the governor and Legislature."

As Senator Jeff Denham (R-Merced) noted, "In the midst of a multi-billion dollar budget deficit, if the Legislature can't even make this – the easiest of cuts – it's going to be a long summer."

As Economy Crumbles Assembly Increases Salaries

A new report from the International Monetary Fund continues to show the immensity of the global economic recession. The report shows that the global economic slowdown is so severe that the worldwide economy will contract for the first time in 60 years. Stateside, America's unemployment rate has increased to 8.5 percent.

In the Golden State things aren't much better - unless you work for the Assembly.

Despite a rocky state economy and projections of a multibillion-dollar budget shortfall next year, the Sacramento Bee is reporting that more than 120 Assembly aides were granted salary increases.

The pay hikes come at a time when most other state workers are required to take an unpaid furlough each month to save money and California's unemployment rate has hit a staggering 11.2 percent.

Growth of CAs Government Projected in Square Feet

The oft repeated claim of conservatives is that at every level government is too big, too inefficient, wasteful, and all too often, interferes with private citizens and enterprises who want to get things done. Despite the claim, it is rare that the citizenry is presented with a state sponsored study that shows how big government will be - in terms of square feet.

The California Department of General Services, which serves as the state’s real estate manager, has released its “Sacramento Region State Office Planning Study.” The first of its kind in four decades, the study will contribute to shaping the future landscape of the Sacramento area based on the state’s development projects.

The study estimates a need for another 13.7 million square feet in the capital region, far more than currently controlled by state government in the downtown core. That means California will need to nearly double its office space over the next 40 years and will look to fill remaining vacant spots in Sacramento’s central core, including The Railyards, but will also consider other areas such as suburban office campuses and the West Sacramento riverfront.

While the findings of the study could mean opportunities for landlords and developers - the massive government growth laid out in the report is not good news for California taxpayers. In the midst of a worsening economy that is forcing private industry to scale back and trim down to remain viable, the DGS report details how California's goverment is looking to use taxpayer dollars to continue growing.

It was Ronald Reagan who once said, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help."

Perhaps it's time to amend the phrase to:"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government and I'm here to grow."

Anti-Smart: CA Grows State Workforce Despite Budget Woes

From our What's Happening in Your California Capitol files...

One might thing that having a $50 billion shortfall for 2009 might have convinced California legislators to adopt more fiscal responsibility during an economic downturn. Instead, they continue to spend money in a fashion that insults drunken sailors everywhere and makes Imelda Marcos look like Ebenezer Scrooge.

In the midst of a tumultuous economy when most businesses are trimming wherever possible to remain viable, California's state work force continued to grow.

From today's SacBee...
From June 2008 to February 2009, most state agencies either increased or kept the same number of full-time employees, according to a Bee analysis of personnel data. The state also failed to lay off as many part-time employees during the crisis as promised by the governor.
While legislators and Schwarzenegger debated how to close a $40 billion budget deficit, 66 state agencies saw a net gain of full-time employees, 35 kept the same number of employees and 55 lost employees, data from the state controller's office show.

With the continued growing of a government that aggressively interferes in the personal lives of its citizens and private businesses, it's no wonder California ranks so low in the State Freedom Rankings.

PS. As their way of thanking you for being a Californian (less than a month after the approving more than $12 billion in tax increases to help bridge a $41 billion budget deficit), Democratic lawmakers have proposed more tax and fee measures they say would curb devastating cuts to state programs.

CA Dems Working Hard for Dumbest Bill of Year Award

From our What's Happening in Your California Capitol files...

Senator Jenny Oropeza (D-Long Beach) is at it again. Jenny has introduced SB 124 in an attempt to ensure that children who ride school buses have cleaner lungs.

How does the good Senator plan to accomplish this task you may ask? By limiting engine idle by school and transit buses to five minutes.

Oropeza's bill just might narrowly edge out Assemblyman Eng's (D-Monterey Park) AB 1224 as dumbest bill of the year. That measure applies hit and run statutes to animals.

