WEST SACRAMENTO — California voters gave Arnold Schwarzenegger a single, blockbuster-sized mission when they sent him to Sacramento six years ago in an unprecedented election: Fix California's chaotic budget system, once and for all.
Today, California is unable to pay its bills, and Schwarzenegger finds himself mired in the worst financial crisis in decades and in a race against the clock to deliver on his promise to "end the crazy deficit spending."
In less than six months, the Republican governor will enter his final year in office and become a political lame duck, as attention begins to focus on his potential successors. That gives him little time to dig California out of its deep financial hole and enact the lasting budget reforms that he had hoped would shape his legacy.
The nation's most populous state, responsible for 12 percent of the nation's gross domestic product, is saddled with a $26.3 billion deficit, has started issuing IOUs for the first time in two decades, is burdened with the lowest credit rating of any state and is seeing unprecedented joblessness and a decline in personal income.
To Cynthia Sterling, president of the Fresno city council, the fault for California's financial mess lies squarely with the governor. A moderate Democrat, the type of centrist Schwarzenegger has been courting for years, Sterling shared the stage with the Republican governor in the past to show bipartisan support for his initiatives.
Today, she believes Schwarzenegger has talked a good game but failed to follow up the rhetoric with decisive action.
"He made poor decisions and did not include those of us who were in the know," she said. "We're in real financial crisis because of this governor."
That October night in 2003, when Schwarzenegger rode his global celebrity to victory and he and his wife, Maria Shriver, waved to thousands of admirers amid a blizzard of confetti, seems like an eternity ago.
Schwarzenegger still draws autograph-seekers, to be sure, but only a third of voters approve of his job performance, according to polls taken this spring, before the state's fiscal crisis had deepened to the point of issuing IOUs.
He seemed surprised last month by the hostility of an audience in Fresno, typically a conservative bastion that has been welcoming to Schwarzenegger throughout his tenure. This week, he was met with boos from state workers protesting his proposed budget cuts as he left a press conference at the state Capitol.
Even his famous gags have fallen flat as the state sinks deeper into financial chaos. He sent the Democratic leader of the state Senate a metal sculpture of bull testicles as a lighthearted way to convey fortitude during the budget negotiations. The lawmaker promptly returned the gift with a terse note saying the cuts Schwarzenegger planned to make to the poor, frail and low-income college students were no joke to him.
"It's not like Arnold came into this situation looking for a $25 billion deficit to cut. Nobody does," Shriver told The Associated Press recently. "People come in because they want to do good, and they want to grow a state and transform a state and help it grow."
That Schwarzenegger finds himself stuck in a financial crisis even worse than the one he inherited is not entirely his fault. He reminds crowds during budget addresses around the state that the worst recession in decades has incinerated wealth everywhere and has hit California especially hard.
Economists agree that the depth of California's financial crisis is due in large part to the sinking overall economy. Schwarzenegger cannot be blamed, for example, for Californians' first drop in personal income since the Great Depression, which is one reason personal income tax dropped 34 percent during the first five months of the year.
His communications director, Matt David, said Schwarzenegger has been fighting since his first day in office for financial and long-term budget reforms that would have given California a buffer during the current economic downturn. But David said the governor has been thwarted by politics or voters.
Schwarzenegger also fought to establish a rainy day fund in 2004, although its watered-down language allowed lawmakers to tap it virtually at will. He now wants a stronger rainy day fund and would like to cap state spending and streamline government programs.
Voters defeated the latest proposals during last May's special election, when they turned down all five budget-related measures on a ballot that was plagued by confusing and deceptive language.
The Legislature also shares a large part of the blame for spending beyond the state's means. The governor, Democratic lawmakers and even voters have approved new or expanded programs over the years without a dedicated way to pay for them, adding to the burden on the state's general fund.
While Schwarzenegger cannot be saddled with the full responsibility for the state's ailing fiscal health, he has taken several steps that have worsened it.
He started by repealing a car tax that brought roughly $5 billion a year to state government but did not identify how he would make up the difference. He persuaded voters to borrow $15 billion to cover the deficit he inherited, then championed another $37 billion in borrowing for infrastructure programs.
Before he was governor, Schwarzenegger persuaded voters to pass the very kind of program that he now criticizes — an initiative for a $500,000-a-year after-school program that is untouchable because it was approved at the ballot box.
Daniel J.B. Mitchell, a professor at the University of California, Los Angeles Anderson School of Management, said Schwarzenegger's failure to commit to a clear agenda is one reason he has failed to enact meaningful, long-term fiscal reforms.
"He was elected largely because of a budget crisis under (former Gov.) Gray Davis. So one would think that working on that — priority 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 for him would've been dealing with the state budget," Mitchell said.
Instead, from his inauguration through May's special election, Schwarzenegger has turned his attention to an array of policy ideas, many unrelated to the budget, Mitchell said.
Complaints about the governor's revolving policy priorities reached a crescendo last week as negotiations collapsed over California's then-$24 billion budget shortfall.
