7.03.2009

[Video] Sarah Palin Resigns as Alaska's Governor

Sarah Palin, the former Republican vice-presidential candidate who electrified the GOP campaign last year, will resign as Alaska's governor later this month.

She built strong support among conservative
Republicans as John McCain's running mate last year, and now says she will step down in three weeks because she can contribute more away from politics.

As you can imagine there is a great deal of speculation as to the reasons behind her decision, but in the clip below you can hear her in her own words. The crux of her logic seems to be that she’s quitting because it’s in Alaska’s best interest, not her own. If it turns out this was nothing more than a way of clearing her schedule to start early on running for president, her primary opponents will never let her hear the end of it.



Update via HotAir: Real Clear Politics has video of Mitchell’s report, including the detail that Palin’s allegedly told her top backers to go ahead and commit to other candidates for 2012. Bill Kristol thinks resigning now could actually be a bold gambit to free herself up for an intense presidential campaign, but I think she’s following more of a Nixonian strategy here. I.e. it could be she’s burned out on politics and dispirited by all the garbage she’s put up with and wants to get away at an opportune moment.

Then again, perhaps she's simply a mother of five who has decided instead of cranking through the political wheelhouse for another term, she wants to take the time to be with her family and her youngest son Trig who suffers from Down Syndrome.

One thing is for sure, her announcement leaves a great deal of questions and speculation.

7.02.2009

Pelosi-Reid Congress Increase Travel Costs By 50% During Recession

The Pelosi-Reid Congress is not only spending more of your money and giving themselves raises and bonuses they are also spending more on exotic excursions than ever before. The Wall Street Journal reported:

Spending by lawmakers on taxpayer-financed trips abroad has risen sharply in recent years, a Wall Street Journal analysis of travel records shows, involving everything from war-zone visits to trips to exotic spots such as the Galápagos Islands.

The spending on overseas travel is up almost tenfold since 1995, and has nearly tripled since 2001, according to the Journal analysis of 60,000 travel records. Hundreds of lawmakers traveled overseas in 2008 at a cost of about $13 million. That's a 50% jump since Democrats took control of Congress two years ago.

The cost of so-called congressional delegations, known among lawmakers as "codels," has risen nearly 70% since 2005, when an influence-peddling scandal led to a ban on travel funded by lobbyists, according to the data.
Of course, this would only be shocking news if the reverse was true.

Exit Thought:
Aren't these the same hypocrites who scolded auto execs for taking private jets to DC?!

[Video] Rep. Tom McCLintock (R-CA) Deconstructs Cap & Trade

The following is a speech given on the House floor last Friday by California Rep. Tom McClintock, after the passage of the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade bill. The speech is insightful, well constructed, and makes a comparison to the history of the Great Depression many of us have not heard before.

McClintock first discusses California's climate change legislation of 2007 and how it drastically deepened the state's financial woes, and then compares cap-and-trade to the disastrous Smoot-Hawley Tariff that sent the country into the Great Depression. It also doesn't hurt that he casually rips apart the claims of global warming alarmists used as a reason to support the bill.




You can see transcripts of his other speeches here.

7.01.2009

Meltdown 101: California's budgetary troubles

California began its new fiscal year at midnight, and celebrated by taking billions in budget solutions off the table.

So how exactly did California get into this mess, and what are state lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger doing to try to get out of it? The
Associated Press gets most of the questions and answers right:

Q: How big is the state's budgetary mess?
A: California's $24.3 billion deficit is roughly a quarter of the general fund, which is the state's main bank account for paying its daily expenses. For perspective, lawmakers could eliminate all funding for state prisons and the higher education system and still not save nearly enough money to address the shortfall.


The budget gap is the biggest of any state.


Q: How did the state get into this mess?
A:
California's problem is partly of its own making. (pay close attention to the first part of the answer)

Lawmakers and voters have agreed to higher levels of spending over the years without identifying a dedicated funding source. Over time, that means the state's general fund has had more obligations than it can afford to pay.

Because of caps on local property taxes adopted three decades ago, the state budget has come to rely heavily on revenue from capital gains and personal income taxes. Both have plunged over the past two years.

The state has its highest jobless rate (11.5 percent) in modern times, and personal income has declined statewide for the first time since the Great Depression. As a result, personal income tax revenue coming to the state plunged 34 percent for the first five months of the year.

During an unusual February session, Schwarzenegger and lawmakers thought they had solved the budget deficit through the middle of 2010. Since then, rapidly declining tax revenue put that budget package out of balance shortly after Schwarzenegger signed it, leading to the current deficit.

Q: When the federal government can't balance its budget, it just operates with a deficit. Can't California do the same thing?
A: No. Under its constitution, California must balance its budget every year. The federal government also can print money, something states cannot do. The main options available to states in lean economic times are spending cuts, tax hikes and borrowing money.


Q: What happens if California can't balance its budget?
A: The state controller will begin issuing IOUs to college students who are expecting grants, welfare recipients, and private companies that contract with the state to provide a wide array of services. Counties that administer social services also would not get paid, nor would taxpayers who are still expecting refunds.

The IOUs are intended as a cash-saving move until lawmakers pass a balanced budget.
In normal years, California can take out short-term loans so it has enough cash to pay its bills until spring, when the bulk of its tax revenue starts flowing. This year, it expects to need $7 billion to $9 billion in such loans, but the state treasurer's office says it will not even try to sell those bonds unless lawmakers balance the budget.

Lenders are unlikely to go along with such loans if California has a $24 billion deficit and no credible plan to close the shortfall, because they will be worried that the state will not be able to meet its financial obligations. That has led to the immediate cash crisis.

Q: Are there any other ways Californians will be affected?
A: Lack of a balanced budget is likely to mean higher lending costs to pay back all sorts of bonds that already have been approved, which lead to difficult budget decisions in the future about more spending cuts or tax increases. For example, a credit rating downgrade on $53.3 billion of unsold infrastructure bonds would increase long-term borrowing costs by $7.5 billion.
Schwarzenegger also has ordered 235,000 state workers to take three days off a month without pay if there is no balanced budget by Wednesday, a move that would reduce available staff at state offices. The three furlough days will reduce the workers' pay by 14 percent.

As of Tuesday afternoon, Democrats and Republicans remained at an impasse. Democrats want to moderate Schwarzenegger's cuts to welfare and health care programs for the poor, but Republicans refuse to go along with tax increases to make up the difference.

Q: Is there anything California can do to avoid this problem in the future?
The AP's answer is that California has had problems with balancing its budget for many years, in part because of its dependence on personal income tax and capital gains taxes, which rely on a rising stock market.

As we have pointed out time and time and time again, California does not have a revenue problem it has a spending problem.

Remember: If, since 1990, state spending increases had been held to the inflation rate plus population growth, the state would have a $15 billion surplus instead of a $42 billion budget deficit.

Newer Posts Older Posts