Yet another reason for limiting the number of legislative measures allowed to be introduced each year.

Once again... thank you California Democrats for focusing on the Golden State's biggest, most pressing issues.

Irresponsible Budgeting, Its Effect, and a Solution

Composed by one of my colleagues, I thought the following briefing report was worth sharing for those interested in California politics.... You may also be interested in reading the CL's post entitled California's Budget, Time for Reform.

In November 2008, two months after he signed the state budget, Governor Schwarzenegger called for a special session of the Legislature to address a budget deficit. Citing rapidly deteriorating economic conditions precipitated by the housing market collapse, the Governor announced that the state faced a whopping $42 billion shortfall by the end of the 2009-10 fiscal year. Now, drastic measures must be implemented in order to avert fiscal insolvency. How did we get here and what must the state do to prevent a reoccurrence of this magnitude?

The Road to Perdition
Some believe that we got into this fiscal crisis because of a spending problem. Others say it’s a revenue problem. The reality is that California’s budget woes are due to overspending of volatile one-time revenues, as discussed below.

First, California’s overly progressive tax structure subjects the state’s primary source of funding to massive volatility.
Under the current tax system, the top one percent of California taxpayers pay about half of all state personal income taxes. Since revenues from the personal income tax make up more than 50 percent of all General Fund resources, this means that a large portion of all the money the state has available for spending is entirely dependent on the fortunes or mishaps of just one percent of the taxpayers. And, because they’re tied to capital gains in the stock market and other investments, these taxpayers’ incomes are highly volatile.

As a result, when the economy is robust, these taxpayers have more taxable income and the state General Fund is flush with cash. However, when the economy takes a downturn and these taxpayers take losses, the state’s primary source of funding nosedives.

Second, the Legislature has chosen to use one-time revenues to fund ongoing spending.
As discussed above, the state General Fund goes through boom and bust cycles because of its over-dependence on volatile income tax revenues. During the boom years the state goes on a spending spree, expanding entitlement programs, giving huge pay raises pushed by union bosses, growing state bureaucracy, etc. However when the economy takes a tumble, the state is left with a pile of bills and no money to pay them.

According to the Department of Finance, a structural deficit was created between 1998 and 2000 when the state, under the Davis administration, used a one-time 23 percent revenue increase from stock market earnings and the dot-com bubble to add new permanent spending increases. When revenues declined the following year, the state had no money to fund these costs. Rather than taking the fiscally responsible approach to reduce overspending on ongoing programs, the state made minor one-time reductions and ran up the bill using borrowed money. This exacerbated the financial situation and left the state with a $14 billion deficit the subsequent year.

Third, California does little to set aside funds for a rainy day.
Another reason why California is in its current predicament is that the state tends to spend every nickel it gets. A couple of years ago, the state attempted to institute a constitutional requirement for funds to be set aside in a rainy day fund, also known as the Budget Stabilization Account. However, the parameters were too loose and weak to be effective. Essentially, the Governor was able to withdraw money shortly after a couple of deposits. Moreover the set-asides have been, on average, no more than one-and-one-half percent. To put this in perspective, financial experts advise households to maintain a cash reserve to get them through at least three months. The state’s reserve is the equivalent of five days.

The Comeback Trail
Opinions vary on how the state got itself into trouble, but economists and fiscal experts generally agree that an approach that includes an effective reserve requirement; a true spending cap on state expenditures; and a more stable revenue source would go a long way towards mitigating budget deficits in the future.

Solving the spending crisis
According to the non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), the most effective tool for mitigating deficits is to implement a reserve requirement. Then, when the state receives revenue growth that is determined to be above average (based on various calculations) the state is required to set aside these funds for a rainy day. The state would only be allowed to withdraw these funds in years when revenues were determined to be below average and under very stringent conditions.

