Let’s start with a bit of trivia. Who said this quote and when: “Our elected officials in Sacramento are facing a budget crisis unseen in this state since the Great Depression, and it was entirely avoidable. Teachers are getting pink slips, cops are getting laid off and the taxpayers are facing an increase in taxes and California's future is in danger.” Answer at the end.
Is this budget crisis over yet? Hardly, but according to State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, a Democrat from Sacramento, it will be done by June 30. In two days, this will all be over. The great budget crisis of 2009 will be finished. Completed. Fin. So we must have made a lot of progress in the last week.
Here are some of my favorite headlines from the last few days:
“Some Reasons Why California Is Ungovernable” by Jerry Roberts and Phil Trounstine (http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=f8123aa9-7ae8-4ce7-8993-fb2c81c23343.)
“California forced to confront roots of current fiscal mess” by Carla Marinucci and Matthew Yi (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705313414/California-forced-to-confront-roots-of-current-fiscal-mess.html?pg=3.)
“California's Fiscal Crisis: The Legacy of Proposition 13” by Kevin O’Leary (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1904938,00.html?xid=rss-topstories.)
“Washington to California: Drop dead” by Victoria McGrane (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090628/pl_politico/24266_1.)
Yup, those all sound very upbeat. In fact, the whole situation seems to have turned into one, big “blamestorming” session (much like this commercial http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50ovKaEI_4Y&feature=related, poor Eileen). Some of the possible culprits:
· The Federal government won’t give CA a bailout. (Because even though one out of every eight Americans live in CA, we have the eighth largest economy in the world, and 55 electoral votes, CA is apparently NOT too big to fail.)
· Proposition 13
· Lobbyists (this is my personal favorite, I would blame my bad hair days on lobbyists if I thought I could get away with it)
· Partisanship and term limits which don’t encourage legislators to work together (or just “legislators” if you prefer the short version), and;
· Diversity (I know, you think I’m kidding, but I’m not: http://www.hutchnews.com/Columns/patbfifs)
Clearly, there’s no lack of places or people to point the finger at (which finger you’re pointing is entirely up to you). Will this be resolved by the 30th? Doubtful. In the meantime, government workers are taking more and more furloughs, CA will begin to pay its bills with IOUs (does that include government workers? It’s pretty difficult to buy groceries with IOUs last time I checked), and the business-oriented Bay Area Council is pushing initiatives for a state constitutional convention, the first since 1879, to wipe the slate clean and build a new rational structure for state government. Not a bad idea.
The answer to the trivia question above: Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2003 when running for Governor of California in the gubernatorial recall election that resulted in the replacement of then Governor Gray Davis.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Who's Afraid of the Big, Bad Regulation?
The United States has always had a history of strong financial regulation.
I would now like to challenge you to say that last sentence with a straight face.
That is not to say that the U.S. is lacking in regulatory agencies and bodies, we are absolutely not. In fact, we lead the rest of the world with eight financial regulatory authorities (second place is Canada with three). For a complete listing, go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_financial_regulatory_authorities_by_country. Clearly, I don’t want to have to type them all out.
As the reactionary country we tend to be (or maybe it’s just Congress that freaks out over everything and the rest of us are perfectly rational), when things are going badly we regulate. Take the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002: a classic case of someone (named Congress) overreacting to the shock and scandal that was Enron, and lots and lots of people losing their pensions. On the other hand, when things are going fine and dandy we (again Congress) have a tendency to deregulate.
Anybody remember the ‘90s, and how great they were? So just when they thought nobody was looking (because we weren’t, we were too busy spending money while we had it), Congress passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act ) sometimes known as GLBA. Yes, you read that correctly. To make a long story short GLBA made it ok for Citibank to merge with Travelers Group, which previously would have been illegal, to become Citigroup. Now if you don’t know what happened to Citigroup, I suggest you move out from under your rock.
Of course in the wake of the credit crisis, what do we come full circle back to? More regulation! Let’s add another agency to the list shall we? Let’s call this one the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. The name certain does make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
The legislation to form the new agency will be reviewed by the House Financial Services Committee in July and will take “many of the consumer protection powers over mortgages and credit cards that now are spread across as many as 10 federal regulators.” (http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090624/pl_mcclatchy/3259529.) Wait, 10? I thought we only had eight. Does anybody actually know how many we have?
Also included in the upcoming legislation: the possibility of giving the Federal Reserve the responsibility of oversight over any institution that is deemed “too big to fail.” Yes folks, this is the same Federal Reserve that either, 1. Somehow didn’t see this whole thing coming, or 2. Just decided to not do anything about it.
Gosh, I feel so much better now.
I would now like to challenge you to say that last sentence with a straight face.
That is not to say that the U.S. is lacking in regulatory agencies and bodies, we are absolutely not. In fact, we lead the rest of the world with eight financial regulatory authorities (second place is Canada with three). For a complete listing, go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_financial_regulatory_authorities_by_country. Clearly, I don’t want to have to type them all out.
As the reactionary country we tend to be (or maybe it’s just Congress that freaks out over everything and the rest of us are perfectly rational), when things are going badly we regulate. Take the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002: a classic case of someone (named Congress) overreacting to the shock and scandal that was Enron, and lots and lots of people losing their pensions. On the other hand, when things are going fine and dandy we (again Congress) have a tendency to deregulate.
Anybody remember the ‘90s, and how great they were? So just when they thought nobody was looking (because we weren’t, we were too busy spending money while we had it), Congress passed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act ) sometimes known as GLBA. Yes, you read that correctly. To make a long story short GLBA made it ok for Citibank to merge with Travelers Group, which previously would have been illegal, to become Citigroup. Now if you don’t know what happened to Citigroup, I suggest you move out from under your rock.
Of course in the wake of the credit crisis, what do we come full circle back to? More regulation! Let’s add another agency to the list shall we? Let’s call this one the Consumer Financial Protection Agency. The name certain does make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
The legislation to form the new agency will be reviewed by the House Financial Services Committee in July and will take “many of the consumer protection powers over mortgages and credit cards that now are spread across as many as 10 federal regulators.” (http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090624/pl_mcclatchy/3259529.) Wait, 10? I thought we only had eight. Does anybody actually know how many we have?
Also included in the upcoming legislation: the possibility of giving the Federal Reserve the responsibility of oversight over any institution that is deemed “too big to fail.” Yes folks, this is the same Federal Reserve that either, 1. Somehow didn’t see this whole thing coming, or 2. Just decided to not do anything about it.
Gosh, I feel so much better now.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
The California Fudget Crisis Continues
The Still Non-Existent California Budget:
Since last week, the California Legislature has done, well, not much. And I (fortunately or unfortunately depending on whose side you’re on) still don’t have an ocean view.
The good news: there appears to be an active debate in the legislature. Some of the items considered to be “on the chopping block” include the California Exit Exam (http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=913216de8b1c6f9033bc480c137978e3&from=rss), and the 30,000 teachers and school administrators who have already received pink slips (http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/48728472.html.) Do we really hate education that much?
Most California senators have also agreed to take a 5% pay cut this year starting on July 1. (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-mew-state-paycut20-2009jun20,0,3127468.story?track=rss) That’s very big of them, to cut into their own $116,208 salary when, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median household income for California in 2007 was $59,928. Way to not even pretend to be average Senators.
The better news: there is a plan. On Wednesday, July 17, California legislators revealed their best version of a new budget. Great! Let’s vote on it, get it in action, pay our July bills and call it a day.
The tragic news: Governor Schwarzenegger says, “I will, without any doubt, veto it.” The legislature still plans to put the plan up to a vote next week, but the Governator reminded them that he is, “very, very much against any tax increase whatsoever.” (http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_12611429?source=rss.)
Don’t get me wrong, I admire a guy (or girl) who sticks to his guns. Good for him for not wavering. Except that he’s holding up the whole process and dragging California down with him. Stop being retarded and pass something already. We can’t pay our July bills until we have a budget. Oh, and did I mention that S&P and Moody’s have both publicly noted that, “The state of California is facing a multinotch downgrade of its debt if it fails to resolve its enormous budget woes.” (http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/moodys-joins-sp-in-warning-on-california-debt/) We’ll have no cash and nobody will want to lend us money. That sounds like a great situation to be in.
Again, don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to pay more taxes either. But the scary truth is that we have a $24.3 billion budget gap and if the best alternative we have is to lay off more teachers and extend government worker furloughs, sure, I can stand to pay a little extra for a tax increase on gasoline, tobacco, and my car registration.
My advice to Governor Schwarzenegger: Stop making like an ostrich and get your head out of the sand already. Sure, you’ll probably face some reelection troubles if you go along with some new taxes, but good luck getting reelected if you’re the Governor who let California go completely broke.
Since last week, the California Legislature has done, well, not much. And I (fortunately or unfortunately depending on whose side you’re on) still don’t have an ocean view.
The good news: there appears to be an active debate in the legislature. Some of the items considered to be “on the chopping block” include the California Exit Exam (http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=913216de8b1c6f9033bc480c137978e3&from=rss), and the 30,000 teachers and school administrators who have already received pink slips (http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/48728472.html.) Do we really hate education that much?
Most California senators have also agreed to take a 5% pay cut this year starting on July 1. (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-mew-state-paycut20-2009jun20,0,3127468.story?track=rss) That’s very big of them, to cut into their own $116,208 salary when, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median household income for California in 2007 was $59,928. Way to not even pretend to be average Senators.
The better news: there is a plan. On Wednesday, July 17, California legislators revealed their best version of a new budget. Great! Let’s vote on it, get it in action, pay our July bills and call it a day.
The tragic news: Governor Schwarzenegger says, “I will, without any doubt, veto it.” The legislature still plans to put the plan up to a vote next week, but the Governator reminded them that he is, “very, very much against any tax increase whatsoever.” (http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_12611429?source=rss.)
Don’t get me wrong, I admire a guy (or girl) who sticks to his guns. Good for him for not wavering. Except that he’s holding up the whole process and dragging California down with him. Stop being retarded and pass something already. We can’t pay our July bills until we have a budget. Oh, and did I mention that S&P and Moody’s have both publicly noted that, “The state of California is facing a multinotch downgrade of its debt if it fails to resolve its enormous budget woes.” (http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/19/moodys-joins-sp-in-warning-on-california-debt/) We’ll have no cash and nobody will want to lend us money. That sounds like a great situation to be in.
Again, don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to pay more taxes either. But the scary truth is that we have a $24.3 billion budget gap and if the best alternative we have is to lay off more teachers and extend government worker furloughs, sure, I can stand to pay a little extra for a tax increase on gasoline, tobacco, and my car registration.
My advice to Governor Schwarzenegger: Stop making like an ostrich and get your head out of the sand already. Sure, you’ll probably face some reelection troubles if you go along with some new taxes, but good luck getting reelected if you’re the Governor who let California go completely broke.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Congress Strikes Out
This week in Congress…
Former major league baseball player and 1998 hitting legend Sammy Sosa announced his retirement from professional sports two weeks ago, on June 3, 2009, after not actually playing for any major league team since the 2007 season.
If you actually care about Sammy Sosa and the several records he broke throughout his career, check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sammy_Sosa#Final_years_.282007-2009.29.
For those of us that care to hearken back to 2005, the year of Terry Schiavo, Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement, William Rehnquist’s death (if you don’t know who either of the previous individuals are, I would appreciate it if you would stop reading this blog right now), Lewis “Scooter” Libby’s indictment, and Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, Congress decided that 2005 was a great time in history to hold hearings about steroid use in professional baseball.
And we wonder why New Orleans never totally recovered.
Yes, in 2005 Congress had nothing better to do than to call on the likes of Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa, and others to testify about steroids. I’m sorry, not steroids, “performance enhancing drugs”.
On a total side-note, why are we picking on baseball players? Clearly, if anyone is using “performance enhancing drugs” it’s those guys who play football!
