Budget problems

The non partisan reviews are in on Arnold's budget:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's annual budget proposal spends too much of a one-time windfall on new or expanded programs, leading to higher deficits in future years, the state's nonpartisan legislative analyst said Thursday.

The review urges lawmakers to consider putting more of an estimated $4 billion in unanticipated income into reserve accounts or use it to pay off existing debts.

"Our concern is that the plan really puts the state on the wrong path in terms of its long-term goal of achieving fiscal balance," Legislative Analyst Elizabeth Hill told reporters. "We are concerned that the unexpected revenue increases, as noted in the governor's plan, are not being used to reduce our past borrowing debt but instead are ratcheting up ongoing spending by $2 billion."

I would suggest that Democrats would be right to criticize the budget precisely on these grounds. While infrastructure is important to the state, so is improving the state's financial future, and with billions of dollars of bonds proposed, it would seem that this budget fails to do that.

It's the new Republican budget plan. Spend 'til everyone's happy. Everyone except the children and grandchildren that inherit the debt.

And it does not look like this budget will sail through the state's legislature, even the Republican side of the aisle:

In their meeting with the governor, the Republican Assembly members said they wanted to ease some aspects of the state's signature environmental protection law, which requires environmental reviews before the state issues building permits. That law, called the California Environmental Quality Control Act, was enacted more than 35 years ago.

But destroying the environment isn't all the Republicans want to do. They also feared that Democrats would insist that rebuilding be done by - get this - union laborers. You know, laborers that would get a fair wage and good benefits to do the work.

Oh, and Democrats are not entirely on board, either. Part of last years budget froze Supplemental Security Income (SSI) cost of living increases to help balance the state's budget. And while Democrats went along with this gimmick last year, this year's proposal has not gone over so well:

"In a year when increased revenues are $3.7 billion, it seems particularly punitive to not give SSI/SSP recipients a federal increase when their cost of food and rent is going up," says Senate leader Don Perata (D-Oakland). "Is it responsible to hijack money from little old ladies? No."

In fact, Perata says he wants to "revisit" all the SSI/SSP decisions from last year.

Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (D-Los Angeles) says that "Democrats, this time around, are not going to stand idly by while the poor take it in the shorts. It's totally unacceptable. It'll happen over my dead body."

Without help from both sides, Arnold's budget won't survive, and Democrats will no doubt make serious demands from Schwarzenegger if he wants his budget passed. It is, after all, what he's banking on for re-election this fall.