In tandem with a reserve requirement, fiscal experts recommend implementation of a spending cap. Specifically, the amount that the state is authorized to spend in a given year would be limited to an amount determined by the average level of revenues over the last ten years. Together these two proposals would, in effect, hold the state to a specified spending level even in years when the state is flush with cash, and force excess funds into a reserve account as a fallback in lean years.

Note: As mentioned above, the current reserve requirement is ineffective. Proposition 1A, proposed for the May 19, 2009 election, would increase the reserve and impose spending caps.

Stabilizing revenues
Besides fixing the spending problem, economists believe that stabilizing revenues would help guard against future deficits. Some proposals include flattening the income tax, or rebalancing the mix of tax revenues.

The Tax Foundation reports that California has one of the most progressive tax structures in the country. This progressive nature makes California’s revenues highly volatile because they are so dependent on the incomes of the very few. Flattening the income tax structure by changing the rates so that the burden is more evenly distributed among a broader base of taxpayers would make General Fund revenues more stable. This approach also has added benefits, such as – fairness, since all taxpayers will pay the same tax rate; simplicity through elimination of various tax calculations; and transparency, since taxpayers will know exactly what taxes they are paying.

Other economists suggest rebalancing the mix of revenues among the three major taxes (income, sales/use, and corporation tax) so that the General Fund draws more evenly among them as opposed to the current 50 or so percent draw from personal income tax. Specifically, this proposal would entail increasing or expanding the sales/use and corporation tax, which tend to be more stable because they are less progressive. However, this approach does not fix the inequities in the income tax rates.

Conclusion
California has gotten itself into a deficit crisis of unprecedented proportions because it relied on an overly progressive income tax system that produced volatile one-time revenues, and overspent those funds on ongoing programs. Now, the state must take drastic action in order to prevent insolvency. Economists advise implementation of an effective reserve requirement coupled with a spending cap to solve the overspending problem. To stabilize revenues, the state could revise the income tax structure to distribute the tax burden more evenly and make it less progressive at the same time.

Protecting the Minority from the Majority?

Just days before a historic state Supreme Court hearing on Proposition 8, the Legislature approved a resolution Monday declaring that voters alone did not have the right to adopt the gay-marriage ban.

The message? Dems want to protect the Minority from Majority rule... unless of course we are talking about taxes and the state budget. Then protecting the voters doesn't seem to matter so much.

Constitutional Convention & What You Don't Know Will Cost You

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says he "absolutely" loves the idea of holding a constitutional convention to overhaul state government," writes George Skelton in the Times.

"California hasn't had such a confab in 131 years. But as Sacramento continues to embarrass itself, a citizens' movement is mounting to call one." The Republican governor would like the convention to consider, among other things, eliminating some statewide offices -- like treasurer, controller, superintendent of public instruction and, especially, lieutenant governor, all currently held by Democrats.

"'It makes no sense that the governor is surrounded by constitutional officers who are trying to derail him,' Schwarzenegger says. 'Look at the way the nation runs: The president appoints those Cabinet positions.'

From the budget fallout files Kevin Yamamura in the Bee notes that "if voters rely solely on ballot arguments when deciding in May whether to pass a constitutional limit on state spending, they will miss the fact that the measure also would extend higher sales, vehicle and income taxes by up to two more years."

Legislative leaders so far have successfully omitted the fact that Proposition 1A will essentially trigger up to $14 billion in additional taxes from July 2011 to June 2013.

Although Republican legislators submitted ballot arguments against the proposal emphasizing billions of dollars in tax increases, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, chose a Democratic legislator to pen the opposing ballot statement, which ignores the tax hikes.

DOAH!

Less Than Flattering Look @ Sacramento to air on 'Oprah'

A national spotlight will shine on Sacramento today, although I'm sure that those in Sacramento wish the images would be a little more flattering.

In a program about the recession and a growing homeless population, the popular "Oprah Winfrey Show" this afternoon is featuring California's capital city, among other venues. The program will include interviews with struggling families at the Cal Expo and St. John's shelters, shots of homeless children at the Mustard Seed School at Loaves & Fishes and a sprawling "tent city" near the Blue Diamond almond factory where hundreds of men and women sleep every night.

SacBee has the story here. The episode airs at 4 p.m. on KCRA Channel 3 and at 9 p.m. on KQCA My58.

California's Bizarro Budget World

Continuing onward in the alternate universe known as the California budget... the storyline reads like a soap opera.

As California's government continued its grinding downshift toward insolvency, efforts to close the state's nearly $42-billion budget gap hit a new snag late Tuesday as Republicans in the state Senate ousted their leader. Around 11 p.m., a group of GOP senators, unhappy with the higher taxes that Senate leader Dave Cogdill of Modesto agreed to as part of a deal with the governor and Democrats, voted to replace him in a private caucus meeting in Cogdill's office. They chose Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth, a staunchly antitax lawmaker from Murrieta, as their new leader.

Four of the 15 GOP members objected to the maneuver and boycotted the selection of the new leader, according to Maldonado. Those included Maldonado, Cox, Cogdill and Ashburn, all four of whom walked out of the meeting before it ended."

At this point it is still unknown whether Cogdill's ouster will prove to be a major setback to budget negotiations. Cogdill was a lead negotiator on the budget package and had committed to voting for it. Now it is likely that Hollingsworth will likely try to renegotiate the deal, which lawmakers spent three months forging.

"It's a shame it ended this way," Cogdill said to reporters. "This budget needs to get out, and we need to put people to work again in this state."Hollingsworth said he does not want to see a tax increase passed, but he offered no plan for resolving the budget crisis."All of that will be determined in the next couple of days," he said.

Soon after the leadership change, lawmakers returned to the Senate chamber at approximately 1am, where they voted down the $14.4 billion in proposed tax hikes that are part of the budget package.

The vote, was the first on the tax hikes, which had been set aside as the governor and party leaders scurried to round up the three Senate GOP votes needed to pass the spending plan.That plan could still survive the leadership change.

Meanwhile the State has started sending layoff notices to 20,000 state workers. Additionally, earlier on Tuesday, Department of Finance Director Mike Genest sent letters to state agencies to halt remaining infrastructure projects funded by the state's general fund beginning Thursday if the budget is not approved. The 276 projects are worth about $3.7 billion and include many transit and highway projects in the Bay Area, including carpool lanes.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders have been trying to get the package approved since Saturday - and it's been an ongoing marathon ever since.

The anticipated Senate floor vote has hopscotched from the morning into the afternoon and then to early morning hours, as tempers frayed.

At stake is a plan supported by Democrats and Schwarzenegger, a GOP moderate, that calls for a 1 cent increase in the sales tax, a 12-cents-per-gallon gas tax boost and hikes in vehicle license fees and the personal income tax. You can discover how the proposed budget would affect your pocket book here.

The saga continues....

UPDATE: Despite the demand of new Republican leader Hollingsworth to remove proposed tax increases Schwarzenegger said he will not re-open broad negotiations over the state budget.

UDATE: In what could be a break in state budget talks, legislative Democrats are contemplating a firm offer -- approval of three constitutional amendments -- from Republican Sen. Abel Maldonado as a means to closing the state's $40 billion budget shortfall.

Calculating Your Proposed Tax Increase

The Senate continues to debate the tax bill, the most difficult piece of California's budget package. To close the $40 BILLION budget shortfall, the tentative budget deal includes vehicle license fee increases and higher gasoline, sales and personal income taxes.

When it's all said and done, California taxpayers could be saddled with as much as $70 billion of tax increases over the next five years.

So how much would the tax plan cost you? Use this calculator to see how California's proposed budget could affect your household.

Let the Budget Marathon Begin

Come now… you didn’t think that California's budget debacle would be over and done with by now did you? Things are just getting interesting!

With lawmakers still unable to deliver a budget after three days of intense negotiations, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger prepared to lay off 10,000 government workers and his administration said it would halt the last 275 state-funded public works projects still in operation," write Jordan Rau and Eric Bailey in the Times.

