The Governor has attempted to blunt the monetary impact of stark budget cuts in salaries and benefits to state workers by extending the life of some “temporary” tax measures that have expired or will shortly expire. At the same time, the Governor has been seeking support for a realignment proposal, changing the mechanism for delivery of public services in California by shifting the burden of rowing oars over to county government (or other local municipality, as applicable).
To place the taxing proposal on a ballot for the people to extend or reinstitute taxes requires some support from Republicans in both the Senate and the Assembly. California voters have rejected recent tax proposals, so it is not clear that even if a bipartisan bill is passed to put the measure on the ballot, that it will then be approved by voters. More likely, it will be defeated.
A governmental restructuring by shifting programs over to local government may still be passed by the voters (it is a constitutional revision), but without a funding mechanism. California counties have expressed concern that merely shifting state burdens mandated by federal law, without additional tax revenues may create more unfunded mandates that are really federal entitlement programs. Counties are not eager to shoulder that burden without a clear picture of what changes may occur in the future to increase the cost of such mandates.
It is interesting that a Democrat governor would suggest that social programs mandated by federal law or regulations should shift over to counties or other local governments. It is understandable that counties are reluctant to embrace realignment without practical and predictable good-faith funding mechanisms. It would be ironic indeed if state burdens were lessened by realignment, only to free up tax revenues for more state programs and to fund demands of state employees.
From the counties' perspective, health and human services programs are underfunded already. Child welfare services programs are in jeopardy, according to the organization that represents counties in lobbying state government. That organization also is concerned with cuts in CalWORKs grants, funds that provide a mechanism for welfare recipients to move into jobs. The focus on providing transition to jobs is important, but it does not address the fundamental issue in California, there are insufficient jobs for those already qualified and eager to work.
The task of dealing with offenders, both new and repeat, does not necessarily belong at the county level. Pushing offenders back to the counties is not a workable solution. Redeploying state resources in a meaningful way, coupled with increased attention to social issues for underprivileged and underserved communities would be a better use of time and financial resources.
Business again reminds government at all levels: increasing the tax burdens on California businesses and residents only promotes the economic development programs of neighboring states. Driving small businesses to other states does not help solve fiscal and social problems.
It is unfortunate that budget woes and the inevitable clamoring of stakeholders to save their pet projects, programs, and vital activities are taking away the legislature and governor's focus on creating an atmosphere for job creation and economic stimulus. The hard work of simply reducing costs to reflect revenue projections should be accomplished quickly and within the statutory time limit, so that lawmakers can focus on getting Californians back to work.
To place the taxing proposal on a ballot for the people to extend or reinstitute taxes requires some support from Republicans in both the Senate and the Assembly. California voters have rejected recent tax proposals, so it is not clear that even if a bipartisan bill is passed to put the measure on the ballot, that it will then be approved by voters. More likely, it will be defeated.
A governmental restructuring by shifting programs over to local government may still be passed by the voters (it is a constitutional revision), but without a funding mechanism. California counties have expressed concern that merely shifting state burdens mandated by federal law, without additional tax revenues may create more unfunded mandates that are really federal entitlement programs. Counties are not eager to shoulder that burden without a clear picture of what changes may occur in the future to increase the cost of such mandates.
It is interesting that a Democrat governor would suggest that social programs mandated by federal law or regulations should shift over to counties or other local governments. It is understandable that counties are reluctant to embrace realignment without practical and predictable good-faith funding mechanisms. It would be ironic indeed if state burdens were lessened by realignment, only to free up tax revenues for more state programs and to fund demands of state employees.
From the counties' perspective, health and human services programs are underfunded already. Child welfare services programs are in jeopardy, according to the organization that represents counties in lobbying state government. That organization also is concerned with cuts in CalWORKs grants, funds that provide a mechanism for welfare recipients to move into jobs. The focus on providing transition to jobs is important, but it does not address the fundamental issue in California, there are insufficient jobs for those already qualified and eager to work.
The task of dealing with offenders, both new and repeat, does not necessarily belong at the county level. Pushing offenders back to the counties is not a workable solution. Redeploying state resources in a meaningful way, coupled with increased attention to social issues for underprivileged and underserved communities would be a better use of time and financial resources.
Business again reminds government at all levels: increasing the tax burdens on California businesses and residents only promotes the economic development programs of neighboring states. Driving small businesses to other states does not help solve fiscal and social problems.
It is unfortunate that budget woes and the inevitable clamoring of stakeholders to save their pet projects, programs, and vital activities are taking away the legislature and governor's focus on creating an atmosphere for job creation and economic stimulus. The hard work of simply reducing costs to reflect revenue projections should be accomplished quickly and within the statutory time limit, so that lawmakers can focus on getting Californians back to work.