It may have been a sign. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s web site crashed in the midst of the live webcast of yesterday’s state budget signing ceremony. Perhaps it marked the late-breaking bad karma of this budget process, or of the line item vetoes yet to be unveiled.
While Schwarzenegger’s web site was soon up and running again — press secretary Aaron McLear, apologizing to Net viewers for the inconvenience, said the mishap was due to a brief “problem with our database” — there was more serious grumbling to come, and even some real pain, in the $703 million in line item vetoes Schwarzenegger promised over a month ago to seal a budget deal.
The sharpest pain may be in the governor’s elimination of $55 million to help the homeless mentally ill. Most accounts are that the program has been a good start, and Schwarzenegger himself has praised it. Beyond the humanity of the program, deranged people living on the street have become a significant problem in several California cities, notably San Francisco, where they have become a blight on the tourist experience.
The state investing in programs like this is good business. But Schwarzenegger cut it, in what may be a sign that further major budget cuts will be slashing not so much into the elusive “waste, fraud, and abuse” as into programs of need.
Our friends on the far right, ever attuned to the symbolic, are upset about Schwarzenegger not cutting $6 million for the University of California’s labor center, which they view as a hotbed of socialism. The one reader who commented on the right-wing Flash Report site yesterday railed against this, urging the political demise of the “Austrian socialist” and “illegal immigrant.” That would be California’s movie superstar-turned-centrist Republican governor.
Schwarzenegger actually did cut it once — perhaps mindful of the fact that it was used to organize against him when he ran in the 2003 recall — but probably found it more trouble than it’s worth for the relatively small amount of money involved.
One very large amount of money is the more than $300 million eliminated from MediCal spending. It’s described by administration officials as a cut that won’t impact the health care caseload of low-income people who use the program. Why not? Because the program has been overfunded.
How long has that been going on?
There are certainly significant efficiencies to be found in state government, as there are in any very large organization that has been little examined for many years. That was the point of Schwarzenegger’s California Performance Review (CPR).
Unfortunately, the CPR fell victim to internal fighting in the earlier version of the Schwarzenegger Administration. I don’t recall a group of conservative Republican senators making a big fuss over that.
Of course, the CPR certainly wasn’t perfect. For one thing, while it was doing an effective job of identifying possible efficiencies in government operations and spending — a project that takes time — its charge didn’t seem to extend to an inventory of another form of government spending. Tax expenditures are tax breaks. Sometimes they stimulate economic development, and sometimes they simply don’t.
The conservative Republican holdouts actually fought hard behind the scenes to preserve one of the most questionable big tax breaks, that for yacht owners. Which actually matches up pretty well on a dollar-for-dollar basis with the program for the mentally ill homeless. Perhaps the homeless can live on the yachts when their owners aren’t off sailing.
Your posts are welcome in the Forum.
Read 
| Comments (0) |
I guess California isn’t perfect after all.
I guess California isn’t perfect after all.
“The one reader who commented on the right-wing Flash Report…” lol
There’s a Contract Advertisement from State’s Department of Parks & Recreation posted today for a $10,000,000+ concession facility located within Pismo State Beach. I see these every week. And while it sounds nice, you wonder where the priorities are. I think I may start up a Proxmire styled golden fleece award om my Webcast.
BB, I am glad you have recently highlighted CPR initiatives, and the lost opportunities. And you’re right, the absence of corporate welfare reform should have been targeted too.
Next GAS budget I would hope that programs are prioritized, within available revenues somewhat along the lines of a great book – The Price of Government co-authored by Reinventing Government guru David Osbourne – the latter, must reading when I was an appointed official in the last decade.
If leg want to change budget, they must indicate what comes out.
Yesterday was pretty ugly. I wish that Schwarzenegger didn’t hype everything that happens. It makes the good things he does seem less valuable.
His relentless optimism is great and a real strength for him. But it could be publicly applied a bit more sparingly.
Thanks.
I think the California Performance Review should be revived.
>BB, I am glad you have recently highlighted CPR initiatives, and the lost opportunities. And you’re right, the absence of corporate welfare reform should have been targeted too.
It’s mildly amusing.
>Ann :
“The one reader who commented on the right-wing Flash Report…” lol
Aug 25, 2007 08:23 AM
Yacht buyers are people, too.
Dick Ackerman is a yacht owner.
MediCal is overfunded?
Yacht owners need tax breaks?
