For some time now I have been debating whether I am a Moderate Independent Leaning Republican or a Moderate Republican Leading Independent. The latest battle over the budget here in California has led me to question the subject again as the hard core conservatives within the GOP have held the state hostage to their own agendas. About the only thing that keeps me from jumping is that the other side is equally troublesome on many other issues.
As most of you know the state is now in the midst of a months long battle over the state budget and the real problem in getting to a resolution has been the steadfast refusal of the GOP to even consider the smallest tax increase.
Let me make it clear from the start that I am no fan of taxes. While I may lean moderate or even liberal on some social and foreign policy issues, I am a strong fiscal conservative, wary of deficits and suspicious of spending and tax increases.
I also tend to trust the average person more than the average legislator when it comes to spend money and would prefer to keep as much possible in the pockets of the people.
However I am also a realist who managed to pass 3rd grade math class and realize that when you are dealing with the kind of figures facing the state right now that you are not going to close the gap with just spending cuts.
For those who aren’t familiar with the details they can be found here. As these numbers show the current projections are that the state will take in about $ 86 billion dollars for the 2009-2010 budget year and is projected to spend about $ 111 billion.
In addition we have $ 14 billion of debt carried over from last year so that results in net revenue of $ 86 billion versus obligations of $ 125 billion or roughly $ 39 billion in shortages.
To close the gap with spending cuts only would require reducing $ 39 billion out of $ 111 billion in spending or cuts of roughly 35.1%. While I certainly agree that there is a lot of waste in government these days I suspect even the most aggressive knife would find it hard to cut EVERY state program by more than 1/3.
And of course that is not the numbers we have to work with. As shown in the same charts at the above link, close to $ 40 billion of the budget is Proposition 98 spending, which is for public schools and is, by law, not subject to review.
That would mean that the cut of $ 39 billion would have to come out of $ 71 billion in spending, which works out to 55% in cuts from every other program which basically covers roads, police and the like, many areas where you are unlikely to find much favor in cutting.
Also while I couldn’t tie down exact numbers a portion of the spending (and an increasingly large one) are tied to interest payment on bonds and other borrowing from the past which are also pretty much not open to cuts.
The current budget proposal calls for $ 2 in spending cuts for every $ 1 in tax hikes. For me that does not seem to be an unreasonable sharing of the burdens. If some of our readers would like to explain how they think the numbers could work I’d be glad to hear from them here. And please do not simply respond with ‘cut waste’, I am asking for some details on how you expect to close this gap.
On the off chance that there are some members of the legislature out there who would like to explain how they plan to resolve the debt without any tax increases I am sure that Joe would be glad to provide a Guest Voice for them to post their thoughts here.
A decent response might just persuade me why I should remain a member of an increasingly isolating party.
Cartoon by Daryl Cagle, MSNBC.com.
The above cartoon is copyrighted and licensed to appear on TMV. All Rights Reserved. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited.