RC: Works for me! I think that the new triend of real spending cuts is a good thing.

I also think that there is light at the end of the IRAQ tunnel as well. I think that we will be out of there within the next Five years unless a Democrat wins the Presidency in 2008. I will leave it there.

Another thing to note is that those vaunted "Moderate" Republican Senators sold us down the road again and Cheney had to break the tie to pass a budget with real cuts. I will lay odds that those "Moderate" Republican Senators will be a roadblock yet again... (sigh)

That being said, budget pressures to maintain those operations will subside.

So I think that extending the tax cuts makes sense. I also think that letting the tax cuts sunset will be a political disaster for those that want to see them expire in 2011. Time will tell.

I can not wait for the comments on this post.

The AP Story Follows...

Link

Posted by the California Republican Assembly Sargeant At Arms, Aaron F. Park.

Past CRA President Steve Frank has a column that discusses McClintock's recent letter to the CRP and the need to stand on principle. Read it here.

California Club for Growth President Tony Strickland has authored a piece criticizing the Governor's bond proposals. See it here.

RC: Be still my heart - Kevin "Arnold" McCarthy, our Assembly Minority leader is crossing horns with the governator!? Could we be having a breakthrough in the Republican Caucus!?

-----

Plan offers option to bonds

Republicans propose allocating state funds to fix infrastructure, avoiding debt under Schwarzenegger plan.

By Clea Benson – Sacramento Bee Capitol Bureau
January 26, 2006

Unhappy with the amount of debt that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants the state to take on for public works projects, Assembly Republicans said Wednesday they were introducing their own plan to pay for construction with funds set aside from the state budget every year.

Assembly Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield, characterized the proposal as a complement to Schwarzenegger's Strategic Growth Plan, a recommendation to issue $68 billion in bonds over the next decade for everything from water systems to roads and schools.

McCarthy's bill, introduced Wednesday as Assembly Constitutional Amendment 27, would instead earmark 1 percent of state revenues for roads, university construction and water projects, starting in 2008. That would enable the state to pay for almost $36 billion in infrastructure projects without having to make interest payments, McCarthy said.

"You'll build more, you'll build now and you'll pay less," he said.

RC: I think we have just seen a breakthrough! LINK

Posted by CRA Sargeant at Arms, Aaron F. Park

Today's San Diego Union Tribune says that conservatives' disappointment with him puts him in a bind because we were so loyal during the special election. He does say "thanks". See the article here.

You have got to be kidding.

His thank you is Susan Kennedy, more Democratic judges, big bonds, a PUC tax, a Water tax and raising the minimum wage. This is only a few.

Message to the Governor:

We supported you, because it was the right thing to do. If this is how you show "thanks", please stop. California would better off.

I just got an e-mail from the Runners about Jessica's Law.

They have 400,000 signatures as of today, and $1,000,000 in the bank.

Why couldn't the partisan Moonbats in the State Legislature pass this!? This is $1,000,000 that is wasted that should be in the coffers of McClintock, Poochigian and Strickland.

Could it be that the partisan communists that infest our state legislature know this? Maybe they tubed this on purpose knowing that the Republican porponents would go to the ballot with this bill?

It smacks of a comspiracy theory, but I can not conceive of a mind that would oppose legislation like this that makes soooo much sense! Your thoughts?

Posted by the CRA Sargeant at Arms, Aaron F. Park

With all the reminiscing in recent weeks over the ten year anniversary of theAssembly Republican Majority, I couldn't resist commenting on the most glaring irony of the reunion held earlier this month. I find it astounding that Assembly Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy would have the audacity to co-host a fond look back at the hard fought majority of which we were robbed a full year,thanks to a handful of GOP sellouts.

Kevin McCarthy, as most political insiders are aware, is a key cog in Kern County's Abernathy-Thomas-McCarthy political machine. Kevin's political partners, of course, are Congressman Bill Thomas and the Abernathy family, who run the local political machine out of Western Pacific Research.

The most frustrating part of the road to the Assembly Republican Majority, for those of us who walked precincts and sacrificed shoe leather, was the seemingly endless parade of Assembly Republican sell outs who sided with Willie Brown and thwarted our efforts; beginning with Paul Horcher, then Doris Allen, and finally Brian Setencich. As bad as they were, the Republican staff and consultants who aided them in their traitorous deeds made it that much worse.

So when I recall that Doris Allen was able to hire Mike Abernathy of the Kern County Abernathy family as a consultant in fighting off her recall, and Brian Setencich was aided by Western Pacific Research with media placement and phone banking in his failed attempts to cling to his ill-gotten power, I am amazed at Kevin McCarthy's involvement in the Assembly Republican Majority anniversary event.

