Contributor
Ray
Haynes
Mr.
Haynes is an Assembly member representing Riverside and
Temecula.
He serves on the Appropriations and Budget Committees. [go to
Assembly Member Haynes
website at California Assembly][go to Haynes index]
Budget
Solution—Year One
Hard
lessons
from the Gray Era...
[Ray
Haynes] 8/10/04
From 1999 to
2002, I wrote articles showing the state was headed for fiscal
disaster. It was increasing spending far faster than the economy was growing.
In fact, in my articles, The Perfect Budget Storm and The Budget
that Ate California, written in May and July of 2001, I predicted massive budget deficits
within the following two years.
At the time I made the predictions, experts were saying that
I was crazy. No recession was coming, they said, revenue was expected
to hit $82 billion in the 2001-02 budget year. The state could
justify a huge increase in spending, from $66 billion to $79 billion
in that one year, without consequence.
Those experts were wrong. Governor Davis and members of the Legislature
knew by November 2001 that revenue predictions were going to fall
short. A recession was in full swing, a recession that had started
in January 2001, and the large capital gains upon which the big
spenders in the capitol had relied to fuel the growth of government
had dissipated. It was certainly no surprise to me when we were
being faced with massive deficits.
But the state kept spending. Governor Gray Davis,
in the mode that cost him his job, simply ignored the crisis.
The situation
exploded, going from a $28 billion problem in 2001-02 to $35 billion
in 02-03. To fix the problem, Governor Davis borrowed—and
borrowed and borrowed and borrowed. He told Treasurer Phil Angelides
to go out and refinance what the state had already borrowed, so
that the state wouldn’t have to make payments for two years.
Angelides gleefully accepted the challenge without complaint.
Things continued to deteriorate, but, undeterred, Davis and his
leftist friends continued their spendthrift ways. Angelides did
not complain, continuing to help them borrow their way through
the problem. Republicans proposed spending cuts, since state spending
had increased 41% in three short years. Democrats wanted tax increases,
even though revenue had actually increased by 28% overall during
that same period. Spending continued.
Davis lost his job to the recall, and Governor
Schwarzenegger proposed fixes to the spending excesses of the
Davis years. The
Democrats in the Legislature demurred. Finally, after seven months
of wrangling, an agreement was reached. It reduced the $48 billion
deficit problem that Davis left to $5 billion. It didn’t
raise taxes, and it actually did some real cutting. It did not
however solve all of the problems that it took 5 years for Davis,
Angelides, and their Democrat cohorts in the Legislature to create.
The Governor’s original budget in January proposed over $3
billion in savings, which would have solved almost all of the problems.
The Democrats insisted on another $4 billion in spending. The Governor
agreed to $1.3 billion, increasing the out-year problem by about
$3 billion.
Because the Democrats didn’t get to raise taxes, they are
now complaining that the budget borrows too much, and creates large
out-year deficits. Their “out-year” deficits were $48
billion. This Governor reduced them to $4 billion, even with the
Democrats’ spending demands. I believe that the end of next
year’s budget process will eliminate that spending gap completely.
That being said, California’s government is still too big,
too bureaucratic, and too unresponsive to the needs of its people.
The Governor, to address those problems, has proposed the California
Performance Review. Their report calls for sweeping reform that
could save the state as much as $32 billion over the next five
years. Let’s see how the Democrats, who now complain loudly
about the Governor’s budget, respond to the challenge of
a more lean, more effective state government.CRO
§
|