By Guthrie “Guff” Worth
Great! California has a “balanced budget” ? sort of! With the line up of government figures in Sacramento, we Californians probably got what we deserve! Problem is that most Californians have little or no knowledge of what the budget consists of or the process by which it is set. What has been affirmed is the fact that in terms of finance, we do not live in a democracy, we are represented by people who are more driven by politics, influence groups, and philosophy, etc., than by the good of the state as a system. Beyond that, these people don”t bother to provide goals, “untouchables,” reasons, priorities and such. It is as if they feel the people who vote are unable to understand what they are doing ? allegedly, for us. We need a whole lot of attitude adjustment ? both the politicians and the “people.” Putting a lot more emphasis on economics, cost/benefit analyses, and reality, rather than emotion and political implications.
For example, I have no idea as to the mission and goals of the various state budget areas as health! Last year some level of service must have been identified and paid for. Do these levels carry with them any commitment? Average expenditures from ”00-”01 through ”04-”05 were $78 billion; per capita expenditure was $2,688. This year total expenditures are budgeted at $84.5 billion and per capita expenditure is $2,301. I would dearly love to have someone explain these known figures. I suspect the total population of California has grown some since the budget of ”02/”03. That might explain part of the 8 percent growth in expenditures, but it surely cannot explain the 17 percent drop in the per capita level. We need far more transparency and explanation! In California the combination of tax and fee reductions seem to have cost the state dearly. At the average per capita rate of ”00 through ”05 ($2,688), California would have had some $104.6 billion to work with! These figures may have perfectly reasonable explanations, but it surely looks weird!
One has to admit, though, that the budget process has shown considerable, if not realistic, levels of such things as ingenuity and sleight-of-hand. My favorite of all the “finagles” is the “saving” (at least for this year) of almost $2 billion by moving the June 30 pay date to the first day of next year”s budget. Please convince me that this move will not become permanent!
The state, politicians and people, must start to make some hard, distasteful decisions concerning the extent of services, priorities on which to base the rationing of services (particularly in the area of health) where there are insufficient resources for all, on the fact that, for a lot of purposes, all people are not equal, when the state should undertake studies to promote more efficient operation, at what point should the various lobbyists, unions, and other groups” influence and contributions be limited … on and on!
And there are so many other areas we should consider and question. Such as, what have we done that 30 percent of people on welfare in the United States are in California?; is health care (medical, vision, dental) a right or a privilege for people who live in the United States?; do indigents as homeless have a right to public support?; do people who have been productive all their lives ? until a tragedy drains them ? have a right to security? ? and so on. A worry for many is that if they make a “right” decision, they will incur the responsibility of paying the bill!
The basic problem is that objectivity too often upsets the status quo, special interest groups and lobbyists. And, of course, most of us are cheap hypocrites who seem to have difficulty putting our money where our mouth is!
Guff Worth is a Lakeport curmudgeon by choice.