While true-blue GOP volunteers gave up their hard earned dollars and tirelessly volunteered for long hours up and down the state to reclaim their rightful governing majority, the Abernathy-Thomas-McCarthy machine were doing their part to keep the traitors and sell outs in power. One dictionary defines the Yiddish term "chutzpah" as "utter nerve; effrontery." Kevin, you've got a lot of chutzpah.

This is a correct statement... read this and understand why!

If you are under 33 years of Age, Thank God You Are Alive!!!

RC: Recently, we marked the anniversary of Rowe. Vs. Wade. This was the landmark decision handed out by the barnacles that Franklin Delano Roosevelt appointed to the Supreme Court.

Somehow, in an intellectually vacuous decsion, they found a "Right" for a woman to murder her unborn child under the guise of "Choice".

I was born in 1971, therefore, I did not have to worry about being aborted. These clothes-hanger arguements are absurd as clothes-hanger abortions before RVW were the rare exception and not the rule. The activist court that FDR appointed saw some inalenible right to murder your unborn child in the constitution.

Since 1973 1/3(!), you heard me correctly... 1 out of 3 pregnancies have been murdered by abortion mills as a result of this decision.

Your Article comes here, but the bias of this article against the pro-life demonstrators does not justify this mass infanticide that has occurred since...

Article

This was posted by The California Republican Assembly Sargeant at Arms, Aaron F Park.

Before moving to the Governor's office, liberal Democrat Susan Kennedy started the process at the PUC to raise 3.2 BILLION dollars in taxes on every Californian ----at Arnold's request. Read all about in the article by past CRA President Steve Frank here. Another promise broken.

Also please read former CRP media sinner Karen Hanretty on the Governor over process and policy. A good read.

Our good friends at Accuracy in Media have great column exposing a reporter for The Los Angeles Times using a fake press release in a story. Their new ad campaign should be: The Los Angeles Times : Lazy AND Liberal. See the column here.

Thomas Del Beccaro, The Chairman of the County Chairman's Association has written more about this. Very good. Read it here.

Past CRA President Steve Frank opines on Sen. Maldonado's support for his support for this job killing bill. See it here.

As someone who has become a fitness buff and a weightlifting fanatic, part of my workouts are doing "Arnolds". An "Arnold" is an innovative routine to work your shoulders, it is basically a Military (Shoulder) Press where you rotate the dumbell 180 degrees during the motion to full extension of your arm.

Arnolds are a staple of every good athlete's workout.

In the weight room, Arnold was known as an innovator. Many athletes have drawn inspiration from Arnold.

I long for the days of the gargoyle sunglasses and the machine guns. The Arnold I want to remember is the larger-than-life action superhero that shot up everything around him and beat up what he missed. Growing up in the 80's (Arnold's heyday), seeing the political glass-jaw is killing me.

The Arnold I have seen since he has been in office is unfortunately an overhandled stuffed shirt. As a loyal Republican, I cringe as my governator makes one blunder after another. I am hoping that Arnold will find his core values and rest on those, including firing some of the factory-trained idiots that are advising him.

This is what defines the CRA in these trying times to be a Republican, we know where we stand, and we always have.

Does our Governator? Or will he go down in the history of failures like Gray Davis?

Arnold, find yourself quick or Governor Angelidies will decimate what's left of this state irregardless of any infastructure bond. States like Louisiana will start looking like an attractive option if we are not careful.

Contributed by CRA Sgt at Arms Aaron F. Park

The San Francisco Chronicle reports on the Governor's attendance at a MLK breakfast.

"Just as during his 2003 recall race, "He's becoming a Democrat again,'' said an
admiring San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, assessing the governor's political
instincts. "It's a good sign for him and a bad sign for the Democratic Party,''
Newsom said. "He gets it. He's learned his lesson. ... He's running back, not
even to the center -- I would say center-left.''

See the whole article here.

Proposition 22 defined marriage to the common sense definition one woman plus one man principle.

The Homosexual lobby has undermined that ideal through the legislature and the courts. Prop. 22's final case is going before the State Supreme Court. An editorial in the Gay And Lesbian Times says that the Governor's appointment of Carole Corrigan means that Court will make "same-sex marriage will be a reality in California within the year" See the editorial for your self here.

That is the title of an op-ed by Past CRA President and Past Chairman of the California Republican Party Mike Schroeder. Read it here.

Today the Governor proposed a 125.6 billion dollar budget. See the story here. While the Governor claims this budget is "on the path to fiscal responsibility" it really gives taxpayer a fat lip.

This budget has a deficit and an 8% increase in spending. In fact the legislatives analyst predicts budget shortfalls for FIVE YEARS. Sound like a good time for more borrowing? The plan doesn't take into account his almost 70 billion dollars in new bond debt he wants over the next ten years. Nor does it take into account the lost jobs resulting from his minimum wage increase proposal.