"The projects, which cost $3.8 billion and include upgrades to 18 bridges and roads in Los Angeles County to protect them from collapsing in earthquakes, had been allowed to continue as others were suspended because the state was running out of cash."The projects to be suspended today had been exempted from a November stop order because of the significant financial cost of canceling contracts, the expense of resuming them or the public-health or public-safety ramifications. The list also includes work to eliminate arsenic in the Central Valley town of Live Oak and half-built highway construction projects.

Schwarzenegger had delayed sending out pink slips since Friday, hoping that lawmakers would soon approve a budget. But they failed Monday to find a third GOP vote in the state Senate to achieve the two-thirds majority needed to pass a budget -- a requirement that essentially gives the minority Republicans veto power. A spokesman for Schwarzenegger said layoff notices would go out today.

At about 8pm Monday evening, both houses of the Legislature adjourned and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) ordered senators back to the chamber at 10 a.m. today, saying they would stay until a budget passed."'Bring a toothbrush,' he said. 'I will not allow anyone to go home to resume their lives or any kind of normal business.'"

Well... my family is thrilled with that announcement! Stay tuned for the goodness.

As Democrats continue to stand up and remind us that the "live within your means" theory is off base, we could be in for the marathon of all marathon sessions.

California's Budget Saga Drags On... and on.. and on...

In the epic Divine Comedy, Dante's Hell is shaped like a funnel that extends all the way to the center of the earth. This funnel is made of nine circles. The first circle is the widest and, progressively, the ninth circle is the smallest. Each circle is reserved to a different category of sinners... and as California's budget saga drags on, I'm ever more convinced that Dante left out a tenth circle.

In the seemingly never ending state budget saga, California legislators tried and failed for a second day Sunday to close a $40 billion hole in the state's budget, still one Republican vote short of approving a package that contains $14.3 billion in tax increases.

Apparently the combination of mathematics and politics create an insatiable riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.

The budget put up to vote during the long-weekend session outlined spending for the next 17 months. In addition to the revenue increases, it proposed cutting $15 billion in spending, including $8.6 billion from education and $1.4 billion from payroll costs, to be achieved in part by furloughing 200,000 state workers at least one day a month. The plan also called for $11 billion in borrowing and $700 million in tax breaks for large corporations.

Capitol Alert has provided a tick-tock on the highlights, many on video, of the night's - and morning's - events. Read and watch

Today Senate session was convened at 11am this morning only to be pushed back to 2:30.... then 4pm... then 6pm and now 7:30pm. Looks like another long road ahead.

Meanwhile, Standard and Poor's Corp. cut California's credit rating to the lowest among 50 states. WOOO-HOOO! WE'RE NUMBER 1!

UPDATE: Sen. Abel Maldonado has been popular around the Capitol lately as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and leg leaders continue to court him as the potential 27th Senate vote for the state budget. Well, Maldonado has given his long wish list and it's definitely worth checking out!

Cowboy-up, Voters. This is Your Mess, Too

So, a buddy forwarded to me this little quip about the budget debacle that appeared yesterday in the Suckramento Bee (or maybe it was Suck Bee Online):

“You know what infuriated the public about this whole package? It's the lack of details sure. The little that was shared really pissed off everyone so the details are scaring the hell out of us. But it’s also the appearance that this budget package is filled with more business as usual spending at taxpayer expense.”

The missive goes on to say,

“My advice to all of you in the Capitol building is to bone up on your salesmanship and statesmanship. We taxpayers are feeling screwed here. Unpopular proposals would be more palatable if they contained at least a plan for jobs creation, elimination of freebies for non-citizens and freeloaders, and a genuine effort to clean up your act and streamline government operations. What don't you get about this? Read these comments, your emails, and listen to the people for a change. We desperately need you to use good judgment and make reasonable decisions.”