Back to the topic at hand: hearings were held, a conclusion was presumably reached (not that anyone heard it, or cared about it at all), and the U.S. Congress continued on its merry way of completely ignoring actual issues.
Four years later, and a mere two weeks after Sammy Sosa’s retirement, on June 16, 2009, it comes to light that two years before his testimony he tested positive for “performance enhancing drugs” and yet told congress that he would never take stuff like that! (For actual quotation and 6/16/09 NY Times article by Michael Schmidt go to http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/sports/baseball/17doping.html?fta=y.) GASP! I know, you’re shocked. I certainly was, at least for the five seconds that I cared.
Congress, on the other hand, can they let it go? Can they let bygones be bygones and focus on, oh I don’t know, the worst economic crisis to hit the U.S. in my lifetime? How about the war in Iraq that we are still fighting for some reason? What about this health care reform thing that I keep hearing about?
Instead, “The Oversight and Government Reform Committee always takes seriously suggestions that a witness misled the committee while testifying under oath,” Edolphus Towns, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said in a statement. “Investigators will begin a review of this matter and, upon learning the results, I will determine appropriate next steps.” (from 6/17/09 NY Times article by the expert, Michael Schmidt, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/sports/baseball/18doping.html?_r=1&ref=sports)
Will someone please tell me why The Oversight and Government Reform Committee is trying to reform baseball instead of the Government?
Former major league baseball player and 1998 hitting legend Sammy Sosa announced his retirement from professional sports two weeks ago, on June 3, 2009, after not actually playing for any major league team since the 2007 season.
If you actually care about Sammy Sosa and the several records he broke throughout his career, check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sammy_Sosa#Final_years_.282007-2009.29.
For those of us that care to hearken back to 2005, the year of Terry Schiavo, Sandra Day O’Connor’s retirement, William Rehnquist’s death (if you don’t know who either of the previous individuals are, I would appreciate it if you would stop reading this blog right now), Lewis “Scooter” Libby’s indictment, and Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, Congress decided that 2005 was a great time in history to hold hearings about steroid use in professional baseball.
And we wonder why New Orleans never totally recovered.
Yes, in 2005 Congress had nothing better to do than to call on the likes of Roger Clemens, Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa, and others to testify about steroids. I’m sorry, not steroids, “performance enhancing drugs”.
On a total side-note, why are we picking on baseball players? Clearly, if anyone is using “performance enhancing drugs” it’s those guys who play football!
Back to the topic at hand: hearings were held, a conclusion was presumably reached (not that anyone heard it, or cared about it at all), and the U.S. Congress continued on its merry way of completely ignoring actual issues.
Four years later, and a mere two weeks after Sammy Sosa’s retirement, on June 16, 2009, it comes to light that two years before his testimony he tested positive for “performance enhancing drugs” and yet told congress that he would never take stuff like that! (For actual quotation and 6/16/09 NY Times article by Michael Schmidt go to http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/sports/baseball/17doping.html?fta=y.) GASP! I know, you’re shocked. I certainly was, at least for the five seconds that I cared.
Congress, on the other hand, can they let it go? Can they let bygones be bygones and focus on, oh I don’t know, the worst economic crisis to hit the U.S. in my lifetime? How about the war in Iraq that we are still fighting for some reason? What about this health care reform thing that I keep hearing about?
Instead, “The Oversight and Government Reform Committee always takes seriously suggestions that a witness misled the committee while testifying under oath,” Edolphus Towns, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said in a statement. “Investigators will begin a review of this matter and, upon learning the results, I will determine appropriate next steps.” (from 6/17/09 NY Times article by the expert, Michael Schmidt, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/sports/baseball/18doping.html?_r=1&ref=sports)
Will someone please tell me why The Oversight and Government Reform Committee is trying to reform baseball instead of the Government?
Sunday, June 14, 2009
California - Did We Budget For This?
And Now For: Your California Legislature
That can’t pass a budget. California, home to the Steve’s (Wozniak and Jobs), birthplace of Google, Stanford, UCLA and UC Berkeley, can’t pass a budget. We have Hollywood, Napa, at least part of Tahoe, Silicon Valley and a really nifty bridge in San Francisco, but we can’t pass the budget.
California, arguably the best state in the union (especially for those of us born and raised here), has, also arguably, the worst legislature in history. It’s a budget guys, it’s not rocket science. Most of us learned how to do this when we moved out of our parent’s house. Hopefully not all of our representatives still live at home with mommy and daddy.
Sure they need a 2/3 vote to pass the budget, but how long does it take to get 2/3 of your friends to agree on what to do on a Friday night? An hour of playing phone tag? 20 minutes in person? Sure, 1/3 of your friends might not come out, but the rest of us all know that doing something is better than doing nothing, even if it doesn’t work out quite as planned. (And really, does anything ever work out quite as planned? Have you seen The Hangover? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1119646/ )
We don’t expect you to be perfect, but we do expect you to do something, like your job perhaps. So suck it up California legislature and pass the budget already! Or amend the constitution to get rid of that pesky 2/3 vote if it’s such a problem!
So what happens if the budget doesn’t pass by tomorrow (June 15th, due date for passage according to the state constitution http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_4)? Clearly, the state won’t drop off into the ocean. Although, if California became an island, the amount of beachfront property would double and maybe I could finally have the ocean view I always wanted, with the Vegas lights off in the distance. Perhaps we could have each of our state representatives and state senators turn to their colleagues on their left and give them the old, “You’re fired!” Whoever does the best Trump impression gets to keep their job, of course. Unless those old tricksters already extended the deadline when I wasn’t looking… Did they?
I don’t know when they would have had time as the San Francisco Chronicle so kindly pointed out; they’re busy up there in Sacramento. Doing things like, you know, making sure that juice sold under the name “Pomegranate” is really 100% pomegranate. Check out the hilariously tragic article by Juliet Williams “Debate for Calif lawmakers: Budget or blueberries?”
That can’t pass a budget. California, home to the Steve’s (Wozniak and Jobs), birthplace of Google, Stanford, UCLA and UC Berkeley, can’t pass a budget. We have Hollywood, Napa, at least part of Tahoe, Silicon Valley and a really nifty bridge in San Francisco, but we can’t pass the budget.
California, arguably the best state in the union (especially for those of us born and raised here), has, also arguably, the worst legislature in history. It’s a budget guys, it’s not rocket science. Most of us learned how to do this when we moved out of our parent’s house. Hopefully not all of our representatives still live at home with mommy and daddy.
Sure they need a 2/3 vote to pass the budget, but how long does it take to get 2/3 of your friends to agree on what to do on a Friday night? An hour of playing phone tag? 20 minutes in person? Sure, 1/3 of your friends might not come out, but the rest of us all know that doing something is better than doing nothing, even if it doesn’t work out quite as planned. (And really, does anything ever work out quite as planned? Have you seen The Hangover? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1119646/ )
We don’t expect you to be perfect, but we do expect you to do something, like your job perhaps. So suck it up California legislature and pass the budget already! Or amend the constitution to get rid of that pesky 2/3 vote if it’s such a problem!
So what happens if the budget doesn’t pass by tomorrow (June 15th, due date for passage according to the state constitution http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_4)? Clearly, the state won’t drop off into the ocean. Although, if California became an island, the amount of beachfront property would double and maybe I could finally have the ocean view I always wanted, with the Vegas lights off in the distance. Perhaps we could have each of our state representatives and state senators turn to their colleagues on their left and give them the old, “You’re fired!” Whoever does the best Trump impression gets to keep their job, of course. Unless those old tricksters already extended the deadline when I wasn’t looking… Did they?
I don’t know when they would have had time as the San Francisco Chronicle so kindly pointed out; they’re busy up there in Sacramento. Doing things like, you know, making sure that juice sold under the name “Pomegranate” is really 100% pomegranate. Check out the hilariously tragic article by Juliet Williams “Debate for Calif lawmakers: Budget or blueberries?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
