[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers

View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
Web Calitics

DiFi buys the Right's Spin on the Budget While Opening Amazing Science Lab

by: Brian Leubitz

Fri May 29, 2009 at 16:19:26 PM PDT

DiFi was at Livermore for the opening of the Livermore Ignition Facility, which itself is an interesting story that could revolutionize our energy future. In short, it would create a fusion reaction from the firing of a bunch of lasers on a spherical hydrogen clump. In theory, it could also solve our nuclear waste problem. It's all quite fascinating.

But that's not the only thing that grabbed my attention. Carla Marinucci, the Chronicle's politics writer, caught this audio clip on the Governor's site. Check the audio, but Carla helfpully transcribed it:

"I have been around in 15 elections. I have never seen a time when the voters did what they did, in view of what they were told about cuts, in the enormous defeat of these propositions,'' she said. "I can't give you the reason for it, but I can tell you, to me it was astonishing.''

"And what they said is, in so many words, take the cuts, because that's the alternative. And nobody wants them, but people have to understand.''

Frankly, this is simply wrong. What they told the Legislature to do was to do their job. The voters weren't simply saying cut, they were saying we don't want this ridiculous spending cap. But, DiFi just goes ahead and takes the Jarvis bait, hook, line and sinker.

The people did not say anything about cuts. In fact, they spoke out strongly against cuts by rejecting Props 1D and 1E that cut social services for children and the mentally ill, respectively. The people are saying they want a functional government that is responsive, not demanding, of the people.

But apparently, Sen. Feinstein is ok with the cuts to teach the people of California a lesson or something like that. Look, she wouldn't be the only person to say this, I've heard it said by many progressives. The trouble is that it's really tough to teach a lesson to the people who are most impacted by the cuts, children, the disabled, and other disadvantaged Californians. We need revenue. Now. Whether that's a majority vote measure or some other form, these cuts-only budgets simply cannot be all that is left on the table. It simply isn't right to let people die for the sake of a lesson.

UPDATE: Arnold has more cuts planned. This batch includes suspending the number of days that animal shelters have to keep strays, school bus service, and more in-home supportive service cuts. Hope you don't let your dog walk away or have a relative who needs some care...

UPDATE: From the comments, americarocks suggest you Contact DiFi to tell her why you voted NO. Not a bad idea.

Brian Leubitz :: DiFi buys the Right's Spin on the Budget While Opening Amazing Science Lab
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

This is shocking, even for Feinstein (0.00 / 0)
I normally don't expect much from her, but this is just terrible. It's really upsetting to see our Democratic leaders use Republican talking points.

With Dems like these, who needs Republicans? (0.00 / 0)
It's amazing to me that DiFi can ignore the evidence that shows Californians DID NOT vote the way they did on May 19 out a desire to cut, and use it as justification to deny health care to 1 million kids or close the state parks system.

Dianne Feinstein has failed to provide leadership on our economic problems for decades. She failed to protect the state stabilization funds in the stimulus, and now she is pushing a shock doctrine on California.

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave

I just emailed Diane Feinstein (0.00 / 0)
and told her why I voted against the propositions. Write her and let her know how you feel.  

1D and 1E weren't neccessarily about cuts (0.00 / 0)
The feedback I received was that people accepted tax increases for specific purposes (mental health and early childhood care) but didn't want to reassign that money to the general fund.  It was about the Legislature keeping their word.

If they tell the voters they want to raise taxes for services for children or for the mentally disabled, then they shouldn't turn around 2 years later and try to change the purpose of the tax to "fix a budget gap".

this is becoming increasingly clear (8.00 / 1)
that the next budget will be an attempt to punish the voters for not giving the legislators what they wanted in the past several elections.

if the democrats side explicitly with the republicans against their own voters out of spite, lord have mercy on the party. this sort of thing could be the impetus to split the party, if they think voters will take this sort of thing lying down.

Dem legislators who vote to punish the public (0.00 / 0)
by cutting the budget to maintain the corporate tax cut and the regressive slant of state income taxes should expect primary challenges from highly electable Dems who understand that it's wrong that people making $47,500 pay the same income tax rate as people making $999,000.  If they think those of us who voted against the propositions on those grounds won't raise the same issues in a primary, they are sorely mistaken.

[ Parent ]
If anything the tax rate is too progressive. (2.00 / 2)
A flat tax is the fairest system of taxation.  Think about it.  The sales tax is a flat tax.  Every pays a different amount of sales tax based on how much they buy.  People can control their spending to control their taxation level.  People who make more shouldn't be punished for doing so.  It discourages innovation and initiative.

[ Parent ]
quite a rich man's conception of 'fairness' (0.00 / 0)
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

what kind of fairness asks the rich and the poor to contribute the same amount, when the rich have so much extra money lying around, and whose excessive wealth is in large part dependent upon the services the state provides via taxation?

next you're going to tell us that it would be fair to cut food stamps, because the rich don't get to use them.