The Governor has abandoned any notion that he is a fiscal conservative. His budget and bond plans are hurting his campaign and the image of the Republican Party.

Below is Tom McClintock's review of the budget

January 10, 2006
Senator McClintock's Statement on the Governor's Budget Proposal for 2006-2007

“Today the Governor released his budget proposal for the 2006-2007 fiscal year.

“It projects general fund spending of $97.9 billion with income of $91.5 billion, for a general fund operating deficit of $6.4 billion. This brings the accumulated three year operating deficit to $9.8 billion.

“This deficit is funded entirely with borrowed funds from Proposition 57, approved by voters in 2004. Although the public was promised that this bond would only be used to pay for past deficits, it is in fact being used to cover deficits for 2004 ($0.6 billion), 2005 ($2.9 billion) and now 2006 ($6.4 billion).

“In November, the Legislative Analyst projected that if nothing were done to rein in spending, the 2006 budget would consume $95.1 billion. The governor proposes spending $2.8 billion above this figure.

“In the last three years, combined population and inflation will have grown 16 percent; revenues 19 percent; spending 25 percent. For the budget year, combined population and inflation will increase 4 percent; revenues 5 percent; spending 9 percent. Revenues continue to outpace inflation and population; spending continues to outpace revenues.

“I have always applied two fundamental tests to a budget: it must be balanced within existing revenues and it must contain a prudent reserve. The proposal as submitted to the legislature fails both tests.”

The California Republican Assembly is the conservative grassroots wing of the California Republican Party. The liberal element is represented by Carl Burton and the California Congress of Republican's (CCR).

Today CCR's goose stepping campaign on behalf of Arnold's Republican liberalism led them to try to deceive Republicans into thinking that CRA and in particular past president Steve Frank supports the Governor's Minimum wage increasing, General obligation bonding, junk food banning, fee raising, Red Chinese emulating vision for California. Here is their lie.

This is a flat out lie. See what Steve really said here and his demand for an apology here. Liberal Republicans have to sell their stuff by lying about where conservatives are on it.

John Fund in today's Political Dairy of the Wall Street Journal:
Santa Schwarzenegger

A year ago, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s State of the State address was a ringing call for reforms to curb the influence of public employee unions and restrain one of America's most bloated state governments. After untold millions of negative ads by those same unions and his own tactical mistakes led to the defeat of his reform agenda last November, the governor has now taken a political U-turn and decided that if he can’t lick his enemies he will join them.

The Terminator became a Pander Bear in yesterday’s State of the State speech. The centerpiece of the governor’s legislative agenda is $70 billion in new bond authority for an already heavily indebted state. But as GOP Assemblyman Chuck DeVore pointed out “without a meaningful reform of environmental regulations and labor laws only a small fraction of that borrowed money will actually go towards building anything.”

Absent such reforms, the same special interests that plunged that plunged the state into the fiscal hell that led to the 2003 recall that brought Mr. Schwarzenegger to power will be the main beneficiaries, not infrastructure-starved taxpayers.

The governor’s other proposals were a grab bag of appeals to various constituencies. Parents with college-bound children were promised a roll back of tuition increases at state universities, with no mention of efforts to control their soaring overhead. Lower-income workers were tossed a $1 increase in the state’s minimum wage, which will likely cost jobs more than it will help them.

Then there is education spending The governor called for increasing education spending by 8.7% this year, the highest percentage increase in seven years. But his efforts to appease the spending appetites of the Democratic legislature didn’t get him much. Senate President Don Perata declared that the increase in education funding was “clearly not enough. I’m not sure how much would be enough.” Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez was a little more conciliatory, noting that he has seen “the governor grow politically” in the weeks since his special election defeat. That comment sent chills down the spines of conservatives watching the governor’s speech.

It is striking to watch a governor who called for ‘blowing up bureaucratic boxes’ a year ago now say that the answer to the state’s problems is to "build it" and the solution will come. The governor’s new tack may indeed get him through the 2006 election but the contrast with last year’s State of the State speech is so dramatic that the Los Angeles Times was moved to note that “a central question (of the coming campain) is apt to be whether Schwarzenegger is motivated more by core beliefs or a quest for personal success.” The early evidence isn't encouraging.

The Governor State of the State is over. No more guessing where Arnold is headed. So what do we know?

The Governor says he believes in Free Markets.

We should judge him by his actions. He wants a 70 Biilion Dollars of General Obligation Bonds oover 10 years. He wants to raise the minimum wage. He wants "user fees" for for some other projects. He wants to fund after school programs, when hundreds of thousands of kids are having trouble passing the High School Exit Exam geared at eighth grade level. He is very proud of banning snack foods from schools.