At first my reaction was, “Yeah, yeah! You tell ‘em! I’m pissed-off, too!” Then I started thinking about what this yahoo said and it made me angry. Although some might argue that being angry is my natural state of being, in this case, I believe it’s justified.
“[T]he details are scaring the hell out of us.” Yeah, me too. “We taxpayers are feeling screwed here.” Right. Your point being? What do you expect? I think there is plenty of blame to go around. But no one is even mentioning the group that is most responsible for this mess. It’s time to “connect the dots,” people. Who has given us this mess? The VOTERS. That’s who. They have been electing near 2/3rds majorities of Democrats for 50 years. Election after election after election, they return to the halls of the Capitol the same bunch to the point where there is no accountability whatsoever. None of them fear the possibility of change. Sure, one or two might get “picked off” every now and then. But, there is no threat that the party running the place for 50 years will ever change. Because the electorate keeps voting for this crowd, this is what they get. Period. In fact, they make it even worse by increasing the establishment party’s majority in the Legislature.

Pundits have savaged Senator Cogdill for saying about this budget deal, "It's the best I could get." Yet they have no concept of the political realities in this state – or else are in total denial. Democrats – not just your average American Democrat who doesn't really know any better but, Stalinist, authoritarian, San Francisco, elitist, Hollywood type Democrats -- vastly outnumber Republicans “under the Dome.” The so-called "Republican" governor from Hollywood undercuts the Legislative Republicans' positions four out of five times. Democrats are but three votes shy of the required two-thirds majorities in both Houses. Without this miniscule Republican obstructionism, there would be no taxpayers left to screw in this state as there would be nothing to stop Democrats from doing whatever they please with our wallets. In fact, unwittingly, we Republicans have been helping the Democrats by forcing upon them some measure of fiscal responsibility and stopping them from raising taxes willy-nilly. We have mitigated the pain that the people would otherwise suffer as a result of unrestrained Democrat control. Yet, Republicans are blamed for the delay and mess.

Admittedly, over the years, Republicans have, at times, been willing accomplices but, for the most part, have used their ability to obstruct the budget or tax increases to force some semblance of discipline on the Democrats. You complainers out there think this is bad now. Just imagine what it would have been like if the Democrats had been allowed free reign over the past decades to "stimulus" California. Where was the outrage when all this mess was being created? For the last decade in the Senate, at least, we have been watching and warning of that the piling of one new inefficient program on top of another was leading to the fiscal collapse of the state. Program after redundant program with spending, spending, spending on “non-citizens and freeloaders” have been passing the Legislature with no “outrage” from the public. In fact, the public has been rewarding such behavior by re-electing those culpable over and over again.

Suddenly everyone is outraged? No. The people get what they deserve. This is the government they have wanted. This is the government they elected. Everyone suddenly wants major reforms and cuts. Yet when specifics are targeted, they scream and yell and whine like French babies. So, I don't have much sympathy for those "a pox on both your houses" people. I say to whoever wrote this dribble in the Bee, don't thrust this, "listen to the people for a change. We desperately need you to use good judgment and make reasonable decisions," crap at us. YOU VOTERS need to start using "good judgment" for a change. It's time for YOU VOTERS to wise up and start making "reasonable decisions" at the polls. This is what YOU VOTERS gave us. It's all YOUR fault!

Perhaps, over my 19 years working in the State Capitol, I’ve become an “institutionalist” and “apologist” for the current system. But, none of these “statesmen” would be here if voters didn’t send them to Sacramento. It’s time to “man-up” voters. It’s time change who’s running the place. Or else, stop complaining and live with the consequences of YOUR political decisions.

Budget Lessons: Shifting California Government to a Compressed Work Week

After missing yet another self-imposed deadline to solve California's $45 billion deficit, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and top legislators Tuesday continued closed-door negotiations.

While the Senate is scheduled to convene floor session today, it is highly unlikely that a compromise budget plan will arise before Friday. Why is that day important? If there is no deal by Friday, state government workers will take their first furlough day. Schwarzenegger has ordered state employees to take two days off a month without pay through June 2010 to save about $1.4 billion.

