Ah the next Barry bail-out...Kalifornia

[dude1394]

I'm having fun imitating Arnold. Lighten up.

But this looks like the path Barry will probably go with it. Give 'em some money and then begin trying to force constitutional changes on 'em. Instead of letting them learn from themselves.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/op...=1&ref=opinion

Others in Sacramento — including the Assembly speaker, Karen Bass, and the state treasurer, Bill Lockyer — are investigating the possibility of federal assistance. This could take several forms. The Treasury could offer guarantees on any short-term bonds that California sells to raise cash. Or money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program could be used to backstop such notes. Or Washington could speed up some of the stimulus money earmarked for the state.


Each of those ideas, or a combination of the three, offers hope. However, as a condition of any assistance, the federal government should charge the state a fee that includes penalties if it fails to make major changes in its budgeting process. At a minimum, California should be required to submit for federal approval a multiyear plan to meet its obligations and to eliminate its structural deficit. Washington might also require the establishment of a board to oversee state finances. (Federal loan guarantees to New York City in the 1970s provide one model.)


There would be fierce resistance to federal aid. Other states may wonder why California deserves special attention — it’s a fair point, and it might be wise for the government to offer similar guarantees to other states in distress. California officials might worry about the loss of sovereignty. And Democrats in the administration and Congress, many of them Californians, may be tempted to help a Democratic state without conditions.



But they shouldn’t. By attaching strings to any aid, the federal government would give the state its best chance at saving itself.



Most important, President Obama should press California’s elected officials and its voters — 61 percent of whom supported him last November — to make constitutional changes. Among these would be the elimination of the gridlock-creating two-thirds vote for budgets and tax increases, and new curbs on ballot initiatives that mandate spending for popular programs without identifying new tax dollars to pay for them.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

I'm having fun imitating Arnold. Lighten up.

that makes no sense whatsoever. do you not pronounce california with a hard c that sounds like a k?

so just who are you "imitating"?

it's not about "lighten up", it's about understanding inane.

[92bDad]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

that makes no sense whatsoever. do you not pronounce california with a hard c that sounds like a k?

so just who are you "imitating"?

it's not about "lighten up", it's about understanding inane.

What are you implying that he's implying?

When I saw the "K", I immidiately thought of the Govenator...I don't however understand what or if you are implying anything?

[mcsluggo]

Originally Posted by 92bDad

What are you implying that he's implying?

When I saw the "K", I immidiately thought of the Govenator...I don't however understand what or if you are implying anything?

wait. Just who are your implying should feel the implication from these overt implied implications?

NOW I am pissed.