GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Has Arnold Forgotten His Audience?

by

Or maybe he’s just been playing to a new audience.

Just over five years ago, when running for Governor in the recall election, Arnold Schwarzenegger had his finger on the pulse of the state.  He knew Californians were outraged by a spendthrift state government and opposed the myriad new tax and fee increases proposed by the then-Democratic Governor and state legislature.

But, now that he is Governor and facing a budget crisis even larger than that which led to the ouster of his predecessor, he seems to be playing to a different audience, no longer the overtaxed people of the Golden State.  Now he seems to be playing to the political class in Sacramento, unwilling to stand up to the public employee unions, hesitant to trim the fat from a bloated budget.

Just last week, negotiating with state legislative leaders, he agreed to a budget which would include numerous tax hikes:

Vehicle license fees would nearly double, going from the current rate of 0.65% to 1.15% of the value of a car or truck. The sales tax would increase by 1 cent, raising the rate in Los Angeles County to 9.75%. Gasoline taxes would increase by 12 cents a gallon. And Californians would pay a new surcharge on their personal income taxes, amounting to 2.5% of their total tax bills.

Republicans in the legislature balked at the tax increases which their (then-)leadership supported.  In the state Senate, they even “ousted their leader” because he backed said increases.

Well, legislators finally reached a compromise, getting one Republican Senator, Abel Maldonado of Santa Maria, to sign on to a budget proposal so they could have the two-thirds vote necessary to pass the package.

Sonicfrog has more on some of the provisions in that compromise and speculates on what it might mean for politics in the Golden State.  His post is definitely worth your attention!

Comments

  1. I believe the gas tax hike was axed in the final bill, thanks to Abel Maldenado. This budget stinks on ice, but it probably is the best California can do under the circumstances. This bill is not going to stop well off people and prosperous businesses from leaving the state, although I wouldn’t put it past the Democrats who run the place to try and lock down the borders, or pass a relocation levy to prevent the rich and their money from leaving the state.

  4. Arnold was supposed to be one of those “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” types we are constantly told is the future of the GOP. But like Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, “fiscally conservative” seems to mean, “willing to tax and spend slightly less than Democrats.”

    Are there any politicians out there who really are socially liberal and fiscally conservative? I can’t think of any.

  5. Arnold was supposed to be one of those “s-o-c-i-a-l-l-y l-i-b-e-r-a-l, f-i-s-c-a-l-l-y c-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-v-e” types we are constantly told are the future of the GOP. But like the Maine S-i-s-t-e-r-s, “fiscally conservative” seems to mean: willing to tax and spend slightly less than D-e-m-o-c-r-a-t-s.

    Are there any p-o-l-i-t-i-c-i-a-n-s out there who really are socially l-i-b-e-r-a-l and f-i-s-c-a-l-l-y c-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-v-e? I can’t think of any.

  6. GPW: I agree that Ahnuld has been a disgrace.

    I disagree that sonic’s post on the budget (that you linked) was worth reading. When I saw it just now, it was something not-too-interesting about gerrymandering, followed by a rant on Reagan’s tax record and the supposed sins of his followers. Yawn.

  8. Sell it back to Mexico for all I care. They can’t screw it up any worse, and they certainly will try.

    After Prop H8 I shed no tears for the Golden State. You reap what you sow.

    When they recalled Gray Davis they should have thrown out the state legislature too.

  10. ILC, you probably don’t live in California. Because of massive gerrymandering, the political representation of the legislature is not a true representation of the population of the state. Worse, because of gerrymandering most of the districts will always stay in the hands of the most liberal wing of the Democratic party. These are the politicians who have perused spendthrift policies that have run California into the ground. Unfortunately, I have learned since my original post that the open primary rule is not automatic, but will be on the ballot in a couple of years. It probably won’t pass.

    Good news is that this budget re-establishes spending caps, which will limit future spending by the idiot party that got us into this mess. It’s something the Democrats were fighting vigorously to prevent. I would love to have balanced this budget without tax increases of any kind, solely by cutting government expenses. But with a deficit of $42 billion dollars, federal and state restrictions on what could be cut where, and the fact that the Democrats in change don’t give a dam about fiscal responsibility, the Republicans did as well as can be hoped. Republicans who are whining and moaning about those who signed on to the budget live in some strange fantasy world, where the majority party in California would cut all aid to illegals and ship them all back to Mexico. Sure, that would help balance the budget, but, sorry, that will NEVER happen, especially when the districts are gerrymandered to keep things in the status-quo. Instead, the hard-core Republicans would hold onto this delusion and have the California government go belly up, which means no police, firefighters and release of criminals from the jails. But that’s OK, because we didn’t raise taxes. And who do you think would get the blame? Who got the blame when the Federal government shut down in 95? California’s finances are in shambles, but having it become insolvent is much much much worse than tax increases. Plus, now that the citizens in this state will be forced to feel the results of their crappy political leadership where it counts, in their wallet. Maybe, just maybe, things will change. (OK. that’s being a bit too optimistic).

    I applaud the Republicans who voted for this budget. They held out as long as they could. Reagan understood that sometimes you HAD to make these kind of compromises. Too bad those Republicans who supposedly revere Reagan don’t seem to know who he was at all, and are stuck worshiping a myth of the man instead of the real thing.

  11. ILC, you probably don’t live in California.

    I do. As a resident, I’m too familiar with the gerrymandering.

    the Republicans did as well as can be hoped

    Fact of life: You can’t tax your way out of a recession. Except in the minimal amounts needed to pay for police, courts and military, taxes always make things worse.

    Good news is that this budget re-establishes spending caps

    That’s something, I guess.

  13. But you can’t get out of a recession if a state the size of California goes bankrupt either.

    I disagree. If the State of CA went bankrupt – and therefore, put itself on a severe crash diet – it would be a very good thing for most of the people, businesses, tax rates and jobs of CA.

    I mean, come on. We’re a state with a 9% income tax rate AND (now) a 9% sales tax. Why are we so much more expensive than other states? Don’t tell me it’s real estate or cost of living, because I’m saying that the tax rates themselves are higher. A 5% sales tax in a cheap State yields a lesser amount, appropriate to that State. A 5% sales tax in a more expensive State yields, by definition, a greater amoun, appropriate to that State. Yet our rate is now 9%. Why??? What could be so special about us? Or so great about the services we’re getting?

  14. As a fellow Californian, I am embaressed to admit such a fact. And, lets just call Sen. Abel Maldonado what he is. A political whore. He sold out for his 30 pieces of silver. What did Sen. Whore Madonado get in return for his vote? A ballot prop (maybe) that would advocate, once again, an open primary. And, dropping the 12-cent hike in the gas tax. Oh, but because of that, now they just HIKED the state income tax by 0.25%. And no raise for legislators in deficit years? They would not have gotten a raise in the last 10 years! V the K hit the nail on the head. THe fallacy of the “fiscal conservative” and “social liberal”. So. Cons are much more likely to look out for the taxpayers. Look and the great work of Sen. Jim DeMint. We have not had a decent, conservative governor since George Deukmejian. That is the kind of leader we need. I think we have a good crop of Republicans running in 2010. But, because of this fiasco of Gov. Benedict Arnold, Sen. Whore Maldonado, et al, I hope it does not ruin the chances of any of the GOP candidates. Thanks, guys!

  15. Mark, sounds like we’re mostly on the same page, except I have to disagree with this:

    So. Cons are much more likely to look out for the taxpayers.

    True, DeMint is teh awesome!!!1! And Palin up in Alaska. As counter-examples, though, look at the simply awful work of Mike Huckabee, or George Bush (on domestic policy / economics), or Rick Warren’s public dance with the philosophies of Chairman O. Social conservatives are as capable as anyone of being fiscal liberals, or Big Government crypto-socialists. I’ll just concentrate on looking for the country’s real fiscal conservatives, who may be social liberals or social conservatives.

  16. #14. ILC´s point is well taken. New York City was bankrupt. It was the fiscal policies of Rudy Giuliani that put the city´s treasury in the black. Sometimes bankruptcy is the only logical option. It would do General Motors well to declare bankruptcy and throw off the yoke of the UAW.

  19. ILC, my point is that at this time, there is no such animal in elected office. Tom Campbell, former Cali congressman and possible gubanatorial candidate, was close to that fiscal conservative, social liberal. I spent a lot of time warning about the Rev. Mike and his terrible economic policies. By and large, our natural allies at this point are So Cons. BTW, saw the post by Ed Morrisey. So depressing about Gov. Benedict Arnold.