With budget Armageddon fast approaching it should come as no surprise that a new Capitol Weekly/Probolsky Research Poll now shows that approximately half of Californians support the concept of a part-time Legislature.

Year in and year out the Legislature has failed alleviate California's chronic budget short-comings. The time has come to finally show the citizens that their government leaders are willing to do whatever is necessary to tackle the financial crisis.

For almost a year now we have actively pursued the idea of a compressed work week for the California Legislature. Shifting the Legislature to a 4 day 10 hour work week would result in significant cash savings as well as relieve pressure on the constantly taxed energy grid. With Californians now looking for leadership and change at the Capitol, now is the time to act.

Shifting to a compressed workweek would provide the following benefits:

Reduction of operational costs.

• Energy savings from the climate control of unoccupied buildings alone could be enormous. Fewer security or maintenance issues could result. A compressed workweek would also result in less energy consumption on the whole – lights off, computers down, phone lines not being in use, etc.

The shift would also help the Democrats achieve their beloved AB 32 goals by creating a reduction in VMT and exhaust emissions from commuter cars as well as a reduction in traffic congestion for the greater Sacrament region.

• Studies have shown that a reduction in VMT per week at 46 mi, is equal to a $850 annual savings in user costs and an average reduction of 2,300 lb of carbon dioxide and pollutants.
• Accident externalities arise when extra vehicles on the road increase the probability that the other road users will be involved in an accident. Accident probability depends to a large extend on distance, driving time and congestion. Eliminating congestion during peak commute times would defray the number of accidents and therefore the strain on public safety and health services.
• Reducing demand on transportation infrastructure lessens road damage and therefore results in cost savings to local and state governments - therefore leaving more infrastructure dollars available for truly crucial projects.

The California ISO has noted that “conservation and demand response programs will continue to be important this summer and have an increasingly important role in years to come.” A compressed work week helps the state do its part in conserving energy during peak demand times of the summer months. Isn't that a better than issuing the threat of rolling brown outs?

Perhaps most importantly, a compressed work week would provide greater access to Legislative affairs by the public. Currently business hours limit people’s ability to access their government because citizens work during standard hours, a compressed work week at the Capitol actually serves to increase access to citizens.

California used to be a visionary leader for reform. Now the golden state lags behind the governments of Utah, South Dakota and Virginia who have all taken on the task of putting people first, politics second while doing whatever is necessary to save taxpayer dollars.

Tic Toc on the Budget Clock

The Guvanator and legislative leaders resumed closed-door talks Monday in an effort to close California's $42 billion budget gap, with employee furloughs just days away and taxpayer refunds already on hold," writes the AP's Judy Lin."State leaders are trying to strike a compromise on an annual spending plan as California runs dangerously low on cash reserves.

No surprise that officials have already missed a self-imposed Feb. 1 deadline for a budget deal.

"The governor and lawmakers can't agree on a mix of tax increases and spending cuts to solve the deficit over the next year-and-a-half. They also disagree over whether the state should impose a spending cap and on elements of what they call an economic stimulus plan. Such a plan could include provisions for flexible work hours so businesses would save on overtime pay and regulatory rollbacks that Democrats fear will weaken existing environmental laws.

"If there is no deal by Friday, state government workers will take their first furlough day. Schwarzenegger has ordered state employees to take two days off a month without pay through June 2010 to save about $1.4 billion."

Furlough or Fire

Tic toc on the budget clock...

California's budget shortfall now estimated at more than $40 billion -- roughly $15 billion for the rest of the current fiscal year and $25 billion in 2009-10 still remains unresolved, and yet another day has passed without either house convening Legislative session.

So to fill the political void, the Govunator flahsed a bit of steely resolve today.

Schwarzenegger warned that if public employee unions don't accept twice-monthly furloughs, he will lay off state workers to reduce salary costs by more than a billion dollars.

The Republican governor signed an executive order last month requiring 238,000 state workers to take two unpaid days off each month starting in February. His order also mandated that the state send warning letters to state workers with the least seniority notifying them that their jobs were threatened.

Labor unions are fighting the governor's furlough order in Sacramento Superior Court, where a judge is expected to rule this week whether Schwarzenegger's plan is constitutional. The governor said that if he loses the case, he will pursue layoffs instead.

"To me, labor has the choice, and I made this very clear: They can help us make the decision in how we can save the ($1.3 billion)," Schwarzenegger said at the Sacramento Press Club. "So our recommendation was furloughs, where everyone takes a haircut rather than laying people off. That's the last thing I want to do, is lay people off. So it's their decision."

"The fact of the matter is in the end I have the authority, if they don't go along with the furlough, to lay people off so we have a savings of ($1.3 billion)," he added.

Who's Fooling Who?

It's Tuesday, January 20, and the only Democrats left in town are the ones who didn't get tickets to the party -- despite the fact that California is on the verge of bankruptcy and staring down the barrel of a $42 billion budget deficit.

Of course, some of the Democrats who are back in DC are doing their best to convince us that they're actually getting some work done.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...

"State legislative leaders, perhaps nervous over how they'd be perceived celebrating amid a fiscal crisis at home and during critical budget negotiations, have couched their trips this week to Washington, D.C., as a chance to make a crucial appeal for federal bailout money for which California is in line," reports Steven Harmon in the Contra Costa Times.

"Both Senate leader Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, D-Los Angeles, put out reassuring statements proclaiming that they will be hard at work pounding on President Barack Obama's doors for money and pressing the California congressional delegation for action."

'Speaker Bass is meeting with our congressional delegation and Obama transition team leaders Wednesday ... to ensure California gets its fair share,' said Shannon Murphy, Bass' spokeswoman, who stressed that Bass missed all of California's inaugural balls Monday because she flew out late Monday night after attending Martin Luther King Jr. Day celebrations in Los Angeles. She did say she was unsure whether Bass' schedule tonight includes inaugural balls."

Some wonder if they should have even bothered with an explanation.

As politics professor Corey Cook noted, "It is a bit disingenuous. 'The spin of 'we're getting work done' is probably not one I'd encourage. That's not real. No doubt they will be working their deals, but that's not why they're here."

Meanwhile, the fiscal time bomb ticks on...

The Art of Exeptions to Threats

I'm beginning to wonder whether Herr Schwarzenegger will carry through with his threat to "veto" or simply allow the Demo'rat budget to become law without his signature. He has a history of making threats to do something or another, then, like bad law, invoking a bevy of exceptions and exemptions from his threats. During the last budget mess, he threatened to veto every bill that came to his desk until the Legislature passed a budget. Then, of course, he made several exemptions and exceptions to his curvy "line in the sand" and signed a bunch of crap. Then he decreed that he would lay off all non-essential state employees, contract employees, seasonal workers, etc., but provided a list of exemptions to that decree that meant no one really got laid off. Now, he's threatening to "not sign" the Democrat budget. Does that mean letting it go into effect without his signature? What are the exceptions to his threat?

Shall we review:
Article IV Section 10(b)(3) and (4) of the Constitution of the State of California says the following:
(3) Any bill presented to the Governor that is not returned [to the House of origin] within 12 days becomes a statute.

(4) If the Legislature by adjournment of a special session prevents the return of a bill with the veto message, the bill becomes a statute unless the Governor vetoes the bill within 12 days after it is presented by depositing it and the veto message in the office of the Secretary of State.

The First Extrordinary Session was adjourned yesterday. The 12 day clock does not start ticking until the bills are "enrolled" and placed on his desk which could take several days. If the bills don't reach Herr Governor's desk until after Christmas eve or Boxing Day, there's plenty of time for the Legislature to reconvene under a new special session or the already called Second Extraordinary Session to throw a few bones at the Corner Office. Herr Governor can claim victory while, at the same time doing what he does best and caving to the Democrats under the direction of Governor Kennedy.