Thread: Some say new constitution would solve CA's woes

Some say new constitution would solve state's woes

By John Marelius, Union-Tribune Staff Writer
2:00 a.m. June 28, 2009

LOS ANGELES – California is drowning in ever-deepening red ink. The state may have to start issuing IOUs this week. And a debilitating cash-flow crunch could hit by the end of July unless somebody does something about it.

But the state's political leadership has repeatedly proved incapable of coming up with a solution.

California has had budget crises before, a lot of them. All sides agree this is different.

“It is beyond dire,â€

Before you get a new Constitution and sail off into these "uncharted waters", why don't you just secure your borders, deport illegal aliens, and pass a state FairTax?



Hint: If you can't agree on balancing your budget, do you really think the people who have caused this disaster are going to get you a new Constitution that will be any better than the one that made California one of the freest richest states in our nation? Just enforce your Constitution, just secure your borders, just restore liberty to your tax code with a FairTax, and spend within those limits. Then work on national policies to do the same thing plus protect our trade which protects your fabulous industries in California, legalize drugs to protect your money supply and stop spending billions incarcerating non-violent drug criminals, and drill baby drill.

It's not complicated. It's very simple. Just reverse the policies that have caused this disaster to your state and our nation without increasing spending by 1 cent or raising state and national debts by 1 dime.

"We shouldn't miss the opprotunity this crisis might provide."

I think that says it all!

Two state senators refuse to take pay cuts

Inglewood Sen. Roderick Wright and Bakersfield Sen. Roy Ashburn say they won't go along with the request to decrease their pay by 5%. All other senators have agreed to the cut.

By Patrick McGreevy
June 28, 2009

Reporting from Sacramento -- All but two state senators have agreed to cut their salaries this year, with one holdout saying that his pay is nobody's business and that slicing it would amount to a political gimmick.

Most senators have gone along with a recent request by Senate leader Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) to decrease their pay by 5% for the fiscal year starting July 1. Some senators have given up more.

Assembly approves budget package, but...Schwarzenegger says he'll impose third unpaid furlough day
Full coverage: California's state budget crisis
With the state facing a $24-billion budget shortfall, Steinberg said volunteering for pay cuts would show that senators were sharing the pain with the majority of state workers, whose compensation has decreased 9.2% this year through unpaid furloughs.

That argument hasn't convinced Sens. Roderick Wright (D-Inglewood) and Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield).

"What I get paid is personal. I don't discuss what I do personally," Wright said. "I don't choose to make anything I do on my personal side public."


Legislators' salaries are set by a state Citizens Compensation Commission, which recently voted to shrink them by 18% for those elected after this year, he noted.

"I think anything else is trying to be gimmicky," Wright said.

There may be political advantages for lawmakers who announce voluntary pay cuts, but that does not motivate him, he said.

Lew Uhler, president of the California-based National Tax Limitation Committee, called Wright's argument that his pay is a private matter "specious."

"The public pays his salary," Uhler said, "so it is the public's business how much he earns."

Senators who haven't cut their pay "should really be quite embarrassed," Uhler said.

California legislators are paid a base salary of $116,208 a year, the highest in the country. They also receive $36,000 annually in tax-free per diem payments for living expenses in Sacramento.

Ashburn, who is prevented by term limits from running for reelection, said Friday that he has not gone along with his colleagues in part because he has always accepted that his pay should be set by the citizens commission.

Although Steinberg promised to use salary savings to restore money cut from basic services, Ashburn said he is not convinced the $235,000 that would be saved if every senator took the cut would end up benefiting any program beyond the Senate's own budget.

"My big concern is that any pay cut does not help the state's general fund, but instead it goes to fund the Democrat Senate operations, which clearly are working against the best interest of the people," Ashburn said. "Why would I want to participate in that?"

Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) has not asked members of her chamber to take salary reductions, but some have nevertheless done so.

patrick.mcgreevy

@latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me ... 2968.story

Before you get a new Constitution and sail off into these "uncharted waters", why don't you just secure your borders, deport illegal aliens, and pass a state FairTax?

CA. can't put armed personnel on the border. That is federal jurisdiction.
They won't even let CA, put the National Guard on the border with weapons.

No city, county or state law enforcement officer of agency can deport anyone. That is federal jurisdiction. CA. can't even deport crimnal illegal alien inmates from their state prisons and jails. They must turn them over to I.C.E. for deportation, and if I.C.E. doesn't come and pick them up the only thing they can do is release them.

What California can do. They could organize a state wide prison bus service to pick up the illegal aliens at the dozens of incarceration facilities and drive them over to ICE[/b]

Originally Posted by Richard

What California can do. They could organize a state wide prison bus service to pick up the illegal aliens at the dozens of incarceration facilities and drive them over to ICE[/b]

And when you get there and I.C.E. won't accept them what are YOU going to do.

RELATED

Feds squabbling over military’s border role

Policing of U.S.-Mexico boundary becomes interagency ‘food fight’

http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-917162.html#917162

's not complicated. It's very simple. Just reverse the policies that have caused this disaster to your state and our nation without increasing spending by 1 cent or raising state and national debts by 1 dime.

It's simple when ONE person is pretending to solve the multiple problems. But when you have hundreds of people, all with personal agendas, trying to work together, and each wants what they want and don't care what anyone else wants, it gets a little more complicated.
[quote]“California is virtually ungovernable,â€

Border Governors asking Congress for help

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) requested 1,000 guardsmen in January who he later said could form 24 border reconnaissance platoons, support Texas Ranger and parks and wildlife tracking teams, and back up air and marine operations. Perry, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R), California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) subsequently asked Congress to add personnel to the National Guard's Counter-Drug Program in their states. Troops provide translators, reconnaissance and administrative support, relaying aircraft surveillance images, for example.

Border states bear "unique and/or disproportionate" costs of dealing with illegal immigration, drugs and violence, Brewer wrote.

"It is abundantly clear that additional resources are needed -- and needed now," the governors wrote in a separate letter.

The fight is largely over money. For two years, Pentagon budget officials have tried to slash funding for state drug-fighting operations, citing the financial strain of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And military officials say governors could pay for their own Guard units.

But governors contend that securing the border is a federal responsibility.

Paul McHale, Gates's assistant secretary for homeland defense until early this year, said the broader worry is strategic. "The real concern is . . . at some point a temporary mission becomes permanent," he said. "Do it four or five times over a decade, and the political and military repercussions are likely negative."
---------------------------------------------------------

Feds squabbling over military’s border role

Policing of U.S.-Mexico boundary becomes interagency ‘food fight’

http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-917162.html#917162