[ Parent ]
We aren't talking about the super rich (0.00 / 0)
who aren't really affected regardless of the tax rate.  We are talking about HENRYs (High Earners Not Rich Yet) generally those above $50,000 who have to pay the 9.3% tax bracket.  Is is too difficult to pass the threshold where you can live rich in the manner you spoke of, so people will move to Arizona to start their business rather than try to do it in California.

[ Parent ]
Yes, please provide statistically meaningful evidence (0.00 / 0)
of people who would otherwise start successful businesses leaving the State of California because of the top personal income tax bracket.  Not just anecdotes.

Go ahead.  We'll wait.  Also, while you're looking at that, please think carefully about who exactly is in the way of a more rational (not flat-tax fake-rational) tax structure that actually pays for the services that Californians want. (Helpful hint:  it's not liberals like the people who write here).

[ Parent ]
wow, a whole 4-5 thousand dollars! (0.00 / 0)
before all the deductions and tax credits, of course. that certainly is a heavy burden just crushing people. if only they had that extra 4-5,000 balanced by a gigantic loss in all the services they depend on for everyday life.

you really don't realize how out of touch you sound, to someone who isn't actually rich. the solution is clearly to toss a whole lot more brackets between $47,000 and a million+ to make the system more progressive.

[ Parent ]
and another thing (0.00 / 0)
if you think initiative and innovation come out of the wealthiest californians, your'e insane. fat cats don't innovate, they squash or buy out innovators.

hilarious how the same types who attack the minimum wage to motivate the peons think executives need huge and tax-free salaries  to motivate the rich.

[ Parent ]
fascinating how closely your first sentence lines up (0.00 / 0)
with schwarzeneggar's chief of staff susan kennedy's talking points today. is it blast fax talking points, or is it just that all anti-rich-people-paying-taxes wingnuts think alike?

[ Parent ]
The only way a flat tax would be fair (6.50 / 4)
is as part of a package that also mandates flat income.  So if you are ready to require by law that all people's income and assets be the same, regardless of job, then sign me up.  Otherwise, I'll stick with the principle that from those to whom much is given, much is expected.

[ Parent ]
that's a good point n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Aristotle got it right several thousand years ago... (0.00 / 0)
....when he said, 'Who should pay taxes? Why, those who can afford to, fool!'

Or something similar. Republicans would no doubt reply that the earth had not been formed yet so Aristotle never existed.

Most Americans never heard of the dude...

[ Parent ]
I tried to write to her (0.00 / 0)
And my e-mail was returned because my address is out-of-state.

My address is out-of-state because I got laid off from my job as an attorney and I'm living with my parents in Arizona; I'm still actively searching for work in California and I care a whole hell of a lot more about California issues than Arizona issues.  I guess I get why she has to filter her e-mails, but talk about tone-deaf.

Yeah... (0.00 / 0)
....yer average dumber than dirt CongressPerson likes to pretend that the mail is still delivered by the Pony Express and that his/her votes only affect their 'constituents'.

Convenient fiction for doing what they are paid to do. The bidding of Corporate Slave State America.

[ Parent ]
I've emailed her on several occasions (0.00 / 0)
And the answers I get have usually been on a totally different subject than the one I contacted her about.  

Same thing happens with Boxer... I get the "Thank you for contacting me in regard to XXX", and then she spends the rest of the message talking about YYY.

Connie Conway, our assemblyperson practiced that kind of politics as a county supervisor and will no doubt continue to do so in the new job she was recently promoted to by the yacht party stalwarts here in Tulare County.  

They simply feel that they are above any need to talk or listen to the "commoners" anymore.

[ Parent ]
Yeah....'Fusion Power' sounds great... (0.00 / 0)
...ain't never gonna happen though. And we don't need it as long as we got Mr. Sun.

Fusion folks want a centrally located power supply so they can control same.

SunPower can be owned by anyone thus is not favored by the oligarchy.

As for DiFi?

I've shit her!

I still have absolutely no clue (0.00 / 0)
as to why we keep reelecting this lady.  She has proved herself time and again to be no more than another rich, elitist politician with delusions of royalty or at least nobility feathering her own nest at the expense of the rest of us mere serfs.

There's something wrong with a system in which 5% of the population can get their candidates elected in spite of the damage those candidates keep right on doing to the other 95%.

Are the working class people in California so gullible that they can't figure out who the woman actually works for?  It's been years since she represented the majority of her constituents if indeed, she ever did.  How long is it going to take for people to realize that and find a good, strong... and most important... REAL Democrat to run against her and her machine?  

Lets just make sure (0.00 / 0)
She's not around for a 17th election, eh?

Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads

blog advertising is good for you

Support Calitics:

Buy on Amazon through us.


Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary

Powered by: SoapBlox