Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jerry Brown, Democrats agree on new budget plan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
alp227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 02:01 AM
Original message
Jerry Brown, Democrats agree on new budget plan
Source: San Francisco Chronicle

Sacramento --

After months of attempting to find a bipartisan solution to California's budget deficit, Gov. Jerry Brown on Monday said he is no longer seeking Republican support as he and Democratic leaders announced a plan to balance the budget that will be voted on today.

The move comes less than two weeks after Brown shocked Democrats by vetoing their plan to close the remaining $9.6 billion deficit, a plan he called inadequate. The new proposal relies largely on billions of dollars in previously unanticipated new revenue, but no additional taxes.

If that revenue does not materialize, K-12 schools, higher education and social services would be hit with deeper cuts midyear.

(...)

This Democratic proposal needs only a majority of the Legislature to approve it and if Brown signs it, lawmakers will begin receiving their salaries, a spokesman for Controller John Chiang said.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/0...



Meanwhile, President Obama continues desperately to compromise with the Party of No. Maybe he needs to go golfing with Jerry Brown instead of John Boehner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 02:14 AM
Response to Original message
1. Jerry Brown's legislature has Democratic majorities.
And he doesn't have a filibuster to deal with, either.

You want to tell me how Jerry Brown could have pulled off this feat if he had a Republican House to deal with?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
existentialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 02:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. You have a valid point, but
until the beginning of 2011 Obama had Democratic majorities in both houses too.

I concede that even so he still had to deal with filibusters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. He always had the filibuster to deal with because Lieberman
was an Independent then, not a Democrat -- and he was usually voting with the Rethugs. That was the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 06:59 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. Remind me how Lieberman was stripped of his prized chair of Homeland Security and
please also describe how hard Obama fought to get Lieberman to vote for Cloture.

LBJ used to call both Democrats and Republicans in Congress on a regular basis, knowing what made them tick and, more importantly, how to get their votes.

Yes, LBJ had larger majorities in Congress--in theory. However, the split between Southern Democrats and Dixiecrats, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, Democrats from the rest of the nation, made today's split seem non-existent. Despite that, LBJ not only managed to get Great Society legislation passed, he also managed to get the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed.

Besides, Bush did okay from 2006-2008 and he had a hell of a lot more than one holdout to deal with.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. Seeing as you are so unhappy now with Obama have you tried borrowing
Docs DeLorean and traveling back to 1964?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tclambert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 05:55 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. It's possible Jerry Brown learned from Obama's unsuccessful attempts at bipartisanship.
It sounds like he originally hoped for a different result in California, but after a few months saw the same obstructionism, and then acted accordingly. It took Obama much longer to accept that truth.

Or maybe it's a character issue. Obama sense of outrage seems atrophied from lack of use. Where's the anger? Where's the fire? If Republicans are doing things to hurt your country, that should make you angry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. No, Brown does not have to compromise because the
Edited on Tue Jun-28-11 10:41 AM by cstanleytech
dems have majority control for now, of course its a risky move for him and the dems though because if the budget plan fails and the state goes deeper under and doesnt recover the republicans will largely have clean hands come the next election and the state might go red, hopefully though that wont happen and the budget plan will work out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
20. Dems didn't really try to fight filibusters
Got the feeling that Obama really supported them because then he could more easily let the repugs block the progressive and workable options to improve the country. Must have bi-partisanship you know, that's the most important thing in the world, not helping put people to work, fairness or anything like that, but keep the rich satisfied.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PoliticAverse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 02:35 AM
Response to Original message
3. So cutting K-12 schools, higher education and social services is a good thing? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Proposition 13 is destroying that state.
And so is another bill requiring supermajorities on tax votes.

I hope nothing like that comes to your state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. The whole Initiative process
has been a disaster for CA. Prop 13 was one of the worst. People rarely read how much these initiatives will cost the state. It's more like they think it sounds like a good idea so they vote for it. Then it becomes mandated and the state has to pay for it.

I think the last initiative I voted yes on was the decriminalization of marijuana. That would have saved the state money but the fear mongers won out on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. The California Initiative
Edited on Tue Jun-28-11 11:59 AM by xxqqqzme
process needs to be revamped. One of the contributors to the state's economic woes is initiatives. When incoming revenues are under an initiative mandate to go to certain agencies or departments, there is little that can be done.

Recently signatures were being gathered for the '1% on 1%' - a 1% tax increase on the richest 1% but the generated revenue will be yet another mandate. Although I agree K through 14 needs the money, it only underlines the existing problem.

And we need to restrict out of state money from flooding the state w/ those special interest initiatives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mz Pip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Like all the Yes on 8 money
that came from out of state. I don't know how that would fly though. I suspect SCOTUS would say that Free Speech has no state boarders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. Did you read the entire article? Those are by far not the only things he cut and
Edited on Tue Jun-28-11 07:12 AM by No Elephants
he cut them to avoid even deeper cuts.



"Going forward, we do expect more revenues in the budget year coming up, but in case that's overly optimistic, we do have severe trigger cuts that will be triggered and go into effect. And those are real," Brown said.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/0...



Given California's laws, Brown does not have too many options.

At some point, Californians are going to have to face the reality that goods and services cost money when government buys them, same as when any individual buys them, and prices increase steadily.

Until then, the Governor will be in a bind, whether s/he is a Democrat or a Republican. If Brown does better than Arnold, that will at least be an improvement.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. Hey, you be nice to the governator or he might time travel
and hunt your younger self multiple times rewriting history each time and eventually creating skynet though the 1st and 2nd movie will be the only good movies for the series and the rest wont be nearly as good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
18. you can put that firmly on the repukes!
they are the ones that won't allow a vote for higher taxes. jerry gave them a choice and they took it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 06:45 AM
Response to Original message
7. Republicons are determined to mess up America
That's for sure...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
10. You do realize that
obama has no choice but to try compromise as he doesnt have the votes in congress to do a budget like many of us would probably prefer and that Brown can just tell the republicans right now to go take a hike as the dems have a majority in california right now, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alp227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. but Republicans can be obstructive in California legislature
when it comes to the issue of taxes. In this case Brown tried and decided to abandon a bipartisan-passed budget.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cstanleytech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Obama though
Edited on Tue Jun-28-11 10:26 PM by cstanleytech
hasnt the same choice since the congress at the federal level is under control of the republicans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kelly1mm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
17. Does everyone here really understand this? There are no increases in taxes in the CA budget.
Only spending cuts, with more spending cut automatically to occur if 'increased projected revenues' do not materialize? Due to CA's Prop 13, you need a 2/3 majority to raise taxes. You only need a simple majority to make cuts. The Governor was trying to get a deal with new revenue and some spending cuts. Now it is all spending cuts.

I am sure the R's would love it if Obama and the Democrats were forced to balance the federal budget using only cuts, and no new taxes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingofalldems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-28-11 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
19. Kick and rec before someone tries to change the subject.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Aug 27th 2014, 11:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC