| | | |

State Budget: Running the Clock

If you are wondering what is happening to the state budget, it appears that the closest analogy is the point in the film High Noon in which the train carrying the Bad Guy arrives at noon. After he arrives, there will be a confrontation/shoot-out with the Good Guy. In the case of the state budget, however, it is midnight – not noon – that is critical: midnight on June 30. At that point, the fiscal year 2010-11 ends and there is no budget to replace it. Also, the taxes that the governor wants to extend expire so that any ballot measure regarding them becomes an issue of tax increases, not extensions.

The Republican strategy seems to be to run the clock until after June 30. They can then offer to put a tax vote on the ballot, expecting that tax “increases” will be defeated, unlike tax “extensions.” And the price is some kind of pension proposition (that could override the pension changes the Regents adopted for UC last December), some kind of spending cap, and various regulatory changes.

Democrats could pass another majority-vote budget with no tax increases to replace the one the governor vetoed. If they pass another that he again vetoes, that passage could nonetheless restore their pay (and the pay of legislative Republicans), so long as it is “balanced” on paper. Contrary to some public impressions, the controller’s decision not to pay does not hinge on the realism of the “balance” but rather technical issues that the Dems could correct. There is brave talk about a Democratic budget that would somehow have retroactive taxes after July 1. No one has any idea what that means, or even could mean.

Nonetheless, the clock is ticking away:

[vimeo 1125644 w=200 h=150]

High Noon – clock montage from Steve Parry on Vimeo.

UPDATE: Rather than wait for the shootout at high noon, there is now a report that the legislative Dems and the governor have a deal. It assumes more revenue will arrive than the May revise and contains a trigger; if the revenue does not materialize, that trigger reportedly will – among other programs – cut higher ed. No word about the retroactive taxes, whatever those were supposed to be. Since the Republicans are not part of the deal, the legislature presumably will not put the GOP’s desired pension limits, spending cap, and regulatory relaxations on the ballot. Of course, such propositions could be put on a future ballot via the initiative process, assuming someone has the money to pay for signature-gathering firms. There will undoubtedly be more details by tomorrow. Early info at http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2011/06/california-budget-deal-under-discussion-by-gov-jerry-brown-and-democrats.html

Similar Posts

  • |

    Report: Affordable Public Higher Education is Possible Today

    A report this week from Reclaim California Higher Education (a coalition of faculty and student groups) makes the case that affordable (even free) higher education is within reach for California. The privatization experiment has failed. The harm to a generation of hard-working, high-aiming young people is proven. It’s time to return to what works: the proven Master Plan for higher education in California. California, with its own resources, can afford to restore top-quality, accessible, affordable college and university opportunity to every qualified student. In fact, Californians can afford nothing less. You can read a summary and download the entire report…

  • | |

    Academic Senate Rejects New Pension Tier

    Representatives of UC faculty on all campuses delivered a strongly worded rejection of the proposed 2016 pension tier. Reports from the campuses were extensive and overwhelmingly negative (link to PDF). Berkeley faculty called the proposal “imprudent and potentially fiscally irresponsible.” Davis faculty said, “It is a myth that UCRP is too generous,” and went on to detail a long list of likely negative outcomes from the new tier. Irvine faculty noted “the level of disappointment and depth of passion expressed from all quarters about the negative impact that the imposition of the PEPRA cap has on the future of the…

  • |

    Faculty Voice Opposition to Pension Proposal

    On Friday, the UCLA Academic Senate hosted an informational meeting that explained in clear terms that this is a bad, bad plan for faculty. What to do about it was less clear cut. Shane White gave a deeply detailed account of financial aspects of the plan (Slides here: Pension Presentation by Shane White). Among the things we learned: Last year’s budget deal introduced the “PEPRA cap” to UC retirement benefits. This is not a limit on retirement pay-outs, but a cap on the earnings that are used to calculate retirement pay-outs. So any new hire after July 1, 2016 who…

  • | | |

    Pension Changes Proposed: lower benefits, little savings, weaker UCRS

    The University of California will soon have a third pension tier if the Regents approve a plan put forth by the Retirement Options Task Force on Friday. UC President Janet Napolitano charged the Task Force, which included management and Academic Senate representatives, with finding a way to implement her agreement with Gov. Brown to set a cap on pension benefits in exchange for state funds to support the pension system. Over the weekend, as faculty activists read the task force report and a second report produced by Senate leaders (Guide to reviewing the recommendations of the Retirement Options Task Force)…

  • | | |

    The Degradation of Faculty Welfare and Compensation

    Colleen Lye and James Vernon (UC Berkeley Faculty Association) UC faculty need to wake up to the systematic degradation of their pay and benefits.  In 2009, when the salary furlough temporarily cut faculty salaries between 6 and 10%, faculty were outraged.  Yet since then our compensation has been hit by a more serious, and seemingly permanent, double blow. First, despite modest salary rises of 3% and 2% in October 2011 and July 2013, faculty take-home pay has been effectively cut as employee contributions to pension and healthcare have escalated.  Faculty now pay more for retirement and healthcare programs that offer less.  Secondly, faculty are…