Showing posts with label Jerry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jerry. Show all posts

Friday, October 26, 2012

California Governor Brown Accuses Proposition 30 Opponents of Being "Orwellian," Needs to Look in Mirror


California Governor Jerry Brown is such a hoot!  In a bit of apparent irony, Governor Brown accuses opponents of his Proposition 30 tax hikes of using "Orwellian propaganda."


"Orwellian" comes from George Orwell, the British author of a number of great books that are as pertinent today as when they were originally written.
  • In 1984, the country "Oceania" is tyrannically ruled by The Party and its Thought Police.
  • In Animal Farm, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Which political party holds nearly 2-to-1 majorities in BOTH Houses of the California ("Oceania"?) Legislature?  Which party holds EVERY state-wide elected office in California?  The answer to both questions is The Party, also known as the California Democratic Party.

Which two of the biggest political spenders in California ("Oceania") politics--who also just happen to be major donors to Governor Brown's campaign and his political party--support Proposition 30 tax hikes with large donations.  As a complete coincidence, of course, Proposition 30 would indirectly funnel more money to these same donors.

Which group was it that, until early October, had a $40 MILLION spending advantage over any opposition to his Proposition 30 tax hikes?  Even after big contributions from opponents, Jerry Brown and his cronies still enjoy a significant spending advantage.
http://votersedge.org/california/ballot-measures/2012/november/prop-30/funding


Who is it that purposely imposed cuts to public education and public safety to spur voters to pass his Proposition 30 tax hikes?  Of course, the Governor bristles at any mention of the word "extortion."

Who is it that created a tax hike that derives most of its revenues from just 2-3% of taxpayers who already pay the highest tax rates and who already pay roughly half of California's income taxes?

Who is it that specifically "electioneered" his ballot initiative to circumvent the 2/3rds majority requirement in the Legislature to raise taxes?

Who is it that, despite his heavy-handed use of official power to pass Proposition 30, calls the opposition "Orwellian"?

Governor Brown, if you want to see "Orwellian," look in the mirror!

Monday, October 22, 2012

Proposition 30 "Trigger Cuts" Threat to K-12 Public Education Adds Up to a Whole Lot of Nothing


If California voters don't pass Proposition 30, Governor Brown forecasts dire consequence that "K-12 schools will lose about $4.5 billion" via the "trigger cuts" provision the California budget that he helped create.

Are these really cuts?  As will all prognostications from politicians, it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

Let's see what this really means.

Please point your trusty web browser at the California Budget web site.  In specific, find the document  California 2012-2013 Budget Summary Charts (May Revision).  Turn to page 4 and examine Figure SUM-06, duplicated below.
http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/Revised/BudgetSummary/SummaryCharts.pdf


Find the table entry "K-12 Education" (highlighted above) and notice that the 2012-13 budget year ADDS another $4,502 million (or $4.5 BILLION) in NEW SPENDING (highlighted in red) over last year (2011-12), a 13.2% INCREASE.

If those pesky voters don't pass Proposition 30 tax hikes, let's calculate the net effect on last year's K-12 spending.  I know that the math is difficult, but please try to keep up.  What is $4.5 BILLION minus $4.5 BILLION?  If I'm doing my math correctly, that's pretty close to $0.


This means that a no vote on Proposition 30 keeps K-12 spending roughly the same as last year (and we remember how the kids ran rampant through the streets last year, right?).  It doesn't INCREASE K-12 education by $4.5 BILLION nor does it DECREASE it by $4.5 BILLION.  That's a very much different claim than a $4.5B "cut" to K-12 education.

Is Governor Brown's claim deceptive.  I'll let you decide.

Could we do better by our kids than what the Legislature provided in the budget?  No doubt.  Public education should be a priority.  However, the state has too many other spending obligations that soak up scarce resources.  California will spend $5.4 BILLION to service our debt on General Fund bonds with $3.8 BILLION going just to interest.  See "State of California: Debt Affordability Report (October 2012)", page 22.  And those aren't the only bond obligations!  REFORM is the solution, not tax hikes.

Me? I'm voting NO ON PROPOSITION 30.  Here's why.

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

California Higher Education: Not Enough Support from Taxpayers or Not Charging Enough Tuition?

There are plenty of complaints about the fast-rising costs of tuition and fees at California's many fine public institutions of higher education.  Due to crumbling tax revenues and annual multi-billion dollar budget cuts, California has imposed massive increases on tuition and fees for in-state students.  Due to budget cuts, there are fewer slots available in required classes, lengthening the time required to graduate.

I have a crazy and controversial question:  Is the problem a lack of funding at these institutions due to a decrease in tax revenues or are California's public institutions of higher education simply not charging enough tuition and fees? I recently came across a benchmark study by Washington State, by a group called the Washington Higher Education Coordinating Board.  The study lists the cost of in-state tuition for students for 47 states across the United States by type of institution.

Flagship Universities and Colleges

California boasts some of the world's best public universities.  The University of California Berkeley (UC Berkeley) is affiliated with more Nobel Prizes than most nations.  Despite some of the nation's highest cost-of-living expenses, expensive real estate, high taxes, and high housing costs, the in-state tuition for California residents at one of these world-class facilities ranks 14th highest in the nation--above the national average, but nearly 35% less than Pennsylvania--the nation's highest.


Comprehensive Colleges and Universities

While California has a few world-renowned public universities, it also has a broad network of excellent mainstream colleges and universities.  Despite high living costs and a whopping 26.2% increase from the prior year, California had only the nation's 35th highest (12th lowest) tuition  and fees for residents attending these facilities.  The 26.2% increase was the 2nd biggest year-to-year increase, second only to Georgia.  California residents tend to remember the massive increase and likely don't know the great value they receive in reduced tuition compared to residents in other states.


Community Colleges

Besides its flagship universities and comprehensive colleges and universities, California also enjoys a vast network of community colleges.  These facilities often provide needed vocational training and skills building necessary to become successful in today's job market.  They also offer a way for low-income students to pass required classes before transferring to one of California's mainstream facilities.  Where do tuition and fees ranks for California residents?  California has the nation's lowest-cost tuition and fees for residents studying at community colleges even after a 30% year-to-year increase--the third fastest increase after Georgia and West Virginia.


How does California maintain such low tuition and fees for residents?  Because the costs of public higher education is subsidized by California taxpayers.


To combat the funding shortfalls and the increases in tuition and fees, Governor Jerry Brown and various teachers unions propose to increase California's already high income taxes on upper-income taxpayers and to raise the state sales tax for all Californian's--already the nation's highest.




The question remains: Do we impose even higher taxes on California taxpayers to further subsidize our public institutions of higher learner or--given the evidence that California's public institutions are generally  priced below the national average--do we allow additional increases to tuition and fees?