Drudge posts the California Governor Arnold's state of the state speech, and there's a lot of good stuff. I want to highlight a few phrases I think are key.
What happened is this. Over the last five years, the state's income has increased 25 percent, but spending increased by 43 percent. This was irresponsible. speThis is a crucial point for all Californians to understand. As I've written before (and as many others have said) California's problem is excessive spending, not inadequate revenue. I'm glad to hear Arnold repeating that so often.The fact of the matter is that we do not have a tax crisis;s we do not have a budget crisis; we have a spending crisis. We cannot tax our way out of this problem. More taxes will destroy what we are trying to save which is jobs and revenue.
First, we must give local schools the power to meet the specific needs of their own communities.My mom is on the local school board, and I know she'll be happy if Arnold can make these changes happen. So much money is spent on state-mandated programs that local education officials often have no discretion on how to use their budget.We can do this by consolidating $2 billion of categorical programs and cutting the strings to Sacramento.
This will give schools the freedom to spend the money as they _ not Sacramento _ best see fit to serve the children.
Second, school districts are forced to spend an average of 10 to 40 percent more than necessary on non-classroom services.
We must give local schools the freedom to be more cost efficient.
One way to do this is to repeal SB 1419, the law that prevents schools from contracting out services such as busing and maintenance.
This will free up more money for textbooks and other vital classroom needs.
Now for the real blockbuster announcement, in my opinion:
We cannot afford waste and fraud in any department or agency.There's nothing I love more than hearing that civil service jobs will be cut. California's government is horribly bloated, and it needs to go on a diet. This means Arnold will have to tackle some rather powerful interest groups.Every governor proposes moving boxes around to reorganize government.
I don't want to move the boxes around; I want to blow them up.
The executive branch of this government is a mastodon frozen in time and about as responsive.
This is not the fault of our public servants but of the system.
We have multiple departments with overlapping responsibilities.
I say consolidate them.
We have boards and commissions that serve no pressing public need. I say abolish them.
We have a state purchasing program that is archaic and expensive. I say modernize it.
I plan a total review of government _ its performance, its practices, its cost.
Jobs. Jobs. Jobs. The more jobs the better.He's funny, but I think he'll be able to pull it off. He can meet with CEOs and business leaders and convince them to stay in California or move here. He'll have to reform the workers' comp system and the unemployment insurance system, as he says later, but there's more to selling than just the numbers and he has the charisma and enthusiasm to excite people.I am going to become California's job czar. I'm going to travel the nation and the world to find those jobs.
I'm going to say, ``Come to California. Come and do business here. Buy our fantastic products. Visit our special attractions. And hire our workers, who are the most productive in the world.''
I am a salesman by nature. And now most of my energies will go into selling California. If you can sell, if I can sell tickets to my movies like ``Red Sonja'' or ``Last Action Hero,'' you know I can sell just about anything. California is the easiest sell I've ever had.
Now here's an interesting bit.
At a bipartisan retreat, the California congressional delegation and I agreed to put party and district boundaries aside and to speak with one united voice in Washington.What stands out to you? That's right, criminal aliens. Is that the new term for illegal aliens? If you're not from California you may not realize that illegal immigration is the political third rail -- you touch it, you die. The public is widely in favor of working to curtail illegal immigration, but there are powerful lobbying groups (and courts) that squash any such attempt. Does this short sentence imply that Arnold is going to press the federal government to secure our border?We agreed to fight side-by-side to get more federal tax money for homeland security, for criminal aliens, water resources, highways, and other needs.
It all sounds good, but it's easy to say the words. Once the 2004-2005 budget negotiations get underway we'll have a better idea if he really means it, and if he has the power to pull it off.









--So much money is spent on state-mandated programs that local education officials often have no discretion on how to use their budget.--
I've been thinking for a while that instead throwing more money at schools, we should look at unfunded mandates.
Unfortunately, "criminal aliens" is not a new term for "illegal aliens".
Until this year's budget, the Federal Government backfilled State governments for the cost of incarcerating illegal aliens who had broken the law. I believe it was called the "State Criminal Alien Assistance Program" or SCAAP. Bush proposed cutting all funding for it in his '04 budget.
but there are powerful lobbying groups (and courts) that squash any such attempt.
I'm curious what quick example you might have of how a lobbying group or a court would block such legislation? What reasoning and what actual powers would you they use?
Sandy: Unfunded mandates are killers. The state requires local school districts to care for challenged kids however their psychologist says, and my mom's district spends 10% of its budget on 1% of the kids for that reason.
BFT: I figured it was too good to be true, thanks for the info. I wish Bush wouldn't do that kind of thing.
Barry: Prop 187 last decade would have refused illegal aliens public services, passed with 70% of the vote, and was killed by a district court judge. When Governor Davis took office he dropped the court fight due to the special interests who supported him. The will of the people of California was thus thwarted.
Just to pull back a little from the specifics above, I just wanted to write that Arnold's speech struck me as extremely powerful and as the words of a great leader. Blowing up boxes aside, the presence that Arnold commands is unlike any I've encountered since I've been politically conscious (I was still playing with G.I. Joes when Reagan was President). Bush brought serious leadership to the White house and virtue to the President's role, and I see the same thing in Schwartzeneggar, which is frankly comforting. There was a point when I used to wonder if strength in political leadership was only something one studied as history.
Z: I agree, I think the problem is that politics doesn't attract great men anymore.