The Governor failed to mention illegal immigration once.

Instead of blowing up boxes he has decided to fill them with tax dollars.

He is reaching out to destroy the Republican Party. Californians already pay plenty for the services you outlined in your speech. Don't make me, my children and their children pay more for what Government has failed to deliver.


Reform, Recall, RIP!

As you may have heard the Governor is planning to support legislation that would increase the minimum wage for workers in California. Any good economist, especially those trained ironically in the "Austrian School of Economics" would tell you that raising the minimum wage hurts workers, especially those on the lower end of the wage scale. (For some good info on this go to Steve Frank's web review of the studies on the minimum wage increases or Political Vanguard's here.)

One great economist is Milton Friedman. The Governor has raised money for their foundation, wrote an introduction for a copy of Friedman's classic Free to Choose claims that he takes advice from Friedman.

Friedman wrote this about the minimum wage in another book Capitalism and Freedom:

"The high rate of unemployment among teenagers, and especially black teenagers,
is both a scandal and a serious source of social unrest. Yet it is largely a
result of minimum wage laws. We regard the minimum wage law as one of the most,
if not the most, anti-black laws on the statute books. "

Milton Friedman is one of the great minds of the twentieth century. His legacy deserves more than to be tarnished by the actions of a Governor without a vision or foundation.

The Governor had his home city take his name off their stadium. He should ask to have his name taken off the books and events done for Milton Friedman. The Governor shouldn't let his fiscally irresponsible actions disgrace a freddom loving economist like Friedman.


P.S. Below is Ray Haynes' MONDAY MORNING MEMORANDUM, that deals with Arnold's Folly.

January 2, 2006

The Minimum Wage Calamity

As the year begins, we find Sacramento once again considering raising the minimum wage. Only this time, Governor Schwarzenegger has indicated he might support a bill raising the minimum wage to $7.25 next year, and $7.75 the year after.

In the wake of high energy costs, high building costs, high liability insurance costs, and workers’ compensation reform that doesn’t reduce costs nearly as much as we need to, we cannot afford to drive up the costs of doing business in California even higher. Even if you do not pay the minimum wage to more than a handful of employees, the inflationary impact it has on the entire salary scale can be significant.

The current federal minimum wage is $5.15 per hour. In California the minimum wage is $6.75 per hour. Left wing political rhetoric has succeeded in confusing the people into thinking that a ‘wage’ is an entitlement, not the price that the worker is worth in the marketplace for the job performed, the skills possessed, or the desirability of the worker to the employer. I think it is time we remind ourselves that wages are, in fact, a price paid for labor.

Everyone is familiar with the harmful economic effects of arbitrary government price controls in other aspects of the economy. Rent control results in fewer rental units. Price control on any goods results in fewer of those goods. Price control on labor results in fewer jobs.

It is an emotionally charged issue, which fails to take into account the ‘side effects’ of the law. If an employer has to pay an employee more than that employee produces for the company, the employer is losing money. So either the employee is fired, or the company goes bankrupt. Either way, the employee loses the job. This is government forced unemployment.

A forced minimum wage deprives the workplace of some lower skilled workers who would be capable of rendering beneficial services to an employer if that employee were allowed to be paid what his effort was worth, making that employee a productive member of society. The worker has been deprived of independence and self-respect which comes from self-support, even though he or she would otherwise be willing to do the work at a lower wage. Even worse, the best way to get a higher paying job is to do well at a lower paying job.

According to an analysis produced by the National Center of Policy Analysis, “The primary cause of low income, …, is no wages, not low wages.” They conclude that most of those who earn low wages are either teen-agers or other secondary earners spread rather evenly across the income distribution scale. According to a summary of their analysis, “While the single mother trying to support her child on a full-time minimum wage job is a better story, the 16-year-old hamburger-flipping student with college-educated and employed parents is a better fact.” Low-income families have a large number of people without jobs and without the skills to get a job. A mandated minimum wage forces them even further out of the job market.

Increasing the minimum wage increases the cost of goods and services, forcing many of the people who lost their jobs as a result of this government intervention to either pay higher prices, or do without. The government has deprived them of a job they could perform, and which would form the basis of further training to acquire higher wages, and has increased the price of goods that they might otherwise have been able to buy. All of this is sold to the public in the name of helping the poor. Some help!

Low-income families do not benefit from a minimum wage, and neither does the taxpayer. Once again we will consider increasing the cost to employers in California for a program that has never shown any legitimate long-term benefit to “the poor”, and that has far more often been shown to be a detriment not only to employers, but to the very “poor” the program is supposed to help. After all, you can only make the minimum wage if you have an employer who is providing a job.