These guys aren’t just divorced from Reality, but they’ve place a restraining order against it – Reality isn’t allowed within 50 yards of them.
Isn’t a tax policy which incentivizes making large purchases out-of-state one of those “job killers” we’re always hearing about?
Yeah, that booming Nevada yacht industry. That’s where I’m getting my next 110 footer.
The Gov.’s veto of the Mentally Ill Homeless Progam was wrong and short-sited, as was the Republican senators’ advocacy of this cut. This program has had proven success the last five years with over 4000 homeless adults who have serious mental disabilites, along with drug and alcohol addictions, being taken off the streets and given shelter, food, clothing, jobs, counseling, medication, responsibility and most importantly, a chance to literally survive and possibly get better. The $55 million program cost is significantly lessened by the savings of fewer emergency room visits, fewer days in jail and fewer pyschiatric hospital commitments. This program is, and now was (very unfortunately), the most fundamental and moral responsibility of government. Those who advocated its demise need to educate themselves on the world of mental illness and re-address their view of what government can and should do.
Something tells me it was the greedy, not the needy, who are served by this budget. And, in a state of plenty, that ‘taint funny!
I know no one here likes to cite the dirty hippies at CALITICS but they did give the only obvious reason for the Governator’s veto of funds for the homeless mentally ill. Those people:
a) don’t vote
b) don’t make large campaign
contributions
Now was that so hard?
Or perhaps he is making a longer term point.
Sometimes the answers are not the “obvious” ones.
Or perhaps he is making a longer term point.
Sometimes the answers are not the “obvious” ones.
Actually, the Dems say they don’t expect the MediCal cut to impact caseloads.
That’s why McClintock says it’s a phony cut.
You can infer whatever else you want from that, of course …
Calitics gets so much stuff wrong factually it is not even funny.
What’s the longer term point?
Yachts good?
Shelter for the homeless mentally ill bad?
You might re-read what I wrote, Richard, instead of being on transmit.
Jonny Flashman a the No-Comment Flash Report is still trying to convince righty wingnuts they won. lol
Hey, what did the DEMOCRATS criticizing the Schwarzenegger vetoes suggest instead of what he did?
Don’t give these boys and girls a free ride.
I’m not aware of them suggesting any alternatives.
The deal, as I understand it at least, is they agreed it was necessary to cut another $700 million to pass the budget and Schwarzenegger takes the heat.
I can tell you that even some on the far right no longer believe the propaganda.
>Ann :
Jonny Flashman a the No-Comment Flash Report is still trying to convince righty wingnuts they won. lol
Aug 25, 2007 11:47 AM
The Gov. wants to reduce the deficit…good; and, he wants to reduce health care costs…good, again. But, eliminating the Homeless Mentally Ill program did neither. The $55 million cost for this program more than pays for itself in the long run. E.g., one homeless mentally disabled “client”, before enrolled in the program, had over $85,000 in medical expenses paid out by private providers in a three year period. And, this amount did not include numerous other emergency room visits and 5150 WIC actions. The associated costs for the homeless mentally disabled include medical, public safety and social. There was absolutely no logic in the veto…absolutely none!
I believe that is what the governor calls, in a different context, of course, a “hidden tax” …
>.g., one homeless mentally disabled “client”, before enrolled in the program, had over $85,000 in medical expenses paid out by private providers in a three year period. And, this amount did not include numerous other emergency room visits and 5150 WIC actions. The associated costs for the homeless mentally disabled include medical, public safety and social. There was absolutely no logic in the veto…absolutely none!
Which rational Republicans vote for the tax increase next year?
No Bill I did read your post but you said that Arnold was making a longer term point. I’d just like to know what that could be? If thepoint is we need fiscal disclipline then why did he OK a tax break for yacht owners?. That’s all.
You know the reason we have homeless mentally ill is because back in the day “liberals” passed something called the “Lanterman-Pettris-Short Act” that closed down the big state mental institutions that everyone agreed were a costly disgrace and replaced them with community mental health centers. Only we didn’t as our “Fiscally Sound” Governor (guy named Reagan)decided there was an even cheaper alternative. No Centers. And we started dumping people on the streets.
Later, when he fooled enough people into making him President, one of his flacks told the media that the homeless liked living outdoors and sleeping over hot air grates. Sorta like all those Cadillac driving Welfare Queens he liked to talk about.
But Jerry and Grey did nothing either because THEY DON’T VOTE and THEY DON”T WRITE CHECKS. Now if they only opened a casino . . .
You’re so close to getting it, Richard.
Just read a little bit further before going off …
Why would the righty wingnuts care about the homeless hassling tourists in San Francisco? They come from San Berdoo and Temecula and Thousand Oaks and wouldn’t be caught dead in SF.
Why would the righty wingnuts care about the homeless hassling tourists in San Francisco? They come from San Berdoo and Temecula and Thousand Oaks and wouldn’t be caught dead in SF.
As much as I hate to admit this, unless this year’s budget “drama” causes a change to the way we pass it, it would seem that the right wingnuts won.
They won because they have been able to hurt the people they hate the most…those without the means to protect themselves.
You’re overstating. I’m afraid that most sensible conservatives are becoming too embarrassed to post here in the wake of the right-wing debacle, although one has certainly been evident here today, so I will pick up the mantle, momentarily.
While a fringe group may hate people with needs, that’s not true of most conservatives.
Hurting homeless people, which also hurts one of the biggest industries going, tourism, to keep a tax break for yacht owners is simply idiotic.
That’s not victory, that’s political lunacy.
The far right lost badly in its attempt to shut down Jerry Brown. Instead, their effort proved a boomerang, as I warned some privately weeks ago.
But they are, not to put too fine a point on it, deranged when it comes to considering Brown. Which we saw last year in the election.
Victory is defined by moving forward and gaining adherents. Nothing like that happened for the far right in this process.
Indeed, you might want to consider the point I keep telling Richard to consider.
I know, I’m telling people to actually read what I write before commenting on it.
Terribly unfair of me.
You could complain to the owner here, of course …
You’re overstating. I’m afraid that most sensible conservatives are becoming too embarrassed to post here in the wake of the right-wing debacle, although one has certainly been evident here today, so I will pick up the mantle, momentarily.
While a fringe group may hate people with needs, that’s not true of most conservatives.
Hurting homeless people, which also hurts one of the biggest industries going, tourism, to keep a tax break for yacht owners is simply idiotic.
That’s not victory, that’s political lunacy.
The far right lost badly in its attempt to shut down Jerry Brown. Instead, their effort proved a boomerang, as I warned some privately weeks ago.
But they are, not to put too fine a point on it, deranged when it comes to considering Brown. Which we saw last year in the election.
Victory is defined by moving forward and gaining adherents. Nothing like that happened for the far right in this process.
Indeed, you might want to consider the point I keep telling Richard to consider.
I know, I’m telling people to actually read what I write before commenting on it.
Terribly unfair of me.
You could complain to the owner here, of course …
Let’s see…sensible conservate. Is that an oxymoron???
(Only kidding, KK!!!)
So, you think I might have overstated my case just a tad? Since you know that is so unlike me, I shocked that you would find that to be the case.
And I would complain to the owner, but he doesn’t like me anymore than you do!!!
Off to fix dinner and than punish myself for overstating my case and, once again, upsetting you.
This is a good discussion, that being about the homeless mentally ill, as a foundation for debate about the big picture. It is what we need on both sides of the aisle, be it difficult for some on the starboard and mid-starboard. As well, not all mentally ill homeless are hassling tourists and the such. Many of these folks are just in search of help from some type of “family”…and family is what the program actually offered. Sorry to belabor the point…but, the cut of this program was wrong…really wrong. I just wish the Gov. understood the program’s family value. Thanks, Bill, for raising this issue and worthy discussion. Maybe, just maybe, those who advocated the cut, will start to understand…and, then act in the right way.
Have a nice dinner.
>Sacramento Solon :
Let’s see…sensible conservate. Is that an oxymoron???
(Only kidding, KK!!!)
So, you think I might have overstated my case just a tad? Since you know that is so unlike me, I shocked that you would find that to be the case.
And I would complain to the owner, but he doesn’t like me anymore than you do!!!
Off to fix dinner and than punish myself for overstating my case and, once again, upsetting you.
Aug 25, 2007 04:52 PM
Thanks for participating, Brian.
I know that a lot of homeless folks aren’t hassling tourists. But a great many are, and I raise that issue to show the pragmatism of such a program for those who aren’t activated by its humanity.
>Brian Lungren :
This is a good discussion, that being about the homeless mentally ill, as a foundation for debate about the big picture. It is what we need on both sides of the aisle, be it difficult for some on the starboard and mid-starboard. As well, not all mentally ill homeless are hassling tourists and the such. Many of these folks are just in search of help from some type of “family”…and family is what the program actually offered. Sorry to belabor the point…but, the cut of this program was wrong…really wrong. I just wish the Gov. understood the program’s family value. Thanks, Bill, for raising this issue and worthy discussion. Maybe, just maybe, those who advocated the cut, will start to understand…and, then act in the right way.
Aug 25, 2007 04:56 PM
Bill,
Thanks! Need to stoke up well this evening as I’m hoofing 14 miles in the morning. Give me time to ponder your words…
Also allow me to play with my new toy/training tool…Garmin 205 Forerunner. It’s a GPS system that will keep track of the miles I stroll.
Hope you and the rest of the group have a great Saturday evening.
14 miles?!
Yes, 14 miles. It’s part of my training for a half marathon in October.
It’s a nice way to spend Sunday morning.
I too hope for the day that CPR can be revived,but am afraid that this version of Arnold’s staff would also push it off the cliff
The culinary union for MGM/Mirage settled their contract. There were a few commentaries in the local Vegas paper today regarding passing the labor cost on to the tourists. Since we are talking about tourists and the homeless,I believe Vegas lost an ACLU court battle regarding restricting and or relocating the homeless from the Vegas strip. I belong to that group of tourists that feels very guilty when someone asks me for a ten spot to cover a meal or(liquid meal)…that guilt translates into me spending less money shopping and or gambling and defintly affects where I will book a room.
I think cutting budget dollars from the homeless is a huge mistake and will affect where I spend my money.
Remember, Anaheim is the tourist capitol of Orange County. If Disneyland families are prompted to go elsewhere ,the entire state will be hurt.
I found it very interesting that the far right budget holdouts got themselves all gummed up in another losing fight with Jerry Brown and pushing to save the yacht tax credit but never mentioned the California Performance Review.
It was interesting that nobody in the republican caucus mentioned CPR in the call for cuts in spending. I wonder if Finance is also to blame, as I know they hated the idea of OMB. But the yacht and airplane tax break is the worst.
No offense taken my friend Solon. Anyone who runs 14 miles today can take rhetorical license at my expense.
Most conservative and liberal activists live unexamined political lives, knowing little of the details of their favorite policy proposals and rarely considering alternatives. Even those committed enough to visit legislative offices can rarely speak beyond the talking points provided by their organizers. Sensible is the wrong word, but most activists are dedicated, yet uninformed.
Next year’s $7-8 billion budget crisis may blow the dust off the California Performance Review. Mining its pages for useful nuggets will help pass time before the real cuts and tax increases are put on the table. If Democrats want more revenue next year, they should prepare for some painful cuts – some shared responsibility for the budget.
Yet the permanent majority party in the Legislature is not good at sharing. Some serious self-examination by both parties would improve our budget process, something Perata’s commission is unlikely to produce.
This fiscal boil will continue to fester until a real consensus on priorities is reached, one that respects Republican views, instead of booting them from the negotiations table. Informed leaders willing to compromise are sensible, regardless which side of the spectrum they represent.
KK – I believe that democrats and republicans in the legislature, and the past few governors, and of course all the staff, realize that what passes for an annual budget bill these last several years is very far removed from reality.
I think everyone also knows that there is no way that the fiscal problems will be dealt with honestly in a structural manner under the current political realities.
The simple truth is that no democrat or republican legislator or governor is willing to sacrifice his or her career to run against the grain laid down by the special interest constituencies and ideology police, which combine annually to ensure that we have a budget of accounting tricks.
These intractable positions are hardened when the participants in the budget see that anyone who happens to debate the propriety of continuing to pay homage to the sacred cows gets eaten alive.
I disagree that next year will be any different.
KK – I believe that democrats and republicans in the legislature, and the past few governors, and of course all the staff, realize that what passes for an annual budget bill these last several years is very far removed from reality.
I think everyone also knows that there is no way that the fiscal problems will be dealt with honestly in a structural manner under the current political realities.
The simple truth is that no democrat or republican legislator or governor is willing to sacrifice his or her career to run against the grain laid down by the special interest constituencies and ideology police, which combine annually to ensure that we have a budget of accounting tricks.
These intractable positions are hardened when the participants in the budget see that anyone who happens to debate the propriety of continuing to pay homage to the sacred cows gets eaten alive.
I disagree that next year will be any different.