APP - it looks like California will have a balanced budget on time this year

Don Quixote

cancer survivor
Contributor
what a novel concept, it may even show a bit of a surplus, a sign that the California economy is improving - oh well

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - California Governor Jerry Brown and top Democrats in the legislature have agreed to a state budget deal that gives them some increased spending in exchange for accepting his more cautious revenue outlook, a lawmaker involved in budget talks said on Monday.
The state Assembly and Senate must still approve the budget deal, but the agreement means the legislature will likely meet its June 15 deadline for approving a new spending plan.
Few details were available but Brown last month proposed general fund spending of $96.4 billion, up from this year's $95.7 billion.
Ranked as the world's ninth-largest economy, California is projected to have a budget surplus for the first time in many years, in part due to recent voter-approved tax hikes.
Legislative leaders have been pushing for a deal with the Democratic governor despite different expectations about the state's revenue.
The legislature's budget conference committee is scheduled to meet Monday evening to review the agreement for the fiscal year starting July 1, said Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, a Democrat on the committee.
"I'm very confident we'll be adopting an on-time budget," Skinner said.
She said the budget agreement is "very much reflective of the governor's framework, yet there was very good progress made on the priorities of the Assembly and Senate."
Aides to other lawmakers said the deal includes about $200 million more in spending for mental health services urged by lawmakers and about $80 million to restore dental services for the poor.
Additionally, lawmakers and Brown agreed to send more money to all school districts instead of only to the state's poorest districts as he had initially proposed.
Brown last month said he was being cautious with his outlook for the state's revenue in his revised budget plan due to uncertainty over whether a recent surge in revenue would persist.
Saying his revenue outlook was too conservative, Democrats in the Senate and Assembly countered with budget plans seeking about $2 billion more in spending than the governor proposed.
But the three plans were similar in that they would put the state budget in the black, build reserves and pay back loans from state funds.
Monday's agreement includes a $1.1 billion reserve for contingencies, an aide to a top lawmaker said.
Presenting his initial budget plan in January, Brown projected California's budget could swing to a surplus as the economy improves and due to revenue from voter-approved increases in November to the state's sales tax and income tax rates on wealthy Californians.
But he also urged lawmakers to restrain spending, an approach top lawmakers accepted to notch the budget agreement, an aide to one said.
(Reporting by Jim Christie; Editing by Lisa Shumaker)

http://news.yahoo.com/california-governor-lawmakers-strike-budget-deal-010729375.html
 
So.. If they wanna pay more in taxes, why should you give a ****?

I don't.....I'm merely pointing out that getting a balanced budget isn't really that big an accomplishment when you raise taxes.....shucks, even Clinton came close to accomplishing that trick......and Cyprus did it too........all they had to do was seize 10% of the cash people had in their bank accounts........(I wonder if Mexico would do something like that to you?).......
 
Gosh... If I had a LOT of money in Mexican banks, that might be a concern. The point being here that Californians are doing a better job of making the difficult decisions necessary to effectively govern than the country seems willing to do on a national level. Wouldn't you agree?
 
Gosh... If I had a LOT of money in Mexican banks, that might be a concern. The point being here that Californians are doing a better job of making the difficult decisions necessary to effectively govern than the country seems willing to do on a national level. Wouldn't you agree?

not at all.....difficult decisions are reducing spending......taking somebody else's money and continuing to spend it is not a difficult decision......
 
Gosh... If I had a LOT of money in Mexican banks, that might be a concern. The point being here that Californians are doing a better job of making the difficult decisions necessary to effectively govern than the country seems willing to do on a national level. Wouldn't you agree?

As a California resident who voted for the taxes, I'd like to say we were in a very tough spot. We had already made a LOT of spending cuts. They were - and still are - hurting a lot of people.

yes, we decided it was time to raise revenue as well. Sometimes, after cutting out spending, a person has to go get a second job. In this case, the state - after cutting a lot of spending - decided to raise revenue; it asked us if we agreed; and we did.

I don't agree with all of Gov Brown's cuts; right now there's a move on to get the Medi-Cal reimbursement cuts for skilled nursing facilities rolled back; but Gov Brown DID cut a lot of things. He stopped a lot of wasteful govt programs. But we decided revenue increases were needed, and thus we voted for them. And now we have a balanced budget - a budget surplus - a budget that's on time.

We're pretty happy overall with that.
 
In this case, the money was their own, which they offered up.

really?.....I'm willing to bet a rich man's nickel that the majority of voters passed a new tax on someone else's money......

personally, I'm happier in Michigan.....here we cut taxes overall, eliminated business taxes, and balanced the budget every year since our Republican governor took office......(not a single taker was harmed in the making of this advertisement)........
 
I realize we try to stay on topic in this forum - but isn't Michigan where the gov overturned the will of the voters by removing elected city officials and putting in people he chose to run the cities? did that in several cities, didn't he?

You all aren't too thrilled with democracy there, are you?

Your schools are running budget deficits by the way -
http://www.freep.com/article/20130606/NEWS06/130606009/Michigan-school-districts-budget-deficit

Oh yeah, and you kicked 46,000 kids off Temp Assistance to Needy Families
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/29/michigan-welfare-cuts-children-cash-assistance-lifetime-limits_n_1387873.html

way to go, Michigan...anti-democracy, anti-kids.
 
As a California resident who voted for the taxes, I'd like to say we were in a very tough spot. We had already made a LOT of spending cuts. They were - and still are - hurting a lot of people.

yes, we decided it was time to raise revenue as well. Sometimes, after cutting out spending, a person has to go get a second job. In this case, the state - after cutting a lot of spending - decided to raise revenue; it asked us if we agreed; and we did.

I don't agree with all of Gov Brown's cuts; right now there's a move on to get the Medi-Cal reimbursement cuts for skilled nursing facilities rolled back; but Gov Brown DID cut a lot of things. He stopped a lot of wasteful govt programs. But we decided revenue increases were needed, and thus we voted for them. And now we have a balanced budget - a budget surplus - a budget that's on time.

We're pretty happy overall with that.



I too voted for the taxes as did all the sane californians.


Jerry is doing what he was hired to do.


Your right to say the right doesnt like democracy .


they even claim we are not one
 
I realize we try to stay on topic in this forum - but isn't Michigan where the gov overturned the will of the voters by removing elected city officials and putting in people he chose to run the cities? did that in several cities, didn't he?

You all aren't too thrilled with democracy there, are you?
the law that he used to do so was voted into place by means of the democratic process....or were you not aware of that....considering that the alternative was bankruptcy do you think he made the wrong choice?.......

Your schools are running budget deficits by the way -

actually, not mine....just some of the ones run by Democrats......

Oh yeah, and you kicked 46,000 kids off Temp Assistance to Needy Families

uh, because of the FEDERAL 60 month limitation?.......something about "Temp" assistance not lasting more than five years......then a state court put 38,000 of the 46,000 back on, stating that the federal limit should not be used.....sounds to me like Michigan is treating them better than the feds....
 
Last edited:
Back
Top