Every day the state slides deeper into financial freefall increases the likelihood that Schwarzenegger will spend his final year in office overseeing a state in decline, with children losing health coverage, crowded classrooms and shuttered state parks.
Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, said solving the budget crisis should be good enough for Schwarzenegger right now, but it doesn't seem to be.
"We want him to have (a) positive legacy, and that means California begins to turn itself around," Steinberg said. "But you know, you build a legacy over years, not over two weeks or a few days."
This is one of the better articles about GAS (Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger) for some time now...
I did not vote for him in either election...
Had Davis remained governor, he would not have rescinded the DMV fees, we would have had at least $5 billion a year (times 6 years=30 b) towards the budget...and with that in place the state was on path to clear up the budget mess from the energy fiasco...we would not have had the GAS 'borrowing' the extra $53b money that still needs repaying which put us deeper in debt...
So, yeah, I blame him at least 90% of the budget problems we have....
He constantly wants to rip-off different programs moneys to pay into the state's general fund account...particularly those programs WE THE PEOPLE voted to put in place in the first place because we kept seeing the state government not taking care of things to begin with and then stealing money from those things to 'pay for something else'...
One thing I will say about the article that I disagree with and that is that I am not sorry one bit for 'The People' voting in mandated programs and funding...
We HAD to since the state wasn't taking care of things. And all GAS proposes is stealing from those funds to pay other bills...not on my watch...that IS why those proposals he wanted so badly in May failed...not because they were supposed tax increases, but because it went against the very programs that WE THE PEOPLE put in place to begin with and we aren't going to allow him to go there. You don't rob Peter to pay Paul...
And I find it offensive that he wants not only to steal money from those programs, but he wants to steal money from the counties as well...just LA alone is 400 million in the hole, yet he wants to take money from them...other cities are also on the verge of bankruptcy and cutting services like police, and firefighters etc...yet GAS wants to take money from them...
But, you are correct about one thing...GAS does not stay on topic or message...and he doesn't follow through...
No, I do not like what he has done to the state budget...at all. I will be very happy to get rid of him. We need a real governor, not some populas actor...that is managed to hop from sound bite to sound bite...
As I live a long way from California, I am not able to comment directly. I would like to say that I am surprised that a conservative would not be a fiscal conservative. You would have thought that he would have reviewed policy before enacting a cut in the state revenue.
Fiscal crisis is happening all over the country, during the good times we spend, spend, spend. Then during the bad times we don't want to cut back to match the amount of money we don't have. What programs do we cut?? what services do we cut?? Who no longer has a job?? These are all hard questions, the fact of the matter is that the state doesn't have the money unless we the people give it to them. Through taxes and fees, if you don't want higher taxes or fees then you have to give up something. Then people get mad and tell them to "fix" it. Not an easy thing to do.
I feel for the people of Cali.... You voted into office a actor (not the first time)...... What skills in this ring did he hold before???? besides married to a powerhouse family!!! He is a another GOP sideshow that went wrong, one thing for the people of Cali. watch what you vote for.
He is a another GOP sideshow that went wrong
Now that I like can I use it sometime? My son and his family live in California so I kind of have a personal stake in what happens there. The Guvun-nator I believe tried to do what he "thought" was right but it backfired. He won votes on the old no new taxes from me platform. It's not such a pretty picture now is it. We have a similar situation here if Flora-duh where they voted in probably the worst Governors form Jeb Bush to Charlie Crist both have done more damage then any hurricane. Along with the Republican controlled State House have virtually bankrupt the State.
Everyone boo's a cut back, I am anxiously waiting for utilities to cut back, goodness, I don't understand the full meaning of CUT BACK, cause every time one thing get cuts back, something goes up in costs more and that doesn't matter what state one is from. I don't see the blame on one person alone.
"The governor, Democratic lawmakers and even voters have approved new or expanded programs over the years without a dedicated way to pay for them, adding to the burden on the state's general fund."
Here is the problem!! The article by Julliet Williams gives the Democrats, who have controlled the legislature for years and years, a pass and when Swartz...joined them instead of doing what he was elected to do, the situation simply worsened - as anyone could have predicted.
BTW, for those that might be looking for a model of what lies ahead for the rest of the country, try paying attention to California.
"...even voters have approved new or expanded programs over the years without a dedicated way to pay for them,"
Well, I do find that line is inaccurate, and misleading...
Even the 'socially liberal' citizens are financially conservative, so when we pass an initiative we usually make sure there is a 'funding stream' built in the package...one such example is the 'kids health program' it was paid for by increasing the taxes on Cigarettes...
The only time I can recall 'mandates' without funding is the 'No child left behind' and that was given to us by ...'oops' a republican president.
It is a law within the state that any 'program' that increases the 'spending' must have an equal decrease somewhere else...to provide the funding... (at least on the books) so this does force the 'conversation' of the programs fundings...the money has to come from somewhere...
But I expect this type of comment from an uninformed outsider that just sees that line and really has no idea what happens under the dome in Sacramento.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |