Part of the Bay Area News Group

California lawmakers pass budget

By Katy Murphy
Friday, July 24th, 2009 at 3:35 pm in finances, politics.

They did it this afternoon, approving a $6 billion cut to schools ($8.8 billion, when you include the state’s university systems). The budget falls $1.1 billion short of closing the deficit.

You can read a detailed story by Contra Costa Times Reporter Steven Harmon here. He writes:

Hundreds of thousands of people who depend on government services — from college students and elementary school teachers to welfare-to-work recipients and sick children — will bear the brunt of a budget package months in the making.

Of the $26 billion in budget “solutions,” $15.5 billion come by way of cuts, with schools ($6 billion) taking the biggest hit. The University of California and California State University systems will be slashed by $2.8 billion; MediCal services are facing a $1.3 billion hit; corrections are facing an unspecified $1.2 billion in cuts, and three major welfare programs — the welfare-to-work CalWORKs program, In Home Supportive Services and the children’s health insurance program — stand to lose a total of $878 million.

The rest — about $10 billion — is achieved through one-time raids on local government funding (for a total of $4.4 billion) and accounting maneuvers, such as deferring state employee paychecks by one day for a savings of $1.2 billion. Another $1.7 billion is saved by speeding up tax withholdings on individuals and businesses.

On a related note: The faculty at California State University have agreed to take a furlough of two days a month.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • Pingback: State budget done, Oakland gets to keep gas tax : A Better Oakland

  • Nextset

    Not enough was done to cut the budget. What needs to be done is to tell the people who think they get to live off the treasury that they need to leave California.

    It is not the place of the taxpayers to keep people alive other than to pay retiremnent of longtime workers. Charity is not allowed with government funds, the Great Society programs of the early 1960s thought they could change that and as a result we now are stuck with multigenerational parasites who in many cases indulged themselves across a lifetime and believe they can stick others with their upkeep.

    There is no reason to maintain drunks and druggies, single mothers, illiterates, the mentally ill, etc. No reason to provide them health care and housing at public expense. There is no reason to prolong life of such people (any people?) for it’s own sake at public expense. If we do we will harm our economy and drive productive activity elsewhere. Charity is a private activity. The conditions private charity attach to their charity can produce change (ie Salvation Army) and rehabilitation, welfare produces more of the bad behavior (ie more bastard kids).

    Not to mention that CA policy encourages more Mexican occupation of CA.

    And if the State Legislature really cared about “the people” and their economic well being they would allow nurses to practice (limited), allow people to order their own labwork, allow people to purchase their own non-narcotic meds without renewed Physician Rx for chronic conditions such as diabetes.

    Our “problems” are largely manufactured by the government – all of them. Including our educational “problems”. Get the government’s regulation out of the way and things will improve.

  • ex oakland staff

    Nextset,
    Thank you for the suggestion. We removed regulations from financial markets and look what we got: Depression (the sequel). Before we had pollution regulations we had bad air. Before we had water regulations we had bad water. Before we had OSHA we had the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire. Government regulations may have some drawbacks, but we would be far, far worse off without them.

  • Nextset

    Ex_Oakland Staff: We got the depression 2 because of government regulation not relaxation of same. It was the governments regs that forced/encouraged home loans to people with no expectation of repaying them in the name of racial quotas – the racial quotas placed on the banks. It was the government’s bright idea to impose deposit insurance and jack up the coverage to allow the banks indulge in casino behavior with gov’t insured deposits – removing all market discipline from the banking industry. Combine endless gov’t procured deposit money with the racial spoils loan policies and throw in the pump and dump inclinations of the management – which is in itself a byproduct of the deposit insurance, and the real estate boom was a forgone conclusion. As exhibit one I give you the Handlers of Oakland and the rape of World Savings. Oh, and anybody else notice the ethnicity of the pump and dumpers?? They Madeoff with a lot of $$.

    I’m not against all deposit insurance but the over-the-top gov’t actions here were intended to make a pump and dump happen.

    The other regulation I speak of are the combination of licensing, taxes and operating regs designed to destroy jobs, prevent entry into occupations, and to discourage business operations (as in White Flight out of CA to refuge states).

    As far as the economy goes, things are about to get a LOT worse. Read up on the Weimar Republic. That sort of chaos and the collapse of basic law and order is what we have yet to see. In any event you will likely see a police state the likes of which the world hasn’t experienced as the Fed struggle to stay in control.

    Some people see these things coming, becoming increasingly likely at least. And some people are taking steps to improve their own chances in such events. Others have their heads in the sand. I suppose education and smarts denote those who take action early. Like those Jews who decided to leave Berlin before the borders closed… Later on, people asked them why they left when so many stayed (after all, the resulting events had not occurred before in living history). As far as I can tell the responses were something to the effect that they just “knew” they had to leave.

    Back to the point on regulation: There are regs that atre intended to provide a reasonablly stable playing field so that people can work and take care of their own business, and there are regs that are intended to artificially reward politically favored people with unearned goods at the cost of the producers. This drives the producers out. I support the former, (maintaining an efficient court system for example to enforce contracts). I oppose the latter (Affirmative Action, racial spoils, forcing unwanted associations and hand-outs).

    Brave New World.